Most Americans would pay less taxes under President Obama than McCain

[bengalrick]

Here are the quotes i was talking about:


[url="http://forum.go-bengals.com/index.php?showtopic=20605&hl=2008+election+anyone"]http://forum.go-bengals.com/index.php?show...election+anyone[/url]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='313923' date='Aug 11 2006, 02:37 PM']I also diagree with you rick, bung is right there are still too many racists and sexists for Condi to have a chance and she's also to close to Bush that that would hurt her as well.[/quote]


[quote name='Jamie_B' post='314028' date='Aug 11 2006, 06:03 PM']And for the Dems's I'd add Warner and the Rep's Allen.

Read up on Waner BJ I dont think Obama would stand a chance due to the racist nature of alot of folks (esp. in the south) but I think a Edwards/Warner ticket would be pretty sweet.[/quote]


Explain to me how I misinterpretted this?

[bengalrick]

I'm pretty amazed by most of your answers... it is clear that you and I will not be agreeing on this, so I can going to stop the circle jerk and just say that we will have to agree to disagree...

[Jamie_B]

visave Condi, the combo of racism and sexism would be too much to overcome (as it stands today).

and in 2006, I wasnt the only one who thought that about Obama, it was and to an extent still is a question that has to be answered.

[quote name='bengalrick' post='674046' date='Jun 18 2008, 02:11 PM']I'm pretty amazed by most of your answers... it is clear that you and I will not be agreeing on this, so I can going to stop the circle jerk and just say that we will have to agree to disagree...[/quote]


what specificly has amazed you?

[bengalrick]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='674048' date='Jun 18 2008, 02:14 PM']visave Condi, the combo of racism and sexism would be too much to overcome (as it stands today).

and in 2006, I wasnt the only one who thought that about Obama, it was and to an extent still is a question that has to be answered.




what specificly has amazed you?[/quote]

The Condi comment I just threw in there... I understand that many people said that about Obama, but I never agreed w/ you on that note... And it doesn't take away from the fact that you were wrong about that, which was my only point there...

The main thing that amazed me is saying that we should let the civil war take place and see who wins... I think that is just about the most nieve way of solving the problem I can think of... Lets see, will AQ or iran win? Should I pick sides, or just say that whoever wins, we will need to destroy within a decade?

Also quoting Chomsky with a straight face is somewhat funny if we are looking for unpartisan views...

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='bengalrick' post='674051' date='Jun 18 2008, 02:21 PM']The Condi comment I just threw in there... I understand that many people said that about Obama, but I never agreed w/ you on that note... And it doesn't take away from the fact that you were wrong about that, which was my only point there...

The main thing that amazed me is saying that we should let the civil war take place and see who wins... I think that is just about the most nieve way of solving the problem I can think of... Lets see, will AQ or iran win? Should I pick sides, or just say that whoever wins, we will need to destroy within a decade?

Also quoting Chomsky with a straight face is somewhat funny if we are looking for unpartisan views...[/quote]


AQ and Iran?? Rick this is Sunni vs Shiite vs Kurd (to a lesser extent) ... AQ and Iran (if we are to believe what we are told by this admin about them being there) are only there because we are.

Chomsky's argument is pretty down the middle, he discusses both the "dove" and the "hawk" in it. I thought in an effort to better understand things on a whole that you had taken up reading Chomsky??

[bengalrick]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='674058' date='Jun 18 2008, 02:31 PM']AQ and Iran?? Rick this is Sunni vs Shiite vs Kurd (to a lesser extent) ... AQ and Iran (if we are to believe what we are told by this admin about them being there) are only there because we are.

Chomsky's argument is pretty down the middle, he discusses both the "dove" and the "hawk" in it. I thought in an effort to better understand things on a whole that you had taken up reading Chomsky??[/quote]


no shit, but AQ is backed by sunni and iran is backed by shiite... and to call the admin liars, you also must call the military officers liers, so don't leave them out...

If we pulled out, you don't think that Iran would flex it's muscles on Iraq? you don't think they would just stay out of it, and allow the Sunnis to take over, do you? And if they helped the Shiites win the civil war, wouldn't they be embolded to Iran?

[bengalrick]

as far as chomsky, thanks to Kandar I did read 3 of his books, but I can only take so much of his dribble... it did open me up some, but I don't see him as a unbiased source at all...

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='bengalrick' post='674063' date='Jun 18 2008, 02:34 PM']no shit, but AQ is backed by sunni and iran is backed by shiite... and to call the admin liars, you also must call the military officers liers, so don't leave them out...

If we pulled out, you don't think that Iran would flex it's muscles on Iraq? you don't think they would just stay out of it, and allow the Sunnis to take over, do you? And if they helped the Shiites win the civil war, wouldn't they be embolded to Iran?[/quote]

Well the admin has been caught with their pants down reguarding the truth before. As far as the military officers, during rummy's reign they had to be yes men to even keep their jobs.


[quote name='bengalrick' post='674064' date='Jun 18 2008, 02:39 PM']as far as chomsky, thanks to Kandar I did read 3 of his books, but I can only take so much of his dribble... it did open me up some, but I don't see him as a unbiased source at all...[/quote]


So who iyo is?

[bengalrick]

not sure what you mean by that last comment, jamie...

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='bengalrick' post='674084' date='Jun 18 2008, 03:09 PM']not sure what you mean by that last comment, jamie...[/quote]


imo = in my opinion
iyo = in your opinion

[bengalrick]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='674085' date='Jun 18 2008, 03:10 PM']imo = in my opinion
iyo = in your opinion[/quote]

gotcha... I'd have to honestly think about that...

