Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Hostage taking.
1 posted on 11/27/2012 7:51:55 AM PST by Qbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Qbert

Okay, Dickie. Fiscal cliff now. Tax increases later.

Your move.


2 posted on 11/27/2012 7:53:47 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert

3 posted on 11/27/2012 7:55:06 AM PST by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert

Same old Democrat/Liberal/Progressive storyline—”we’ll reduce spending later”. Of course, “later” never comes.

Pray for our country and wisdom (don’t be suckered once again folks) for the Republicans in Congress. We continue to sink deeper and deeper into the abyss!


4 posted on 11/27/2012 7:56:52 AM PST by House Atreides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert

ESAD Dick Turban.


6 posted on 11/27/2012 8:01:18 AM PST by jospehm20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert

Got to hand it to the Rats, their old “tax and spend” has evolved very effectively into “spend and tax”. Now they spend and spend and spend and then take the nation to the brink of ruin to force the taxation.

They build up the Rat-voting parasite class first and then attack the achievers with class envy.


7 posted on 11/27/2012 8:02:35 AM PST by Proud2BeRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert; All

The ‘Iron Triangle’ of RINOs -Democrats-Liberal Agenda Media has been very powerful in the USA.

The problem for the ‘Iron Triangle’ is that they have run out of OUR money.

Undaunted, they are now borrowing 40 cents on every dollar spent to keep up the false impression that they are worthy of our continued loyal support.

One idea that the Liberal Agenda Media Elite, or LAME, will never mention is the fundamental difference between government and Business.

In Business, the main concern is profitability, and the imposition of a rigorous profit and loss discipline on all aspects of that business.

In the Federal Government, profit and loss are rarely considered, and when considered, usually ignored.

In government, the Federal Politician’s main concerns center around using their definition of ‘Bi-Partisan Compromise’ to achieve their primary goal of being re-elected.

A “Bi-Partisan Compromise” to a Democrat means NEVER give up any move to the Left concession agreed to by the Right, and if possible do not do what the Democrats promised to do in the Compromise.

For nearly 80 years now, the Democrats have demanded two steps to the Left, “Compromised” by agreeing to taking one step to the Right, which then gave them a net one step to the Left EVERY TIME that a ‘Bi-Partisan Compromise’ was made.

Thus, the US Federal Government has steadily moved always to the Left and with few exceptions almost always with a substantial financial loss.

The supporters of the RINOs have usually been very grateful to their Heros, the RINOs, for not allowing the Democrats to get all that they had at first demanded.

Thus, the RINOs get re-elected for doing a ‘good’ job, and the RINOs have job security for life.

Hence, we Conservatives must convince the RINO supporters to at least question their blind support of their Republicans In Name Only.

Without the RINOs, the ‘Iron Triangle’ will become the ‘Iron Bar’ of the Democrats and LAME, a much easier entity to defeat.


8 posted on 11/27/2012 8:04:45 AM PST by Graewoulf ((Traitor John Roberts' Obama"care" violates Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND the U.S. Constitution.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert
Entitlement reform NEVER - is what he means.

We have to shift the discussion away from taxes to spending. Tax increases on the rich is a lousy 8% of the annual deficit - it's all about spending.

Let's go off the cliff. They won, now we can all suffer. Maybe after paying federal taxes for a while, people will start to understand that government isn't free.

Dysfunctional works for me. Balance of power is to PROTECT the minority; not succumb to the majority.

10 posted on 11/27/2012 8:12:08 AM PST by dan on the right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert

Sure. We believe you DICK. By the way, how many budgets have you asswipe Demon rats passed the last three years?


12 posted on 11/27/2012 8:14:51 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert

Sure. We believe you DICK. By the way, how many budgets have you asswipe Demon rats passed the last three years?


13 posted on 11/27/2012 8:15:42 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert
Durbin says any changes to the tax system must make it more — not less — progressive.

That is what all of this is about, moving the ball toward their goal, marxism.
Cliff or surrender, either way they are going to take us there.

14 posted on 11/27/2012 8:16:27 AM PST by oldbrowser (Welcome to U.S.Zimbabwe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert

translation: “fiscal cliff - as it is now - now; entitlements never, unless what you mean are more tax increases”


16 posted on 11/27/2012 8:35:54 AM PST by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert

FUDD


17 posted on 11/27/2012 8:39:18 AM PST by goodnesswins (R.I.P. Doherty, Smith, Stevens, Woods.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert
No asshat... your word and the word of your party and president cannot be trusted. You are a liar and of satan.

LLS

18 posted on 11/27/2012 8:49:20 AM PST by LibLieSlayer (WOLVERINES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert
The Revenue Act of 1964 (from Wikipedia)

History and effects

President John F. Kennedy brought up the issue of tax reduction in his 1963 State of the Union address. His initial plan called for a $13.5 billion tax cut through a reduction of the top income tax rate from 91% to 65%, reduction of the bottom rate from 20% to 14%, and a reduction in the corporate tax rate from 52% to 47%. The first attempt at passing the tax cuts was rejected by Congress in 1963.

Kennedy was assassinated in November 1963, and was succeeded by Lyndon Johnson. Johnson was able to achieve Kennedy's goal of a tax cut in exchange for promising a budget not to exceed $100 billion in 1965. The Revenue Act of 1964 emerged from Congress and was signed by Johnson on February 26, 1964.

The stated goal of the tax cuts were to raise personal incomes, increase consumption, and increase capital investments. Evidence shows that these goals were met to some degree by the tax cut. Unemployment fell from 5.2% in 1964 to 4.5% in 1965, and fell to 3.8% in 1966. Initial estimates predicted a loss of revenue as a result of the tax cuts, however, tax revenue increased in 1964 and 1965.

19 posted on 11/27/2012 9:00:55 AM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert

The Dems want tax hikes now, no spending cuts ever. Then when things go to hell they will say we need to raise taxes again, the rich are still not paying their fair share.

The dems are invincibly ignorant. I don’t think anything can stop them. They cannot reason normally. We are dealing with lunatics and they are going to pull us all under when the ship goes down. But hey by then we will all be equally poor so the Dems will die happy.


22 posted on 11/27/2012 10:31:35 AM PST by Hound of the Baskervilles ("Nonsense in the intellect draws evil after it." C.S. Lewiscrate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Qbert

They will never ever ever cut spending


23 posted on 11/27/2012 11:15:00 AM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson