Skip to comments.tax cuts for middle class?
Posted on 12/06/2010 7:41:43 AM PST by blitz128
I am sure this has been covered, but I have a couple of questions about the tax cut/extension debate. Why are the Dems worried about the Bush Tax cuts expiring, after all I can remember during the original debate that these tax cuts only benifited the rich. Now all I hear is that if these tax cuts arnt extented for the middle class, they will be hurt(which they will be). Which is it? Next Nancy Pelosi says that unemployment benifits are the best stimulus for the economy, (since the Bernacke just said that 10% unemployment may last for 5 years, and the Dems will want to extend unemployment benifits from 99 weeks to 250 wks, thats a lot of stimulus)but people keeping their own money instead of giving it to the Govt to redistribute isnt, and of course lastly even if these tax cuts for the "Rich" are denying the Govt 700 billion in revenue and you assume their numbers are correct, so what its not their money. Wont even get into the zero sum vs. job creation, increased business activity, increased revenue toward govt....
It's what ever lie is politically convenient at the moment.
Remember the Dems screamed bloody-murder about the evils of the Patriot Act prior to 2006, but they've owned Congress for four years now and the Presidency for two, and I've heard not one peep about repealing it.
This is the question Rush was asking the other day. The answer is that the Dims have been lying to us since these tax rates went into effect. Anyone who believes anything from the regime and the MSM is not only a fool but dangerous, since they cancel out your vote.
Democrats are ALL about POWER - to get the power, they have to TAX and CONTROL. Control your thoughts, your lifestyle, your interaction with other Democrat-defined minority (victim) groups, and enslave you to their will. They TAX so that they can redistribute YOUR income to the victims - simple.
The dims talking about extending the Bush tax rates would put them in a position of agreeing with GW Bush on taxes.
Fat chance there. All this talk is just that. All they have to do is wait out the calender and they get a tax increase without anyone having to cast a vote. Then the dims and their media will blame Bush on the tax rate hike. It was called the Bush tax cuts and had an expiration date.
It is easy to see that you are a prime candidate for “reeducation camp!”
[It’s what ever lie is politically convenient at the moment.]
Exactly. The Democrats can lie without consequence because the state run media never holds them responsible and in fact, will support and back whatever their lie of the moment is!
The truth is, they’ve never given a rip about the middle-class.
Three more points:
A) Pelosi and friends state that the additional unemployment extension will provide for more jobs. How? I mean, these benefits have been in existence for 99 weeks, so its not like this is a new benefit starting from zero. If anything, they could maybe make the argument that without the extension, jobs will be lost because money that people have been spending for 99 weeks would dry up.
2) IF, as Pelosi and friends state, the additional unemployment extension will provide for more jobs because the money will be immediately spent, wouldn’t this mean that the unemployment rate should have went down since these benefits have been in existence for 99 weeks?
C) If the real goal is giving people a job, why not do away with unemployment benefits after 26 weeks and just GIVE these people a job doing SOMETHING for their city, county or state. I mean, isn’t there some miscellaneous job the Government could find?
Pay no heed. We just switched from fighting Eastasia to Eurasia.
Now, now, Annie. You know that's wrong. They care about the middle class in the same sense a dairy farmer cares about his prize milking cow.
Socialists lie. Always.
It is an unfair tactic to ever quote what a liberal has said on record in the past. You're "taking it out of context".
Besides, "the public is too stupid to vote Democrat", they vote for "hate" and "superstition" in spite of their own "economic interest".
The Rats figure that such a distinction (that Bush cut taxes on middle class Americans) got in the way of the message that Bush gave tax cuts to his "rich buddies". So that detail was simply omitted.
Lies by omission are perfectly permissible by Stalinist standards.
I stand corrected.
Yep. Mark Halperin, formerly ABC political editor and now Newsweak political editor...
FLASHBACK 2004: THE MARK HALPERIN MEMO (ABC NEWS CHIEF SHOWS HIS BIAS) ( October 8, 2004 )
Halperin Memo Dated Friday October 8, 2004
It goes without saying that the stakes are getting very high for the country and the campaigns - and our responsibilities become quite grave
I do not want to set off (sp?) and endless colloquy that none of us have time for today - nor do I want to stifle one. Please respond if you feel you can advance the discussion.
The New York Times (Nagourney/Stevenson) and Howard Fineman on the web both make the same point today: the current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done.
Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win.
We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that.
I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions.
It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right.