Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    03 Aug '09 23:53 / 3 edits
    No middle-class tax increases, White House insists

    'The president's clear commitment is not to raise taxes on those making less than $250,000 a year,' spokesman Robert Gibbs says after Geithner and Summers suggested increases had not been ruled out.

    Reporting from Washington -- Despite warnings from President Obama's top economic advisers that new taxes for middle-income Americans cannot be ruled out, the White House insisted today that the president's "commitment" to a campaign pledge to avert new taxes for those earning less than $250,000 a year holds firm.

    Both Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner and chief economic adviser Lawrence Summers had suggested during appearances on the Sunday morning news talk shows that tax increases could not be ruled out for Americans earning less than the threshold that the president has set.

    But White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs adamantly and repeatedly insisted today that the president remains committed to his pledge -- though he was unable to explain why Geithner and Summers had strayed from the administration's line.

    "The president's clear commitment is not to raise taxes on those making less than $250,000 a year," Gibbs told reporters pressing for an explanation about apparent discrepancies in the White House's message.

    Gibbs added, "I hope you'll take my reiteration of this clear commitment . . . in the clearest terms possible, that he is not raising taxes on those who make less than $250,000 a year."

    etc.


    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obama-taxes4-2009aug04,0,2495150.story


    Come on, Mr. President, let's have some internal discipline and order around here. We wouldn't want anyone to think your administration is just playing it by ear...
  2. 04 Aug '09 00:12
    Originally posted by sh76
    [i][b]No middle-class tax increases, White House insists

    'The president's clear commitment is not to raise taxes on those making less than $250,000 a year,' spokesman Robert Gibbs says after Geithner and Summers suggested increases had not been ruled out.

    Reporting from Washington -- Despite warnings from President Obama's top economic advisers that n ...[text shortened]... wouldn't want anyone to think your administration is just playing it by ear...[/b]
    While a lot of money is being spent, they may be wanting to hold back a little on the truth. Both of my vehichles are worth about $4,500 put together and I shal be footing the bill for folks to buy autos worth more than mine. I have no reason to buy a new one as both are in real good shape still. This kind of thing doesn't go over well with a lot of people. So why not keep the tax lie status quo a little longer? The other guys probably hadn't been briefed yet on this.
  3. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    04 Aug '09 01:47
    Originally posted by sh76
    [i][b]No middle-class tax increases, White House insists

    'The president's clear commitment is not to raise taxes on those making less than $250,000 a year,' spokesman Robert Gibbs says after Geithner and Summers suggested increases had not been ruled out.

    Reporting from Washington -- Despite warnings from President Obama's top economic advisers that n ...[text shortened]... wouldn't want anyone to think your administration is just playing it by ear...[/b]
    Obama is not immune to some comments that don't make much sense. (He is a politician after all). This pales in comparison to Bush and Co's shouting from the rooftops in 2001 and 2002 that "weapons of mass destruction in Iraq are a threat to American security, and must be eliminated" 5 years, and 5,000 American lives later, we found the weapons...were not there. So, your confused? So were those 5,000 brave American soldiers that died for nothing!:'(
  4. 04 Aug '09 02:08
    Originally posted by bill718
    Obama is not immune to some comments that don't make much sense. (He is a politician after all). This pales in comparison to Bush and Co's shouting from the rooftops in 2001 and 2002 that "weapons of mass destruction in Iraq are a threat to American security, and must be eliminated" 5 years, and 5,000 American lives later, we found the weapons...were not the ...[text shortened]... e. So, your confused? So were those 5,000 brave American soldiers that died for nothing!:'(
    So why did Bush go to Iraq do you think?
  5. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    04 Aug '09 02:30
    Originally posted by bill718
    Obama is not immune to some comments that don't make much sense. (He is a politician after all). This pales in comparison to Bush and Co's shouting from the rooftops in 2001 and 2002 that "weapons of mass destruction in Iraq are a threat to American security, and must be eliminated" 5 years, and 5,000 American lives later, we found the weapons...were not the ...[text shortened]... e. So, your confused? So were those 5,000 brave American soldiers that died for nothing!:'(
    Oh; come on. What does one thing have to do with the other?