I have been enjoying the Judge on "Brian and the Judge" lately...

Most people in the spot light though, are on one side or the other... I can't even listen to conservative radio much anymore, these days...

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='bengalrick' post='674090' date='Jun 18 2008, 03:15 PM']gotcha... I'd have to honestly think about that...

[color="#FF0000"]I have been enjoying the Judge on "Brian and the Judge" lately...[/color]

Most people in the spot light though, are on one side or the other... I can't even listen to conservative radio much anymore, these days...[/quote]


Not familiar

[bengalrick]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='674091' date='Jun 18 2008, 03:19 PM']Not familiar[/quote]

Judge Napolitano... Libertarian leaning and a staunch defender of the constitution...

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='bengalrick' post='674093' date='Jun 18 2008, 03:24 PM']Judge Napolitano... Libertarian leaning and a staunch defender of the constitution...[/quote]


Where do I watch/listen?

[bengalrick]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='674095' date='Jun 18 2008, 03:26 PM']Where do I watch/listen?[/quote]

9 - noon... He plays mainly on Fox news radio, but you can listen on many stations around the country... you would enjoy the Judge, but would dispise Brian so be warned

You can download the podcast of the first hour every day [url="http://feeds.feedburner.com/BNJ/"]here[/url], which is what i usually have to do to listen...

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='bengalrick' post='674096' date='Jun 18 2008, 03:27 PM']9 - noon... He plays mainly on [color="#FF0000"]Fox news [/color]radio, but you can listen on many stations around the country... you would enjoy the Judge, but would dispise Brian so be warned

You can download the podcast of the first hour every day [url="http://feeds.feedburner.com/BNJ/"]here[/url], which is what i usually have to do to listen...[/quote]


<cringes>

NPR>>>>>>Foxnews Radio

[bengalrick]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='674099' date='Jun 18 2008, 03:30 PM']<cringes>

NPR>>>>>>Foxnews Radio[/quote]

Don't knock it, till you rock it

I'm listening right now at the podcast for today... arguing about Gitmo... you should really listen, as it is a pretty good debate imo...

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='bengalrick' post='674101' date='Jun 18 2008, 03:43 PM']Don't knock it, till you rock it

I'm listening right now at the podcast for today... arguing about Gitmo... you should really listen, as it is a pretty good debate imo...[/quote]


Wolnt be able to till tonight.

I listen to NPR mostly during the lunch hour I forget the guys name who is the host though.

[bengalrick]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='674102' date='Jun 18 2008, 03:50 PM']Wolnt be able to till tonight.

I listen to NPR mostly during the lunch hour I forget the guys name who is the host though.[/quote]

i've heard good things about NPR... I am not sure if I get it on Sirius though...

[Jason]

[quote name='BlackJesus' post='672444' date='Jun 12 2008, 01:16 PM'][center][/center][/quote]

I can't watch the video at work, but I have 1 comment and 1 question.

Question: At what income level does he define someone as "rich"?

Comment: Bill Clinton promised lower taxes too in 1992, then went ahead and raised them on everyone.

[bengalrick]

[quote name='Jason' post='674353' date='Jun 19 2008, 02:57 PM']I can't watch the video at work, but I have 1 comment and 1 question.

Question: At what income level does he define someone as "rich"?

Comment: Bill Clinton promised lower taxes too in 1992, then went ahead and raised them on everyone.[/quote]

I know that he is wanting to lower taxes on the middle class, which he considers I think 85,000 or less... So I assume the powerhouse families that are making 90,000 a year are now in the upper class...

[|BlackJesus|]

[quote name='Jason' post='674353' date='Jun 19 2008, 03:57 PM']Question: At what income level does he define someone as "rich"?[/quote]
[b]2.3 million a year [/b]





[quote name='Jason' post='674353' date='Jun 19 2008, 03:57 PM']Comment: Bill Clinton promised lower taxes too in 1992, then went ahead and raised them on everyone.[/quote]
[center][img]http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/5/53/300px-Alextrebek86.jpg[/img]

[size=3][b]Who promised[/b] [i]"Read my lips ... No new taxes"[/i] and then raised them ???[/size][/center]

[CTBengalsFan]

[quote name='bengalrick' post='674361' date='Jun 19 2008, 03:18 PM']I know that he is wanting to lower taxes on the middle class, which he considers I think 85,000 or less... So I assume the powerhouse families that are making 90,000 a year are now in the upper class...[/quote]

According to the video the cut off is $112,000. And I would guess that's per person, not per "family".

[Jason]

[quote name='BlackJesus' post='674367' date='Jun 19 2008, 05:12 PM'][b]2.3 million a year [/b]






[center][img]http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/5/53/300px-Alextrebek86.jpg[/img]

[color="#FF0000"][size=3][b]Who promised[/b] [i]"Read my lips ... No new taxes"[/i] and then raised them ???[/size][/center][/color][/quote]

Little known fact, the Democrat controlled congress railroaded him into that tax hike. Either he signed it, or nothing he wanted done would get done.

Still doesn't change the fact the Clinton also raised taxes after promising cuts to the middle class.

[Jason]

[quote name='CTBengalsFan' post='674375' date='Jun 19 2008, 06:28 PM']According to the video the cut off is $112,000. And I would guess that's per person, not per "family".[/quote]

It's usually per family. Which means my taxes will go way up.