Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[PRobb]

wavdoctor wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 10:13

I have my guns close and ammo dry...Can you say revolution!! It's an AMERICAN party not Partisan.

Oh for goodness sake- you lost a couple of elections. Now it's the other guy's turn. That's the way America works.

The sore loser brigade is really going off the rails. You're being played here.

[bblackwood]

PRobb wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 09:23

This is being portrayed as a grass roots movement. It isn't.

It's obvious you believe this though I can't find anything proving your assertion (nor has anything other than "we know it" been provided), so I suppose I'll bow out of this one. I can only share my experience and motivation for being there, take it or leave it.

[PRobb]

bblackwood wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 10:52

PRobb wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 09:23 This is being portrayed as a grass roots movement. It isn't. It's obvious you believe this though I can't find anything proving your assertion (nor has anything other than "we know it" been provided), so I suppose I'll bow out of this one. I can only share my experience and motivation for being there, take it or leave it.

Under $200,000 you taxes go down. $200,000 to $250,000 they stay the same. Over $250,000 they go back to what they were under Clinton.

And I'm supposed to believe that's what caused this great grass roots outrage?  And again, since the taxes that were due yesterday are 100% Bush tax policy (remember, they're 2008 taxes), where was all this last year? Plus Faux has been actively promoting "FNC Tea Parties". None of this passes the smell test.

It reminds me of William Randolph Hearst and the Spanish American war. He sent a reporter to the front to cover it. The reporter wired back saying the was no war and could he come home. Hearst told him "Please remain. You supply the pictures and I'll supply the war."

[bblackwood]

PRobb wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 10:05

Under $200,000 you taxes go down. $200,000 to $250,000 they stay the same. Over $250,000 they go back to what they were under Clinton. And I'm supposed to believe that's what caused this great grass roots outrage?  And again, since the taxes that were due yesterday are 100% Bush tax policy (remember, they're 2008 taxes), where was all this last year? Plus Faux has been actively promoting "FNC Tea Parties". None of this passes the smell test.

No, it's about the bailouts and wasteful usage of our tax dollars, at least that's what 90%+ of the signs I saw yesterday were about.

Once again you're trying to make this about Obama - it's not.

Again, it appears you've made up your mind, likely without having even gone to your local gathering to see for yourself what it was about, so I will say this: for some (many) of us, we're sick and tired of the unbelievable spending that is going on in DC - the recent  budgets and bailouts were simply straws that broke the camel's back. You can try and twist this around all you want, but what I saw, with my own eyes, wasn't about republicans or democrats, Bush or Obama, or anything else 'political' - it was about a federal government that is spending ludicrous amount of money year after year, mortgaging our  and our kid's futures.

Now, I feel fairly certain you'll come back with more partisan politicking here, and that's why I'm out. I wish we could discuss this with open minds and without the (often false) smear stuff like 'The Repubs and FauxNews owning the TM for Tea Party' (which you apparently posted on more than one forum though I've seen no retraction), but as you seem to only see what you wish to see, I'll not continue discussing it with you.

Cheers,

[mgod]

Well Brad, when the protest had to leave the White House, where did it go? To Dick Armey's office, out of which he has been lobbying for companies taking bailout money. So, with respect to your wish for this to be non-partisan, it reeks beyond breathe-ability of being ENTIRELY partisan, and as was said, people are being played.

DS

[bblackwood]

mgod wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 10:42

Well Brad, when the protest had to leave the White House, where did it go? To Dick Armey's office, out of which he has been lobbying for companies taking bailout money. So, with respect to your wish for this to be non-partisan, it reeks beyond breathe-ability of being ENTIRELY partisan, and as was said, people are being played.

Again, while damning for that party, that's approximately 0.2% of the parties that happened yesterday.

I need more than hunches to say a group of people, some of whom I know quite well, are simply pawns in some political chess match.

[Daniel Farris]

bblackwood wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 08:46

I need more than hunches to say a group of people, some of whom I know quite well, are simply pawns in some political chess match.

