"Obama centers budget on tax hikes for the rich," also "unlikely ever to come into force"

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Obama centers budget on tax hikes for the rich

By Agence France-Presse
Friday, February 10, 2012 20:32 EST



http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/10/obama-centers-budget-on-tax-hikes-for-the-rich/

US President Barack Obama will Monday roll out a populist election-year budget challenging Republicans to support his job creation drive and to finally agree to hike taxes on the richest Americans.

Obama will use his annual spending plan to flesh out his pledge to build a new economy in which every American gets a “fair shot” and the rich pay what the president calls a “fair share,” senior officials said.

His proposal will be seen as a highly political document, given its timing as Obama gears up his reelection fight and the fact it follows spending guidelines from a deficit control agreement with Republicans in September.

The budget is also unlikely ever to come into force, as Democratic Senate Majority leader Harry Reid has said there will be no vote on a budget proposal this year, due to the already agreed spending guidelines.

[dkf]

1. What will spur "fairness" is a booming economy due to real growth.

That is when unemployment falls and when the scarcity of labor drives up wages.

I'm so sick of taxes being everything to both parties. Taxes and abortion taxes and abortion. Where are the visionaries?

[emulatorloo]

8. What will spur that is getting the Republicans out of the way.

Every dem jobs plan has been killed by Republicans.

As to the tax issue, here is the Dem's thinking. They have been saying this for years. Give tax relief to the people that need it. They will SPEND the money on goods and services that they need. That will cause the economy to grow.

Think about it. It makes perfect sense. It is not the only solution that Dems have, it is part of a package of ideas.

[MadHound]

2. Well, part of this "fairness" initiative could have already been achieved,

If Obama hadn't caved and extended the Bush tax cuts for the rich. Let's hope he's learned his lesson and doesn't cave again.

[emulatorloo]

5. Enough with the contextless bullshit spin

- It was right after the 2010 election while Republicans were doing their victory lap. They had their "Mandate". If you want to blame anybody, blame the voters and the DU'ers who relentlessly posted dishonest threads aimed at discouraging Democratic voter turn out in 2010. If they were doing it here, they were doing it in the real world too.

- Republicans would not allow the Bush Tax Cuts for the 1% put into a separate bill from the Bush Tax Cuts for the 99% so that their could be a separate vote Dems in congress tried this, Republican would not do it. This meant that EVERYBODY's taxes would go up. Dem economic theory is to give tax relief to people that need it. Republicans insisted on all or nothing. That is partly why Obama agreed to a temporary extension of the Bush tax cuts.

- The other reason was that Republicans were holding the extension of unemployment benefits hostage. You may not give a shit about the unemployed, but the Dems do.

- You ignore that Obama has been pushing on the tax cut for the wealthy issue ever since. Relentlessly Encouraging people to call their reps and Senators, etc etc. You ignore that the Republicans continue to push for a PERMANENT extention of the Bush Tax Cuts.

- You ignore the fact that their will NEVER be an increase of taxes for the rich while the House is controlled by Norquist's syncophants.

I am sick and tired of the simplistic half-truths and sloganeering that passes for criticism these days. Honestly in my mind it devalues any legitimate criticism that people have about Obama and the policies of the Obama administration. It is just a bunch of noise, and there is way too much noise here and not enough signal.

[MadHound]

7. The fact is, Obama extended the Bush tax cuts for the rich,

In the face of popular opinion, which clearly indicated that the public wanted those tax cuts for the rich ended.

Another fact, Obama did his face plant cave three weeks before the drop dead date. No deal making, no working the bully pulpit, no playing chicken to get a better deal.

Another fact, if you think that anything that anybody says on this discussion board has any resonance in the real world, you are sadly deluded.

Another fact, actions speak louder than words. Obama would have a lot more credence if he hadn't caved. Instead, after the fact, now he is speaking out about fairness. After the fact achieves nothing.

Another fact, at the time Democrats still controlled Congress and the White House. Yet there was still the cave.

Facts, it is best to deal with them instead of election year fantasy.

[emulatorloo]

9. Let's start here:

I wrote: ". . . the DU'ers who relentlessly posted dishonest threads aimed at discouraging Democratic voter turn out in 2010. If they were doing it here, they were doing it in the real world too."

