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

Skip to comments.

Republicans signal a hard-line stance after election success (Good!)
CNN ^ | Nov. 7, 2010 | Tom Cohen

Posted on 11/07/2010 1:47:02 PM PST by SmartInsight

Republicans interviewed on talk shows promised congressional investigations, an all-out effort to repeal health care reform, and steadfast opposition to any form of higher taxes.

When asked what they would do with their greater power, GOP legislators offered a hard-line agenda that left little room for middle-ground compromise.

(Excerpt) Read more at edition.cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: elections; obama; obamacare; republicans; taxes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-44 next last
To: ReneeLynn

Won’t it be interesting watching McCain?


21 posted on 11/07/2010 3:51:21 PM PST by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

this might just be the tip-of-the-century. you ought to get a FR award for this.


22 posted on 11/07/2010 3:52:09 PM PST by the invisib1e hand (every bad idea once seemed good to someone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

Do you get the feeling that the media is prime to revolt against the dems? Just little things, like Chrissy “thrill up his leg” Mathews declaration the stimulus didn’t work. It’s not a surge, but some are waking up (I think it’s the bean counters seriously looking at their bottom line). Take a look at MSLSD’s suspension of Oberman. Stuff like that is bubbling up. And the reporting out of India has been awful towards Owebama. They can not seriously consider themselves ‘news’ when all they do is opine.

More to come, I’m sure.


23 posted on 11/07/2010 3:59:10 PM PST by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: screaminsunshine
Why don’t we build paupers hospitals.

Because EVERYONE wants the best and most that medical science has to offer, no matter their ability to pay. As soon as someone tried to offer "Walmart" value care and the inevitable death or bad outcome occurred, lawyers would be on them like flies on ..... well, you know.

24 posted on 11/07/2010 4:09:51 PM PST by A Mississippian (Proud 7th generaion Mississippian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: the invisib1e hand

tee hee.


25 posted on 11/07/2010 4:21:36 PM PST by SunkenCiv (The 2nd Amendment follows right behind the 1st because some people are hard of hearing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance

Nope, not at all. Every once in a while the partisan media shills have to drop a half-hearted and/or heavily qualified bit of fact to make their lies seem palatable. Intermittent reinforcement is the hardest to beat.

And of course, there are also actual journalists out there who are gainfully employed (mostly on Fox News, but also on talk radio and the WWW) who don’t just spin and shill for the Demwits.


26 posted on 11/07/2010 4:52:58 PM PST by SunkenCiv (The 2nd Amendment follows right behind the 1st because some people are hard of hearing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv
"Every once in a while the partisan media shills have to drop a half-hearted and/or heavily qualified...

That was true before this historic election, but the mood of the country has changed. The politicians are trying to figure out what's going on.

There is a real and tangible change happening. The tea party isn't going away. It's a real movement, not astroturf. The awareness level on the people is off the charts. I don't believe that's going to change just because it's past Nov 2.

We're treading in a new territory, and we can't predict the outcome based on past performances.

This is an intriguing time participating in politics.

27 posted on 11/07/2010 5:02:15 PM PST by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ReneeLynn
They’d better get a really fast hold on anyone who starts talking ‘reaching across the aisle’. Really fast.

Better hogtie McCain right now...
28 posted on 11/07/2010 5:06:55 PM PST by CottonBall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sourcery

LOL! I like the way you think.

People look at me like I’m nuts when I tell them that the 3% the Bush tax cuts saves me isn’t enough for me to bother going to work. I’ll need a reduction of at least half, like you say. But that’s only because the dumbing-down of our education system has left the sheeple unable to calculate just how much they are paying in taxes!

I find it very frustrating to have to explain, over and over, that if my husband’s top income bracket is 25%, then everything I make is taxed at least 25% - along with 9.55% state and 7.65% SS and medicare. The gov gets 42% of what I make off the top, no questions asked. It’s criminal! Make that 21% and I’ll consider rejoining the work force.


29 posted on 11/07/2010 5:10:35 PM PST by CottonBall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: screaminsunshine

>We are broke.

We cancel what we owe the Fed. They print it out of this air to “lend” it to us anyways.


30 posted on 11/07/2010 6:59:47 PM PST by ROTB (Without a Christian revival, we are government slaves, or nuked by China/Russia during armed revolt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: screaminsunshine

>We are broke.

We cancel what we owe the Fed. They print it out of THIN air to “lend” it to us anyways.


31 posted on 11/07/2010 7:00:02 PM PST by ROTB (Without a Christian revival, we are government slaves, or nuked by China/Russia during armed revolt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: screaminsunshine
USA vs. The Democrats and the MSM.

Washington vs the rest of us.

32 posted on 11/07/2010 7:08:36 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sourcery

Cutting the income tax in half will make it grow back faster.

Let me be specific. The Income tax without apportionment was made legal in 1913 after 52 years and was originally a flat tax. But the 16th Amendment was a de facto business permit for certain lobbyists to trade tax favors inside revolving doors with Treasury and Congress.

Since 1913 there have been FIVE MAJOR tax reforms of the Income tax code. Each made the income tax flatter and simpler. But each time the tax code was back to insanity within 15 to 20 years.

Since the last major reform in 1986 under President Ronald Reagan, there have been more than 18,000 amendments to the tax code and once again we are back to insanity.

The Income Tax code is a cancer. The 16th amendment is the root of the cancer.

Cutting the cancer in two will result in cancer coming back with a vengeance.

