Another Bush victory.... [message #55211] |
Wed, 10 May 2006 07:34 |
Mr Vinyl
Messages: 407 Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (1st Degree) |
|
|
It really must burn the liberals that Bush gets almost everything he wants. Not all but almost. I mean, after all, according to the liberals, Bush is a bumbling idiot. This one was important for the Republicans and the country. From the link below:
The bill would hand President Bush one of his top tax priorities, a two-year extension of the reduced 15 percent tax rate for capital gains and dividends, currently set to expire at the end of 2008. Republicans credit the tax cuts, enacted in 2003, with boosting economic growth and creating many jobs. They have a long way to go to correct the liberals tax and spend policies but every little bit helps.
|
|
|
|
Yes, Republicans were able to get that in as well, thanks. [message #55214 is a reply to message #55212] |
Wed, 10 May 2006 08:46 |
Mr Vinyl
Messages: 407 Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (1st Degree) |
|
|
I beg to differ. If Bush didn't want it in there the Republicans wouldn't have put it in. Keep fooling yourself on the economy. It keeps getting better and better proving that tax cuts work better than anything else. Reagan and now Bush have proved this point. Remember the phase "it's the economy stupid!" That's not my words. It's a Democrat talking point if a Republican happens to be in office during a downturn. Not many Demorcrats using it now though. I wonder why??
|
|
|
|
Can't find that anywhere... [message #55218 is a reply to message #55215] |
Wed, 10 May 2006 09:02 |
Mr Vinyl
Messages: 407 Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (1st Degree) |
|
|
Here is an article about the tax cuts from the liberal leaning CNN. I'm sure they would have mentioned your point if it were true. Notice the article linked only mentions the Republicans debating among themselves about what to put in or leave out of the tax bill. The only thing mentioned about the Democrats is that they didn't want the cuts because they are "supposedly" for the wealthy. Some old rehashed rhetoric that never works. Nothing mentioned about any other complaints by the Democrats. If you can show me where it says Bush would veto a bill because of the AMT part I would be happy to admit I'm wrong. However I believe everyone (or mostly) both Democrats and Republicans were for this measure.
|
|
|
|
oh your accountant told you.... [message #55220 is a reply to message #55219] |
Wed, 10 May 2006 09:17 |
Mr Vinyl
Messages: 407 Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (1st Degree) |
|
|
Let me ask you a question. Why do you bother to post on a "discussion group" if your not willing to support anything you say? Other than the fact that what you say is usually not correct. Do you do it just to hear yourself talk? Ask yourself this question "If I can't prove or even support what I post then could it be the other side is right?" If what you say is true the Democrats would be trumpeting it all over the news. It would be a victory for them that is very rare these days. Now I have to leave for awhile. Don't worry I'll be back when I can. No I'm not dodging any of your posts. I'm just very busy during the day. I will try to check in from time to time.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, you forgot to answer my post... [message #55223 is a reply to message #55222] |
Wed, 10 May 2006 12:11 |
Mr Vinyl
Messages: 407 Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (1st Degree) |
|
|
That's ok. We both know why. I mean of course you can't substantiate anything you say. Because it's not true. Bush never threaten to veto the tax bill if the AMT was in it. This is so true of almost every Liberal argument. Based not in facts but in how they "think" the world is. Or wish it too be. This is why liberal solutions to problems (mostly tax and spend) never work. The problem is I think they know their "solutions" don't work. They don't care. It's sounds good and to hell with the consequences. Thankfully people are catching on thanks to the internet, cable and talk radio. Oh, the Democrats will still win one every now and then but these wins are becoming fewer and farer between.
|
|
|