The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Obama starts to break campaign promises

jackoroe said:
I'm not condemning him for his pragmatic decision not to raise taxes. It actually repudiates the erroneous position he sold the American people. Spreading other people's wealth around won't solve the problem of a recession. Let the people who create jobs keep their money so they can continue to create more jobs. Even Obama sees this is true.
Click to expand...


I agree. But I don't agree that he lied. I've seen him bend truths, and not tell the WHOLE truth, but I have never discovered he's flat-out lied. That's a main reason I voted for him. I may not like him, but I can say he hasn't lied.
 
Passion4Muzik said:
What I was specifically asking you about is how allegedly Obama lied, since that's you said. How did Obama lie?
Click to expand...

Are you actually arguing that his position hasn't changed? Because if it hasn't there's no point to this thread. But his position is apparently different than what it was just a few weeks ago. That would constitute a lie. I understand he's being pragmatic, But if he truly believes that taxing the wealthy is good for America, why not speed up the process?

The fact is, he realizes it won't and will exacerbate the economic situation we currently suffer from. If he were to simply man up and say that, I'd have some respect for him. But he won't.
 
jackoroe said:
Are you actually arguing that his position hasn't changed? Because if it hasn't there's no point to this thread. But his position is apparently different than what it was just a few weeks ago. That would constitute a lie. I understand he's being pragmatic, But if he truly believes that taxing the wealthy is good for America, why not speed up the process?

The fact is, he realizes it won't and will exacerbate the economic situation we currently suffer from. If he were to simply man up and say that, I'd have some respect for him. But he won't.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing anything. You maintain a disdain of Obama while being in favor of the possibility of delayed tax increases for the wealthy. You said, "he lied to us" and I'm asking you what the lie is.

Also, are you a part of the wealthy?
 
iman said:
They are just campaign promises. Like "of course I love you" and "sure I'll respect you in the morning" and "I'll call you tomorrow" and "that was the best night I ever had" - it's all bullshit - not mean't to be taken seriously.
Click to expand...


They said he would consider delaying the rich tax increase. He didn't say it wouldn't come.
Also, he's still on track to provide the middle/working class a tax break.

In the meantime, this is still Bush's economy.
 
Passion4Muzik said:
It's interesting that you condemn him even as he may do something you agree with.

Did Obama ever state that he would immediately repeal tax cuts once he got in office?
Click to expand...

No, he said he wouldn't renew them when they expired.
 
Anyone who believes a 3.6% tax increase on those making over $250,000 will have any significant effect on the economy have a much better handle on political rhetoric than they do on economic reality.

Its why the Clinton tax increase didn't harm the economy of the 90's......it simply wasn't big enough to do any damage.
 
I have two issues with this post

1. How is this breaking a campaign promise?

All I have heard is that the tax increase may happen later than they planned, not that it won't happen

He did make some promises with dates attached to them, the tax cuts/increases were not part of those promises


2. Why are we even discussing this?

Obama has not EVEN being sworn in as president!

I think this is another case of jumping the gun, and believing what some pundit/blogger has said, because it confirms the posters beliefs, rather than being even close to factual](*,)
 
chatolandia said:
I think this is another case of jumping the gun, and believing what some pundit/blogger has said, because it confirms the posters beliefs, rather than being even close to factual
Click to expand...


Umm, it was Obama's own advisors that said this.](*,)](*,)](*,)
 
justapixel said:
39.6% - 35% = 4.6%

If you can not do that simple math, I do not have any faith in any thing you say.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected. !oops!

But I still believe my original point is valid.

If you wish to prove me wrong explain to me why after tax increases in 1990 and 1993 the 90's produced job increases and a robust economy.

I presume you have the capacity to answer the question.
 
](*,)

They said that the increase wouldn't happen just yet


right?


That is not breaking a campaign promise, that is planning WHEN to fulfill whatever promises he made.


Hence my question

](*,)
 
hollisterbro said:
^Obama's whole premise was that the Bush tax cuts were wrong and that the rich were not paying their fair share. He is now back peddling from that under the realization that as prez he, not George Bush, will be held responsible for the economy. Therefore he is smelling the coffee, if u will, on the reality of taxation and economics. Perhaps not a complete break of a promise but none-the-less a dramatic attitude change.
Click to expand...



Obama has struck me as the kind of man that would change the course of action if he deems the circumstances require it.


I find that to be a good thing on a leader


We had one that would not back down, even on the face of a mountain of evidence of the contrary, and look were we are now.


So his change, or rather deferment, is a good thing in my book.
 
Shafted said:
No, he said he wouldn't renew them when they expired.
Click to expand...

Well, what I was getting at is what Obama said on the campaign trail regarding when taxes on the wealthy would increase. So far, Obama's detractors have not provided a date or time that Obama stated he would increase these taxes. Even the article provided does not say Obama broke a promise/lied. The Obama detractors have gone a step beyond the article (perhaps because of poor comprehension/the misleading title or their disdain for him), but have not provided any proof that would indicate a lie/break of a promise.
 
hollisterbro said:
^Obama's whole premise was that the Bush tax cuts were wrong and that the rich were not paying their fair share. He is now back peddling from that under the realization that as prez he, not George Bush, will be held responsible for the economy. Therefore he is smelling the coffee, if u will, on the reality of taxation and economics. Perhaps not a complete break of a promise but none-the-less a dramatic attitude change.
Click to expand...

Obama could only be back-peddling if he said that the tax cuts were fine. The only issue regarding the tax cuts is if he will initiate legislation to repeal Bush's tax cuts or let them expire the year after he takes office. Either way, the taxes of the wealthy will increase, thus being inline with Obama's stance during the campaign.
 
hollisterbro said:
Well it is good. Prob is if Repubs do it they are called stupid and liars, if Obama does it he is called a good leader. Objectivity is priceless.
Click to expand...

This thread isn't about republicans vs. Obama, though. This thread is about an accusation that Obama broke a campaign promise (which even the article accompanying the original post doesn't support).

Your response to the poster about repubs being called stupid and liars is based on that poster's political philosophy, not any actions by Obama so I'm unsure as to how you could make a comparison between the criticism of republican legislation vs. Obama legislation when Obama has not yet taken office and isn't in power.
 
ICO7 said:
So how is it they create jobs during a recession, when the unemployment rate goes up, but don't create jobs at other times, when it could prevent a recession?

Answer: Your sentence is fundamentally untrue and unsupported by facts and reality.
Click to expand...

He's also being deceitful on "people" creating jobs: people in the upper regions of the tax realm don't create jobs any more than the Mexican on the corner selling roses does. Jobs are created when people spend, which stimulates demand. The people who will spend the result of a tax cut are those at the bottom, and up into the middle. So this:

GenAlfie said:
Clinton's RAISING of taxes on the hyper-wealthy stimulated the economy in the longest expansion of economic growth in modern history, and, you know, led to surpluses? Then in comes pansy Bush II, he cuts taxes for the hyper-wealthy, and BAM! Lookie lookie where we are today.

Further, please do read what I posted -- please don't make shit up. I said, "Cutting taxes for the hyper-wealthy doesn't stimulate demand..."
Click to expand...

is correct.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top