The only way to kill this cancer is to repeal the 16th amendment and pass a replacement tax code.

http://www.fairtax.org


33 posted on 11/07/2010 7:11:25 PM PST by Hostage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
I know all that. But we have no possibility of eliminating the income tax at this time. Flattening it is far more achievable. And once it's flat—and must remain so by Constitutional restriction (which is already there, since the Constitution requires any non-direct taxes to be "uniform"), it becomes much easier to eliminate it altogether.

SCOTUS has correctly ruled that the only effect of the 16th Amendment was to define the income tax as not being a "direct tax," which necessarily means that it is an indirect tax, and so is subject to the Constitutional constraints on indirect taxes.

Unfortunately, SCOTUS has incorrectly interpreted the semantics of the uniformity requirement. But the requirement clearly and unambiguously requires that the tax itself, not the law that imposes it, must be "uniform." Progressive rates violate that constraint.

34 posted on 11/07/2010 7:29:57 PM PST by sourcery (Poor Nancy: From Speaker OF the House to...Speaker UNDER the House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: sourcery

Cutting the income tax in half will make it grow back faster.

Let me be specific. The Income tax without apportionment was made Constitutional in 1913 after 52 years of having it shot down by courts as unconstitutional, and it was originally a flat tax. But the 16th Amendment was and is a de facto business permit for certain lobbyists to trade tax favors along revolving doors with Treasury and Congress. This activity comprises a tax gaming industry.

Since 1913 there have been FIVE MAJOR tax reforms of the Income tax code. Each made the income tax flatter and simpler. But each time the tax code was back to insanity within 15 to 20 years because of all the tax gaming.

Since the last major reform in 1986 under President Ronald Reagan, there have been more than 18,000 amendments to the tax code and once again we are back to insanity.

The Income Tax code is a cancer. The 16th amendment is the root of the cancer. The 16th Amendment always permits Congress to amend the tax code however it wants until they create tax insanity again.

Cutting the cancer in two will result in tax cancer coming back with a vengeance.

The only way to kill this cancer is to repeal the 16th amendment and pass a replacement tax code.

http://www.fairtax.org


35 posted on 11/08/2010 4:00:33 PM PST by Hostage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sourcery

Sorry for the repost in post #35.

The legal argument for uniformity is flawed. Within each income tax bracket, the tax rate is indeed uniform. Since the income tax is confined to ‘income’ however defined, the federal government has had a free hand to draw income brackets however it wishes, and as just said, the tax rate is applied uniformly with each tax bracket.

The law is vague and allows for a backdoor progressive income tax.

The FairTax code http://www.fairtax.org has the NRST that is uniformly applied as a nondirect excise tax on RETAIL consumption. It abolishes the Income tax code in toto. It does not repeal the 16th amendment and sunsets in 7 years if the 16th Amendment is not repealed. In short, after 7 years if the American people want to go back to the Income tax after 7 years of the FairTax, it will happen automatically. But if they want to keep the FairTax, then the 16th must be repealed.

The sunset provision of the FairTax code was put in recently to guard against the possibility that the federal government would have both the Income tax and the FairTax to levy on the American people.


36 posted on 11/08/2010 4:22:39 PM PST by Hostage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
Yes, they can define income however they like, but once defined, that definition must be applied uniformly—as must the tax rate. That's what's required for the tax to satisfy the constraint not only of uniformity, but of self-consistency and non-violation of the Law Of Non-Contradiction (violation of the latter results in being able to prove that true = false, and hence renders logic and truth meaningless.)
37 posted on 11/08/2010 4:38:20 PM PST by sourcery (Poor Nancy: From Speaker OF the House to...Speaker UNDER the House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: sourcery

And they do apply the tax rate uniformly with each tax bracket. They have the power to set up brackets and be uniform within those brackets.

That’s how they get around what you might consider the origial intention of uniformity.

By setting up brackets however they wish, they get a progressive tax code.


38 posted on 11/08/2010 4:42:57 PM PST by Hostage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
Each bracket redefines income. Multiple definitions of income create a logical inconsistency: No court would permit the same word in a law or contract to have different meanings, and doing so is also a violation of the uniformity requirement. There's no way that having multiple, self-contradictory definitions of "income" in any way qualifies as "uniform."

Uniformity requires a single, uniform definition and description of the thing to be taxed, and the way the tax is to be calculated. Tax brackets are so clearly and undeniably in violation of that requirement that any judge who rules otherwise should be impeached and removed from office in dishonor and disgrace.

39 posted on 11/08/2010 5:09:17 PM PST by sourcery (Poor Nancy: From Speaker OF the House to...Speaker UNDER the House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance

It’s imperative that the Tea Party continues, because some of these primary winners were Demwit astroturf candidates (some call them RINOs, but basically, they got in due to illegal D-party activities). Some of the jackoffs like Lindsay Graham have to go because they clearly are working for the Demwits, or at best don’t give a damn about us, about conservatism, about the Republican Party, or about the country.

The defeat of Obama in 2012 would be nice, I hope we can accomplish it. Our main goal is to solidify our gains; to recruit candidates (Reps, Senate, state offices, local offices) for 2012 primaries NOW and build ground organizations; to keep gathering intel on the enemies within, in particular any and all organizations and local leaders (including public school teachers and admins) who work for Zero; and to keep slamming Soros for his anti-American activities until he’s either under indictment, or dies from the stress and strain.

We are in a long war, truly. We didn’t start it, but we will finish it.


40 posted on 11/08/2010 6:34:26 PM PST by SunkenCiv (The 2nd Amendment follows right behind the 1st because some people are hard of hearing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-44 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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