Originally posted by utherpendragonIf I do, will you then say he didn't lie?
you give me an acceptable link where he stated this as you say BEFORE he was elected.
"He had also previously made it very public that he supported increasing tobacco tax to help fund health care for children."
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyThe American public wants to have twice the goodies while only paying half the taxes. After all, isn't that what everyone promises during their campaigns? The Dems may focus more on the goodies and the GOP may focus more on the tax cuts, and there may be some very vague promises to "make government smaller" or to "cut the waste-fraud-abuse", or to raise taxes only for "really really REALLY rich people".
So it begs the question as to why the American public continues to elect people who push entitlements on them? Do they really believe their taxes will not go up? Are they stupid do you think?
If this is what the American public really wants, then yes, they are STUPID. They can't do simple math. But I suspect the real problem is that main canadidates very rarely give the public a chance to make smart choices. Most elections end up being a choice between "stupid promise A" and "stupid promise B" (or some other candidate that has "no chance of winning" ) - so no matter what happens, you're stuck with something stupid.
Originally posted by MelanerpesI have to pretty much agree w/that statement
The American public wants to have twice the goodies while only paying half the taxes. After all, isn't that what everyone promises during their campaigns? The Dems may focus more on the goodies and the GOP may focus more on the tax cuts, and there may be some very vague promises to "make government smaller" or to "cut the waste-fraud-abuse", or to raise t ...[text shortened]... ce of winning" ) - so no matter what happens, you're stuck with something stupid.
1 edit
Originally posted by utherpendragonAt least once I saw Obama confronted with the tobacco tax hike involved in his support to expand SCHIF (State Children's Health Insurance Fund). And he explained why it was necessary and included his own battle to quit smoking.
I guess I will have no choice
I looked and looked but I couldn't find anything where the tobacco tax hike was specifically mentioned by him (on the internet). But that tax hike has always been a major piece of the bill that he promised to pass (and Bush vetoed in 2007).
The tax hike on tobacco tax wasn't an arbitrary, stand alone bill. It is to fund the expansion of SCHIF, which was widely known. And Obama promised to do just that.
I can reference many places where he spoke out in support of SCHIF before the elections. Would that be acceptable to you?
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperWhere he says basically,"elect me as president and i will raise taxes on tobacco which will directly affect all you poor people."
At least once I saw Obama confronted with the tobacco tax hike involved in his support to expand SCHIF (State Children's Health Insurance Fund). And he explained why it was necessary and included his own battle to quit smoking.
I looked and looked but I couldn't find anything where the tobacco tax hike was specifically mentioned by him (on the ...[text shortened]... where he spoke out in support of SCHIF before the elections. Would that be acceptable to you?
Think you can get that for me?
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFThere's certainly nothing wrong with a politician changing his mind based on the facts on the ground. If I make a promise on national security, for instance, and then after being elected, the head of the NSA explains to me that my promise is not a good idea based on info civilians don't know about, I have the responsibility to backtrack on my promise if it's necessary for the best interests of my constituency.
Being able to change your mind, to me, is a political virtue.
Incorrect predictions come with the territory.
If policy proposal X is the right and necessary thing to do, is it wrong to adopt policy X simply because of a prediction that policy X wasn't going to be necessary?
Where does "lying through the teeth" even enter into it?
What an odd and noxi ...[text shortened]... us mixture of political naivety and bottomless cynical seething from utherpendragon, as ever.
Also, of course, if facts change,policy may also have to change. GW Bush's greatest weakness was that he was not able to adapt his policies to changing circumstances in many cases. His promised tax cut was based on a surging economy and a budget surplus. When the economy cooled off, he should have shelved his big tax cut. etc.
Still, the biggest question here is: Did Obama know, at the time that he made those pledges, that they were unrealistic? I can't prove it. But, I believe he did. He knew perfectly well that there were enormous budget deficits and he knew he wanted healthcare reform as part of his initial agenda. Frankly, not a whole heck of a lot has changed since he made those pledges. Again, I have no problem with some tax hikes. I do think Obama was less than forthcoming on this issue though. But hey, politicians have done worse to get elected, I will certainly concede.
By the way, USAP, when did Obama enact the greatest middle class tax cut in history?
Originally posted by utherpendragonNo, but I can find you him promising to pass the very bill he passed that makes you call him a liar.
Where he says basically,"elect me as president and i will raise taxes on tobacco which will directly affect all you poor people."
Think you can get that for me?
Would that work, or would you rather just swim around in silliness.
Originally posted by sh76FY 2009. Add up the reduced rates plus the tax credits, like the making work pay credit and the first-time homebuyer tax credit and it's the largest middle class tax cut in history.
There's certainly nothing wrong with a politician changing his mind based on the facts on the ground. If I make a promise on national security, for instance, and then after being elected, the head of the NSA explains to me that my promise is not a good idea based on info civilians don't know about, I have the responsibility to backtrack on my promise if it's ne ...[text shortened]... de.
By the way, USAP, when did Obama enact the greatest middle class tax cut in history?
Originally posted by KazetNagorraI don't think he's even going to need to. All economic indicators are showing the economy is turning around. In fact, just NOW the S&P 500 just hit the 1000 mark.
A courageous move by Obama. He knows raising taxes is needed to get the US economy back on track, but he also knows raising taxes could be political suicide.
NOTHING increases tax revenue like economic growth, which was the main cause of budget surpluses at the end of the 90's.
People in this thread act like it's already happened even though they simply said, "it would be foolish to take any options off the table"