Believing Lies

Crashk

Crashk

Unite or Die
"Last week, Hannity featured a clip of President Obama explaining why he will allow the Bush tax cuts to expire, just as the prior administration had planned. Introducing the video, Hannity called Obama's words "a rare moment of honesty" that he hopes voters will watch.

"... [Taxes] are scheduled to go up substantially next year, for everybody," the president said.

Cut back to Hannity.

"I know the anointed one will make sure that happens," he quipped disapprovingly.

But, that's not really what the president said.

"Under the tax plan passed by the last administration, taxes are scheduled to go up substantially next year, for everybody," he explained, in an unedited version of the remarks. "By the way, this was by design."

Watch video here and a hundred other places.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/09/kurtz-calls-hannity-deceptive-editing/


No 'misspeaking', no mistake and no lying your way out of this lie. BUT! this isn't the only little twist or clever video editing in order to tell a thinly veiled lie, it goes on every day at Faux news. Bottom line is they lie to whip up hate against their 'enemies'.

If you believe Faux news you gotta realize that you've been fed a line of bullshit and corporate propaganda for years. But I realize the wingnuts here WANT to believe the lies and can't see the truth behind what Faux does and why they do it.

I don't trust people who lie to me. Especially if they lie repeatedly and I catch them in those lies but you wingnuts have been eating it up since Saddam could bomb us within 40 minutes or duct tape and plastic will save you from chemical warfare.
 
I re-read that a few times and am missing the lie.

The way I understand it the 2001 tax cuts are scheduled to expire in 2011. Congress and the President can either vote to continue the tax cuts or let them expire which means taxes will rise back to 2001 rates.

What is the issue here?
 
cawacko said:
I re-read that a few times and am missing the lie.

The way I understand it the 2001 tax cuts are scheduled to expire in 2011. Congress and the President can either vote to continue the tax cuts or let them expire which means taxes will rise back to 2001 rates.

What is the issue here?
Click to expand...

Watch the video then tell me Hannity wasn't twisting the facts.
 
I don't like when people do that editing b.s. and leave parts out. But maybe because I understand this issue I don't see it this time.

The fact is taxes are scheduled to go up and it is in Congress's and Obama's hand whether they want to allow the tax cuts to expire or extend them. Hannity was saying he thinks Obama will allow them to expire. Of course if one had no clue on this issue Hannity definitely could have gone into more detail about it.

But since the discussion turned to Democrats and Republicans Obama is correct that the tax cut passed by Congress and signed by Bush in 2001 had an expiration date of 2011. If Obama wanted to be really truthful he could have said the reason the tax cuts had an expiration date is because that was the concession Republicans gave to the Democrats who voted for the tax cuts passage. So Obama in essence did what they are complaining about Hannity doing.
 
cawacko said:
I don't like when people do that editing b.s. and leave parts out. But maybe because I understand this issue I don't see it this time.

The fact is taxes are scheduled to go up and it is in Congress's and Obama's hand whether they want to allow the tax cuts to expire or extend them. Hannity was saying he thinks Obama will allow them to expire. Of course if one had no clue on this issue Hannity definitely could have gone into more detail about it.

But since the discussion turned to Democrats and Republicans Obama is correct that the tax cut passed by Congress and signed by Bush in 2001 had an expiration date of 2011. If Obama wanted to be really truthful he could have said the reason the tax cuts had an expiration date is because that was the concession Republicans gave to the Democrats who voted for the tax cuts passage. So Obama in essence did what they are complaining about Hannity doing.
Click to expand...


The sunset provision of the tax cuts had nothing to do with giving concessions to Democrats. Bush and the Republicans used reconciliation procedures to pass the tax cuts in 2001 which require a ten year sunset for laws that will raise the deficit beyond the 10 year window. Also, and relatedly, this was done to give the appearance that the Bush tax cuts would not blow up the budget long term.
 
cawacko said:
I re-read that a few times and am missing the lie.

The way I understand it the 2001 tax cuts are scheduled to expire in 2011. Congress and the President can either vote to continue the tax cuts or let them expire which means taxes will rise back to 2001 rates.

What is the issue here?
Click to expand...

the issue is Crash is a fucking moron
 
Rana said:
Not always...
Click to expand...

Taxes are allways bad for the economy. Its what is done with tax money that can be good for the economy. How can tax cuts ever be bad for the economy. I might believe that the government would do something good with the money to help the economy grow but how can a tax cut ever be bad for the economy. The higher taxes are the less people businesses can hire and the less money they can invest. The higher taxes are the less people can spend and invest. Spending money is good for the economy and so is investing money.
 
Rana said:
Not always...
Click to expand...


Mostly always ... it goes back to... is it better to have money in the hands of the public or is it better to have money in the hands of an ever expanding Govt.? I bet on the People over Govt.

By the way...is this who I think?
 
The bottom line.. an expiration of this Tax policy in any way shape or form is a Tax increase and now is not the time for a Tax increase ...especially on those who's money and investments are the driving force of Job Creation. Why is this so difficult to understand?
 
klaatu said:
Mostly always ... it goes back to... is it better to have money in the hands of the public or is it better to have money in the hands of an ever expanding Govt.? I bet on the People over Govt.

By the way...is this who I think?
Click to expand...
This is froggie, is what whom you think?