    Frankly, I think that's a deft bit of thread hijacking.
  6. 04 Aug '09 03:35
    Originally posted by sh76
    Oh; come on. What does one thing have to do with the other?

    Frankly, I think that's a deft bit of thread hijacking.
    Give him a break, he is desperate for a reason to still believe in the messiah!!
  7. 04 Aug '09 04:12
    Originally posted by sh76
    Oh; come on. What does one thing have to do with the other?

    Frankly, I think that's a deft bit of thread hijacking.
    Its the same old tactic of the left. When ever you point out a grievance about Obama they pull out the "Bush card". Its getting tiresome. I had someone bring up Bush Senior today as a rebuttal to Obama renigging on a campaign promise.
    To get back to the OP,it is very confusing.The mixed messages.He needs to use his community organizing skills on his staff. Get one message and stick to it.
    The old saying comes to mind, "what a tangled web we weave......"
    You know the rest.
  8. 04 Aug '09 04:41
    Originally posted by sh76
    Oh; come on. What does one thing have to do with the other?

    Frankly, I think that's a deft bit of thread hijacking.
    deft? bill78?
  9. 04 Aug '09 06:22
    Originally posted by sh76
    Oh; come on. What does one thing have to do with the other?

    Frankly, I think that's a deft bit of thread hijacking.
    That's all he ever argues... "Well Bush did it too"
  10. 04 Aug '09 08:35
    Originally posted by sh76
    [i][b]No middle-class tax increases, White House insists

    'The president's clear commitment is not to raise taxes on those making less than $250,000 a year,' spokesman Robert Gibbs says after Geithner and Summers suggested increases had not been ruled out.

    Reporting from Washington -- Despite warnings from President Obama's top economic advisers that n ...[text shortened]... wouldn't want anyone to think your administration is just playing it by ear...[/b]
    I read the first comments in their context. They simply said it would be foolish to completely rule out any particular action in the future. Unfortunately in the world of politics this translates to, "OMG your messiah is raising taxes on the middle class!"

    What I get from all of this is they will never rule out any future actions, but raising taxes on the middle class would be an absolute last resort.
  11. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    04 Aug '09 09:11
    Originally posted by whodey
    So why did Bush go to Iraq do you think?
    Ask Bush! I'm not a mind reader.
  12. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    04 Aug '09 09:17
    Originally posted by sh76
    Oh; come on. What does one thing have to do with the other?

    Frankly, I think that's a deft bit of thread hijacking.
    Think so? Well...You are confused about Obama's comments, and I'm confused about Bush's. The only real difference between the two is Obama's confusing comments did not cost 5,000 American lives. I'm sorry to bring this up, but these little inconvienent facts keep coming to the surface. Moral of the story: If you live in a large glass house, don't throw stones at the other side!
  13. 04 Aug '09 09:30
    Originally posted by bill718
    Think so? Well...You are confused about Obama's comments, and I'm confused about Bush's. The only real difference between the two is Obama's confusing comments did not cost 5,000 American lives. I'm sorry to bring this up, but these little inconvienent facts keep coming to the surface. Moral of the story: If you live in a large glass house, don't throw stones at the other side!
    Always go back to Bush.Bush is gone. Obama and his following are accountable for nothing? "Bush said this and Bush did that,yadda,yadda,yadda" Give me a break!
  14. 04 Aug '09 09:49
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    Always go back to Bush.Bush is gone. Obama and his following are accountable for nothing? "Bush said this and Bush did that,yadda,yadda,yadda" Give me a break!
    While it's important to address current policies and decisions (and I always do), there's nothing wrong with pointing out hypocrisy.

    Partisans on both sides tend to have double standards.
  15. 04 Aug '09 09:53
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    While it's important to address current policies and decisions (and I always do), there's nothing wrong with pointing out hypocrisy.

    Partisans on both sides tend to have double standards.
    I under stand what you are saying.Personally, Bush upset me w/many of his polices ,as well.When he was in office (or any other President I recall) did not bring up the prior administration as a scape goat.Obama and his followers constantly do this.