It happens often enough that they have a name for it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing

DF

[Berolzheimer]

Brad:

 http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/10/fox-news-tea-party-video /

"Fox News isn’t the only right-wing organization involved in building up these so-called “grassroots” events. The tea parties have been heavily backed by corporate lobbyists. The principle organizers of many of the local events are actually the lobbyist-run think tanks Americans for Prosperity, Freedom Works, and Newt Gingrich’s American Solutions. The groups are heavily staffed and well funded, and are providing all the logistical and public relations work necessary for planning coast-to-coast protests.

With its aggressive advocacy for the anti-Obama protests, it looks like Fox is quickly dropping its “fair and balanced” slogan to become the “voice of opposition” to the Obama administration."

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/09/lobbyists-planning-teapa rties/

[Berolzheimer]

As I browse images from yesterdays "tea parties"  I see a lot of pasty white faces.  Not one black, hispanic, asian, or dare I say even Jewish looking mug among them- and yes, Brad, more that a few anti - Obama signs.  At a time when taxes are being lowered for most people and it's clear that government programs are needed, and therefore need to be funded, to fix some major problems that we face, one has to wonder what motivates people to protest against their own interests?
I suspect this "movement" is really being used to cloak something else altogether-

Racism.  I think these people are angry & scared at having a black man in the White House.

[bblackwood]

Berolzheimer wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 12:00

I suspect this "movement" is really being used to cloak something else altogether- Racism.  I think these people are angry & scared at having a black man in the White House.

[Kris]

I used to play in a band called The Fatty Teabags and I can say with authority that this whole thing is clearly about dipping your balls in someone else's mouth or having someone else's balls dipped in your mouth (depending on the perspective).

[T. Mueller]

Quote:

Under $200,000 you taxes go down. $200,000 to $250,000 they stay the same. Over $250,000 they go back to what they were under Clinton.

My understanding, though, is that this figure gets touchy when you apply it to middle-class families and small businesses.  If I'm a small business owner, and I want to give back to my company, and my wife has a job that makes a respectable wage (my wife currently makes more than I do!), and I want to grow my business, it seems like having taxes go up on households that earn above $200,000 can hurt the business by reducing the opportunity to reinvest in it.  Sure, you get to deduct those wages, but a deduction isn't a credit.

I'm very much not a Republican, and give significantly to charities, etc, so I'm not saying this as an excuse to allow bloated Americans to continue to make money hand-over-fist on the backs of those who day-in and day-out do hard work in America.  

I'm openly asking someone to tell me my facts are wrong about the economic effects on the small business.  I'm also not intending to challenge anyone's philosophy; just let me know facts.  

[Berolzheimer]

T. Mueller wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 11:37

Quote: Under $200,000 you taxes go down. $200,000 to $250,000 they stay the same. Over $250,000 they go back to what they were under Clinton. My understanding, though, is that this figure gets touchy when you apply it to middle-class families and small businesses.  If I'm a small business owner, and I want to give back to my company, and my wife has a job that makes a respectable wage (my wife currently makes more than I do!), and I want to grow my business, it seems like having taxes go up on households that earn above $200,000 can hurt the business by reducing the opportunity to reinvest in it.  Sure, you get to deduct those wages, but a deduction isn't a credit. I'm very much not a Republican, and give significantly to charities, etc, so I'm not saying this as an excuse to allow bloated Americans to continue to make money hand-over-fist on the backs of those who day-in and day-out do hard work in America.   I'm openly asking someone to tell me my facts are wrong about the economic effects on the small business.  I'm also not intending to challenge anyone's philosophy; just let me know facts.

For one thing the increase only applies to the amount above 250k.  For another thing it's only a rollback of the Bush tax cut- so it's an increase in the top rate from 36 to 39 percent, but only on the amount above 250k.

As far as small businesses are concerned the are still plenty of deductions in place.

More info here:
http://www.barackobama.com/taxes/

And on a lighter note, my favorite sign so far from the protests:

[Berolzheimer]

I've posted this before but it's appropos of T''s post:

[Jay Kadis]

Berolzheimer wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 10:00

Racism.  I think these people are angry & scared at having a black man in the White House.

It could also be that they're afraid of someone smarter than they are in the White House.