Tax cuts have been in effect for the 2% for the last eight years and in those years we have had to give bail outs to the USA economy. I do not see where the trickle down has worked. It would be better to put the money into the hands of the small business and extend the tax cuts for the middle class which is where the buying power int he USA is really at! The success of the stock market no longer reflects the health of the country, anymore. Wall Street is doing fine, but the unemployment rate is not decreasing. We need to look at other options. We all may have to pay a little more right now, but it is the sacrifice I am willing to pay to get us back on track. I am all for reducing the amount of money the Feds spend, but where we disagree is where to do it. I believe that defense, and nuclear, and right now, the space program and other non vital programs need to be cut. I think that private industry should take over "space". There are other areas that I would like to see trimmed. I think we can take a look at the way corporations are subsidized. There are many areas that can be cut without hurting the people who are already hurting.
 
Rana said:
This is froggie, is what whom you think?

Tax cuts have been in effect for the 2% for the last eight years and in those years we have had to give bail outs to the USA economy. I do not see where the trickle down has worked. It would be better to put the money into the hands of the small business and extend the tax cuts for the middle class which is where the buying power int he USA is really at! The success of the stock market no longer reflects the health of the country, anymore. Wall Street is doing fine, but the unemployment rate is not decreasing. We need to look at other options. We all may have to pay a little more right now, but it is the sacrifice I am willing to pay to get us back on track. I am all for reducing the amount of money the Feds spend, but where we disagree is where to do it. I believe that defense, and nuclear, and right now, the space program and other non vital programs need to be cut. I think that private industry should take over "space". There are other areas that I would like to see trimmed. I think we can take a look at the way corporations are subsidized. There are many areas that can be cut without hurting the people who are already hurting.
Click to expand...
After all, when you make $75,000 a year, that is as happy as you can get!
 
Rana said:
Tax cuts have been in effect for the 2% for the last eight years and in those years we have had to give bail outs to the USA economy. I do not see where the trickle down has worked.
Click to expand...

Au contraire! The trickle down did work and it worked for most of the decade. Up until the first year of the Obama administration our Nations Unemployment rate was continuously under 5%. The need for bailouts wasn't due to the Tax Policies, it was due to Reckless behavior by the our Elected Officials, Banks and Wall St.

The most important factor in getting us out of recession and moving into a steady but sure recovery is expanding private sector Jobs. The key to this is allowing the Private sector to work and getting the hell out of the way. This expansion of the Federal Government is unprecedented in growing its powers and bureaucracies ..
 
klaatu said:
Au contraire! The trickle down did work and it worked for most of the decade. Up until the first year of the Obama administration our Nations Unemployment rate was continuously under 5%. The need for bailouts wasn't due to the Tax Policies, it was due to Reckless behavior by the our Elected Officials, Banks and Wall St.

The most important factor in getting us out of recession and moving into a steady but sure recovery is expanding private sector Jobs. The key to this is allowing the Private sector to work and getting the hell out of the way. This expansion of the Federal Government is unprecedented in growing its powers and bureaucracies ..
Click to expand...
I have to disagree, the trickle down did not work, the middle class got trickled upon by the scams of Wall Street and the banks. It was due to the wrecklessness of the prior years due to both Dem and Repub policies but made worse during the Bush years by the two wars, deregulation and free trade which isn't fair trade. Obama inherited a mess which he isn't helping make better, but it is due largely to Congress and not the President. I feel the President has very little control, especially lately, over what Congress does! Private sector unfortunately can not always be trusted to do the right thing as we have seen over the last ten years!
 
Rana said:
I have to disagree, the trickle down did not work, the middle class got trickled upon by the scams of Wall Street and the banks. It was due to the wrecklessness of the prior years due to both Dem and Repub policies but made worse during the Bush years by the two wars, deregulation and free trade which isn't fair trade. Obama inherited a mess which he isn't helping make better, but it is due largely to Congress and not the President. I feel the President has very little control, especially lately, over what Congress does! Private sector unfortunately can not always be trusted to do the right thing as we have seen over the last ten years!
Click to expand...

Since we've changes the subject of the thread what deregulation are you referring to under Bush?
 
klaatu said:
Au contraire! The trickle down did work and it worked for most of the decade. Up until the first year of the Obama administration our Nations Unemployment rate was continuously under 5%. The need for bailouts wasn't due to the Tax Policies, it was due to Reckless behavior by the our Elected Officials, Banks and Wall St.

The most important factor in getting us out of recession and moving into a steady but sure recovery is expanding private sector Jobs. The key to this is allowing the Private sector to work and getting the hell out of the way. This expansion of the Federal Government is unprecedented in growing its powers and bureaucracies ..
Click to expand...


Claiming that "trickle down worked" from 2001 through 2008 is laughable. If you look and pretty much any measure of economic activity from the end of the 2001 recession to the beginning of the most recent recession (and I'm being generous here) economic growth was the lowest for any "growth" period in recent history.

The rest of your post is pretty much just a collection of talking points du jure.
 
cawacko said:
Since we've changes the subject of the thread what deregulation are you referring to under Bush?
Click to expand...
Deregulation, wrong word, lax enforcement of regulations a better choice. They kind of ignored certain steps taken by certain industries, and as a result, there were dire consequences. My personal knowledge, the many oil spills on the North Slope during his administration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top