What's new

Republicans.....what do they intend to change?

Ch. 12

Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2002
Messages
1,355
Reaction score
0
So...what is it? Other than a few keywords ("stay the course" now means "keep the strategy"), we have been presented with no apologies for major shortcomings nor have we been presented with any ways that the GOP plans to correct issues. We dont' know what they are going to do about their own rampant corruption. WE don't know what the long-term plan for Iraq is (but then again...neither does the GOP). We don't know when the deficit will stop growing exponentially. We don't know when the middle class will actually get any benefit from taxes as we watch our rich buddies end up with zero tax liability even though they made hundreds of millions of dollars. We don't know what the GOP intends to do about all of this daisy cutter fear they have planted into our medulas. What's the plan?
 
As I said - we have to sum up a "plan" in 3 words. What a shame. What a sham.
 
Surely (or is that Shirley?), you jest!

The Republicans don't intend to change anything. W has made that crystal clear.

All together now....
Stay the course! Stay the course! Stay the course!

After all, isn't the war is going just as the neo-cons predicted?
 
What war? I recall something about "mission accomplished". Thi sis just mopping up. Another 10-15 years, it should be spick and span.
 
What war? I recall something about "mission accomplished". Thi sis just mopping up. Another 10-15 years, it should be spick and span.
Apparently, there ISN'T a war
http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2...ingers_war.html

from the article

Appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee in February, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was quick to correct Senator Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) when he said Congress had officially declared war on its enemies. "There was not a war declaration, either in connection with Al Qaeda or in Iraq," Gonzales explained. "It was an authorization to use military force...an authorization only to use military force." He reiterated this distinction when he went before the committee again in July, reminding the senators, "There's been no declaration of war."
 
Just noticing the ads on that website...could you have found one that was just a little more slant to the left?

:up: 🙄 :lol: 😀
Did you read it? I read the article on the other web site. That's the thing...you righties find a right winger website and it's the gospel truth. And us "demolibs" read the articles. But when a link is posted to a left leaning website...99.9% of the time, a right winger will dismiss the source and NOT read the article. Could you tell me what you would dispute about that article...after all...Congress did NOT issue a declaration of war...and according to the constitution, the president can't.

Just spotted another article http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061103/pl_nm/...tions_bush_dc_9

From the article
Bush said Democrats should be asked, "What's your plan?" for winning in Iraq and a host of other national security issues separating the parties.

"What's your plan?" the audience yelled back.

"Truth is the Democrats can't answer that question," he said. "Harsh criticism is not a plan for victory."
On the other hand, not having a plan is about as good as a "plan" that consists of "stay the course". What's Bush's plan? I mean, I've heard stay the course...but I haven't seen a detailed plan. That's what makes politics so great...they can point "they have no plan" to divert the attention from the fact that Bush doesn't have much of one.
 
Did you read it? I read the article on the other web site. That's the thing...you righties find a right winger website and it's the gospel truth. And us "demolibs" read the articles. But when a link is posted to a left leaning website...99.9% of the time, a right winger will dismiss the source and NOT read the article. Could you tell me what you would dispute about that article...after all...Congress did NOT issue a declaration of war...and according to the constitution, the president can't.

Just spotted another article http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061103/pl_nm/...tions_bush_dc_9

From the article On the other hand, not having a plan is about as good as a "plan" that consists of "stay the course". What's Bush's plan? I mean, I've heard stay the course...but I haven't seen a detailed plan. That's what makes politics so great...they can point "they have no plan" to divert the attention from the fact that Bush doesn't have much of one.

There sure are a lot of exaggerations in these posts.

We don't read the articles "99.99%" of the time? That means only 1 in 10,000.

The deficit is growing "exponentially"? Not really. In fact, it has decreased this year.

"We don't know when the middle class will actually get any benefit from taxes as we watch our rich buddies end up with zero tax liability even though they made hundreds of millions of dollars." Zero tax liability for hundreds of millions of dollars? Actually anyone making that much pays at least 35%, which is over a third of their income. You think they should pay more?

I thought the Republican plan was to train Iraqi troops until they can maintain security themselves. Last I heard it would take another 1 to 2 years.

Most liberals just seem to want us out. That would leave Iraq in shambles.
 
There sure are a lot of exaggerations in these posts.

The deficit is growing "exponentially"? Not really. In fact, it has decreased this year.

I know that Rove/Bush have made it seem as though you can just post a statement as truth even if it isn't and people will believe it but you are dead wrong. According to the Burueau of the Public Debt, our national debt is $8.6 trillion as of yesterday. A year ago it was $7.9 trillion. National Debt to the Penny

"We don't know when the middle class will actually get any benefit from taxes as we watch our rich buddies end up with zero tax liability even though they made hundreds of millions of dollars." Zero tax liability for hundreds of millions of dollars? Actually anyone making that much pays at least 35%, which is over a third of their income. You think they should pay more?