You wrote: ". . . if you think that anything that anybody says on this discussion board has any resonance in the real world, you are sadly deluded."

So right there, you have grossly misrepresented and distorted what I said.

By selectively LEAVING THINGS OUT.

Which is exactly what you have done in your last two posts in this thread.

It is but one of the tools in your arsenal.

I don't care if you do that to me. I don't mind being lied about.

However, it is typical of the kind of rhetorical strategies you seem to consistently employ. Half-truths, context free meme promotion, distortion of positions, selective quotation.

Beleive me, I am not singling you out. You aren't the only DU'er who employs these tools, although they are very few in number.

Nor is this a "Personal Attack". It is about the rhetorical choices you make.

[MadHound]

12. Alright, let's start there

What you said, full quote: "If you want to blame anybody, blame the voters and the DU'ers who relentlessly posted dishonest threads aimed at discouraging Democratic voter turn out in 2010." Again, what gets said on this board has no impact on the real world. As far as posters here going out into the real world and discouraging voters, that is an assumption on your part, an assumption that you have absolutely no proof happened. Please, show me some(ten or more to be statistically significant) instances where a DUer actually went out into the real world and mounted an organized effort to discourage voters.

Now that we've started, let's continue.

Oh, wait, we can't continue, because the fact of the matter is that the only refutation for my post is a half assed assumptive argument about semantics. You aren't dealing with any of the other points I mentioned, why is that? Oh, yeah, they're facts. Never mind.

So you've been reduced to picking nits and assuming with no proof. Sad, truly sad.

[msongs]

13. Obama chose NOT to veto the tax giveaway extension. He CHOSE not to. Fact avoidance lol nt

[emulatorloo]

14. Arguing with people who are willing to employ dishonest rhetorical tactics is a waste of time.

If you truly believe that putting words into other people's mouths, selective quotation to misrepresent positions, excessive hyperbole, context-free "analysis" and so on are "nits," then what is there to discuss?

"As far as posters here going out into the real world and discouraging voters, that is an assumption on your part, an assumption that you have absolutely no proof happened. Please, show me some(ten or more to be statistically significant) instances where a DUer actually went out into the real world and mounted an organized effort to discourage voters. "

Preposterous - everybody talks to their friends and family. If someone is motivated enough to post thread after thread on DU promoting the latest revision of "democrats-are-evil-there-is-no-difference" meme, you can bet they are saying the same things in the real world.

Bottom line: I caught you misrepresenting my positions and putting words in my mouth. Once again, I don't care what you say about me.

I have noticed the same patterns of dishonesty in your posts and original threads. You can't employ every trick in the Fox News playbook and then expect you aren't going to get pushback when you do.

Again, I am not singling you out. I think that there are a handful of posters here who are willing to do the same in multiple original threads per day.

I think the excesses of these posters is poisonous to the discourse.

I think it drives a wedge between DU'ers who are on the same page about so many things.

I think that it is giving a bad name to people who are legitimately concerned about some of Obama's policies. My hope is that they recognize this sooner or later and start pushing back on the posters who employ these tactics.

In real life I am sure we have more things in common than not. There are a lot of values that we share. I'm not questioning your motivatlon. I am only pointing out the flaws that I see in your willingness to employ dishonest rhetorical tactics. And another thing I am assuming is, given your passion, you are a strong activist for the things we at DU believe in.

[Better Believe It]

3. A "fair shot"???!!!! At what? What does that mean?

I have a "fair shot" at winning the lottery. I have just as much chance to win as anyone else who buys a ticket.

[rfranklin]

4. If you already lost the "Lucky Sperm" lottery...

Your only hope now is the MegaMillions.

[emulatorloo]

6. Yes, let's focus on a common expression that every body understands and try to make it seem sinister

DU stock and trade.

[kenny blankenship]

10. Fair Shot: You get a running start and the 1% have to use a bolt action or double gun

Steady with the wheel Obama. Let's keep it sporting at least!

[dkf]

11. The only thing that works is a "fair shot" at a hefty inheritance.