Report: McCain a ‘Hero’ to Taxpayers

[HAL 9000 96]

Money that is sitting there, mainly tax-free.

If you don't want to raise taxes on the rich, then make the tax code include all earnings. That way ALL are paying a fair share of their income. Besides, Obama's proposal doesn't apply to 98% of American individual taxpayers. Go figure.

[IAMX 3,055]

There's the history of lowering taxes and "fiscal conservative" claims. Retards.

[Peikko 1,575]

No Gary, you don't want to address the issues. I asked what I thought was a legitimate question and it was ignored in favour of some 'nah, nah' ####### for tat game with SRVT. Honestly, it's pointless.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Bingo!

[luckytxn 2,264]

Has Obama said he'd raise taxes across the board?

Nope.

He has siad and his website said that the tax decrease that was voted on years ago would just be allowed to expire and those taxes would offset his Socialist programs. It was siad many times by many Socialist (Dems) that this is not a tax increase as they were taxes that were already there.

A couple weeks ago Obama did say that with the economy the way it now that he would postpone the tax decrease lifting until the economy is better. That is saying he is for more taxes.

Now McCain has said he is for extending the tax decrease and even making them permament. He is also known to vote for more and bigger Government thus increasing the deficit.

So I guess we have a win-win situation coming.

[Eric_and_Corinna 0]

My taxable income falls into the 38-66k bracket. Under McCain's plan, I would pay about $300 less. Under Obama's, I pay $1000 less.

According to the Tax Policy Center, which hails itself as non-partisan based in DC, it is estimated that over 10 years, McCain's tax proposals could increase the national debt by as much as $4.5 trillion with interest, while Obama's could add as much as $3.3 trillion.

I found these numbers on CNN/Money magazine's site here

http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/election/index.html

I think this site is pretty accurate, but I'm sure there are those that will disagree.

[HAL 9000 96]

Has Obama said he'd raise taxes across the board?

Nope.

He has siad and his website said that the tax decrease that was voted on years ago would just be allowed to expire and those taxes would offset his Socialist programs. It was siad many times by many Socialist (Dems) that this is not a tax increase as they were taxes that were already there.

A couple weeks ago Obama did say that with the economy the way it now that he would postpone the tax decrease lifting until the economy is better. That is saying he is for more taxes.

Now McCain has said he is for extending the tax decrease and even making them permament. He is also known to vote for more and bigger Government thus increasing the deficit.

So I guess we have a win-win situation coming.

Socialist.

I suppose on top of letting those tax cuts expire he'd *surprise* work with Congress to legislate better tax cuts to those that maintain our market economy = consumers? That shouldn't be too hard. 98% of earners in the country have done a good job til recently (most of the time) of keeping the economy from going bankrupt.

[IAMX 3,055]

Has Obama said he'd raise taxes across the board?

Nope.

He has siad and his website said that the tax decrease that was voted on years ago would just be allowed to expire and those taxes would offset his Socialist programs. It was siad many times by many Socialist (Dems) that this is not a tax increase as they were taxes that were already there.

A couple weeks ago Obama did say that with the economy the way it now that he would postpone the tax decrease lifting until the economy is better. That is saying he is for more taxes.

Now McCain has said he is for extending the tax decrease and even making them permament. He is also known to vote for more and bigger Government thus increasing the deficit.

So I guess we have a win-win situation coming.

Pre-cisely.

Obama's lowering taxes bit is a ###### stupid thing to do. Of course, there are far too many idiots who think lowering taxes is a solution. Maybe for the lowest working class brackets. The first solution is to stop spending so much god damn money, and actually TRACK where it goes, which hasn't been done for ####### in Iraq, btw, adequately fund the necessary social programs that keep this country running and in the first world, then adjust the tax rate based upon that.

I'm tired of earmarks, tired of Obama claims of lowering taxes like an idiot, and well, long tired of conservative claims that lowering taxes help anything. Yeah, it helps other countries own your ###. Should I post that pic again of Bush holding hands with Saudi royalty?

And then conservatives want to paint some xenophobic picture about foreign intervention into our elections. How about this -- Saudi oil barons and the oligopolistic OPEC vote McCain for President.

[SteveLaura 0]

One victory was the defeat of the effort to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) by $35 billion and extend it to middle-class families. SCHIP was designed to help low-income families who made too much to qualify for Medicaid get health insurance for their children. The President vetoed several SCHIP bills but Congress was unable to get the votes needed for an override. CCAGW will remain vigilant to make sure that more control of healthcare decisions is not turned over to politicians and bureaucrats.

The Council for Citizens Against Government Waste

[HAL 9000 96]

My taxable income falls into the 38-66k bracket. Under McCain's plan, I would pay about $300 less. Under Obama's, I pay $1000 less.

According to the Tax Policy Center, which hails itself as non-partisan based in DC, it is estimated that over 10 years, McCain's tax proposals could increase the national debt by as much as $4.5 trillion with interest, while Obama's could add as much as $3.3 trillion.

I found these numbers on CNN/Money magazine's site here

http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/election/index.html

I think this site is pretty accurate, but I'm sure there are those that will disagree.

Maybe if you break the numbers down, they could disagree a little less.

[GaryC 7]

Bingo!

An overly simplistic cartoon to explain something in a slanted way. Let me add a few more facts to that.

Reagan years: building up our military to defeate the soviets.

Bush one years: Gulf war 1

Clinton years: letting the military go while ignoring major threats.

Bush II years: 9/11, war on terror.

Keeping us safe isn't cheap.

[IAMX 3,055]

How fast do you think Gary spins? I'd say at about 5,400rpms, equivalent of a laptop hard disk.

He doesn't offer much protection against heat, which is why I'd say not a 7200, 10K, or 15K SCSI.

[HAL 9000 96]

Bingo!

An overly simplistic cartoon to explain something in a slanted way. Let me add a few more facts to that.

Reagan years: building up our military to defeate the soviets.

Bush one years: Gulf war 1

Clinton years: letting the military go while ignoring major threats.

Bush II years: 9/11, war on terror.

Keeping us safe isn't cheap.

We fought them militarily?

There is one thing that is emerging in that one post... Gary implies Republicans like war.

Wasn't it that the Soviets crashed their own party?

[SteveLaura 0]

One victory was the defeat of the effort to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) by $35 billion and extend it to middle-class families. SCHIP was designed to help low-income families who made too much to qualify for Medicaid get health insurance for their children. The President vetoed several SCHIP bills but Congress was unable to get the votes needed for an override. CCAGW will remain vigilant to make sure that more control of healthcare decisions is not turned over to politicians and bureaucrats.

The Council for Citizens Against Government Waste

Add to this: Nearly two out of three voters say they support expanding SCHIP to cover an additional 4 million uninsured children at an additional cost of $35 billion over five years, according to an Aug 2007 poll. But over-turning it is a "victory". It would appear that this group's aim - to get rid of government waste - is not so black & white. It's like having a group say that they are for Second Amendment rights and then giving a politician 0 points because they favour checks for mental illness or felonies.

[rclouse 0]

Here Gary, I found this on another site. Should help you out in the future:

Here, I made a template post for the Republican astro-turfers around here :

"Well, looks bad for Obama! Earlier in the campaign, I thought he was gonna win by a landslide. But now things seem to be going of the rails. I guess his [inexperience/elitism/lack of substance] is starting to show.

You can see he is getting worried. If he wasn't, why would he be so shrill?

People can see that he doesn't have substance! He speaks of change but they know he wants to [raise taxes/have more government/rape your dog].

I mean he should just apologize for [whatever fabricated gaffe he committed this week] but he is too [elitist/black/muslim]. "