Taxes 101 here. LIABILITY is different from tax bracket. Tax bracket is essentially meaningless outside of the middle class b/c lower and upper classes can claim numerous exemptions from taxes therefore limiting their LIABILITY. In other words, you can make $15 million in a year but due to exemptions only report $100k. Your 35% would be off of the $100k so it would, in effect, be a very low tax for the true amount earned. Check out Cheney's tax return: Cheney Tax and you will see that they made $8.8 million in income yet only "owed" $529k (6%) :shock: due to $6.9 million in exemptions. Tell me how hard the upper class has it.

I thought the Republican plan was to train Iraqi troops until they can maintain security themselves. Last I heard it would take another 1 to 2 years.

I thought "mission accomplished". I thought a year and a half ago that our goal was to start scaling back in 6 months. I thought that all was great in Iraq. False that Dems want to just pull out of Iraq...that is your PR spin machine at work. But they do want clear goals to get out. Vietnam didn't turn out all that bad after we left even though it was pitched the same way.

Sorry to bring facts into any of this. I know that facts sometimes conflict with your PR spin and false statements meant to look like "truths"...until somebody posts real data (both of my links were official gov't entities of the executive).
 
I know that Rove/Bush have made it seem as though you can just post a statement as truth even if it isn't and people will believe it but you are dead wrong. According to the Burueau of the Public Debt, our national debt is $8.6 trillion as of yesterday. A year ago it was $7.9 trillion. National Debt to the Penny
Taxes 101 here. LIABILITY is different from tax bracket. Tax bracket is essentially meaningless outside of the middle class b/c lower and upper classes can claim numerous exemptions from taxes therefore limiting their LIABILITY. In other words, you can make $15 million in a year but due to exemptions only report $100k. Your 35% would be off of the $100k so it would, in effect, be a very low tax for the true amount earned. Check out Cheney's tax return: Cheney Tax and you will see that they made $8.8 million in income yet only "owed" $529k (6%) :shock: due to $6.9 million in exemptions. Tell me how hard the upper class has it.
I thought "mission accomplished". I thought a year and a half ago that our goal was to start scaling back in 6 months. I thought that all was great in Iraq. False that Dems want to just pull out of Iraq...that is your PR spin machine at work. But they do want clear goals to get out. Vietnam didn't turn out all that bad after we left even though it was pitched the same way.

Sorry to bring facts into any of this. I know that facts sometimes conflict with your PR spin and false statements meant to look like "truths"...until somebody posts real data (both of my links were official gov't entities of the executive).

GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.

"Deficit" is not the same as "debt". :shock: In any case, you can't look at either of those without taking into account GDP and inflation :shock: .

6% is greater that "Zero". :shock: $529K is much greate than "Zero". Do you even know what Cheney deducted for? Maybe he gave it all to charity 😉 You and I can also declare deductions. I don't know why you think that the wealthy owe something to you anyway. I have no intention of leeching off them. I don't have the right and neither do you.
 
Did you read it? I read the article on the other web site. That's the thing...you righties find a right winger website and it's the gospel truth. And us "demolibs" read the articles. But when a link is posted to a left leaning website...99.9% of the time, a right winger will dismiss the source and NOT read the article. Could you tell me what you would dispute about that article...after all...Congress did NOT issue a declaration of war...and according to the constitution, the president can't.

...
Yes, I read it and to be honest I can't say for any certainty, anymore than you can unless you're a very well versed attorney, that the authority given to the President by Congress included the things they quote in that article and if the administration has overstepped that authority in any way. What I can say is if he had overstepped his authority we would have heard about it a lot louder than we have up to this point from everyone from Howard Dean right down to Jesse Jackson.
 
So much for originality on my part......copycat lib's....WTF's this world coming to? :lol:
 
GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.

"Deficit" is not the same as "debt". :shock: In any case, you can't look at either of those without taking into account GDP and inflation :shock: .

OK...fair enough...let's make this relative. ANY deficit will add to the debt. We still have a mounting debt...one that made Bush raise the ceiling on Debt. If we budget a huge deficit every year, the debt increases and the dollar loses value. It's simple.

6% is greater that "Zero". :shock: $529K is much greate than "Zero". Do you even know what Cheney deducted for? Maybe he gave it all to charity 😉 You and I can also declare deductions. I don't know why you think that the wealthy owe something to you anyway. I have no intention of leeching off them. I don't have the right and neither do you.

Ummm...6% is ridiculous when you and I in the working class are paying 30+%. It is not a secret that there are many tax deductions to the rich and that many have been added recently. It is unfair that you and I are unfairly propping up the funding for things like Iraq, Afghanistan, education, infrastructure, etc (contrary to your assertions, taxes are for much more than welfare and other handouts...most of them are currently going to Iraq). It's humurous to me that you have been so brainwashed by those in charge that you are defending the fact that they are paying much less of a percentage in taxes than you are. It pisses me off but I guess you like taking it in the shorts so that Cheney (and many others, I'm sure...including Clinton, etc) can pocket millions that should have been part of their tax liability. The wealthy owe it to their country to pay a fair share of taxes. 6% is not a fair share.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top