Not blind, just incognizant. Bogus distraction issue and you know it. McCain's is only slightly higher. Name one Obama socialistic economic policy. I can name you a $150 million purchase of private banks that a Republican administration just did. $258 Billion after his proposed spending cuts, McCain proposes $211 in additional spending, too, after his cuts. Example? Do you prefer the ignorance of the harm of staying in Iraq forever? You hate the idea of the government spending money on lazy welfare recipients, but you extoll the virtues of spending $10 Billion a week buying food, gas ,and everything for the friggin' Iraqi's who don't work and are trying to kill Americans. They got nuthin' we need. Saddam is dead, the WMD's were imaginary, the people hate us and want us gone, WE WANT TO BE GONE, . . . and you don't even want to address the fact that its way past time to plan for being gone. We're bleeding money (almost a Trillion already) to pay for welfare for your beloved ragheads. We got nuthin' to prove to anybody. We've proven to our enemies that we can take down their country in three weeks and stay for as long as we want to. We don't have to stay in Iraq forever to make that point any clearer. Any candidate who isn't seriously working to get us deployed out of Iraq and into Afghanistan where troops are needed or get them reconditioned for the next important fight, just isn't thinking strategically . . and he's not listening to the military experts either.
Oh, I do a little. This is your research conclusion? What are you talking about? There are states and communities all over that would welcome a new refinery to locate there. Much additional refinement could be done by additional production facilities on existing sites anyway. Baton Rouge isn't the only place in the country to build a refinery. You did the research, I presume. What is your evidence for "Obama supporters in the Scotlandville Area" being responsible for EXXON's decision not to build any new refineries in 30 years. This I have to see.
No precedent has been set by Bush, Obama, a Democratic congress or a Republican congress for spending cuts. What I said was "I expect some balanced spending bills to be proposed by Congress. I think spending must be cut." I still do. I think many in Congress do. I think proposals will be written and then we'll see how our COngressmen and President will act on them. Your suggestion that a "liberal" Congress is not going to cut spending is not based on any fact that you've presented here. Eight years of a Republican President (6 with an allied Republican COngress) have brought us to this ugly point of deficit spending. The Democrats can hardly do worse. In fact, Bill Clinton posted surpluses and paid down the debt. Did you forget? if you are correct--that Obama is a "tax and spend" candidate--then he is responsibly trying to pay for what we spend and reduce the debt. McCain, the "borrow and spend" candidate is just digger our hole deeper.
whats more likely? that obama's groupies colin powell and warren buffet ignored all those deficiencies (you forgot that he's a muslim and not a U.S. citizen), or that those "deficiencies" dont really exist. if you arent blind or obstinate then address red's comment about tax cuts to exxon.
The thought that Exxon’s tax credits/incentives are out of line because they make to much money is absurd. Do you not think it is in our best interest as citizens to help American companies grow? There is a recent example right here in Baton Rouge. EA Sports (Video game Company) makes huge margins and profits. Why would the citizens of Louisiana spend millions of dollars giving them tax credits (in essence cash)? They do not need it; they make huge profits every year with out our help? The reason the Governor, the Mayor & LSU gave them so much was they wanted them to come set up shop on LSU’s campus. Why? Good jobs, good pay, good taxes. Did EA need the money? NO Did it entice them to bring 200 jobs here? Yes Is there a chance EA likes it here and grows further in our state? Yes It is easy to beat on Exxon because oil is valuable right now, but how would you like to depend on a business that is based on a commodity that you have very little control over it’s value? As for corporate taxes they should go away. All federal revenue should be based on income earned. If you make a dollar you pay a percentage of it to the government. The people who make more should pay a higher rate because they benefit more from a thriving economy. The tax code would be one page. If you make between X & Y you pay
Since the Democrats are advocating redistribution of wealth and have determined the maximum any individual or business should make, why don't they tackle one more issue in the name of fairness? How about tort reform? How about these liberal judges awarding people millions for ridiculous claims?
I, like you, don't care for Obama's tax plan. It is not an equitable plan and will serve to discourage economic growth, but as bad as his plan is there is no point where a 100% marginal tax rate is imposed, and this statement is just intellectually dishonest. Why can't we argue real issues instead of silly made up issues that no one is proposing.
just saw JTP on fox. he's griping about taxes for welfare yet he was on welfare as a child. stay classy, joe.:thumb:
This sums up the "Joe the Plumber" flap nicely: http://www.theoldriverroad.com/theoldriverroad/2008/10/joe-the-plumber.html
