The Republican Thread

[kapkomet]

So Cknolls point is that there wasn't enough outrage at the cost of Bush's inauguration?

Yep.

 

Of course we won't hear about the exorbitant (sp.) costs of anything Obama does, because he's the Messiah.

[StrangeSox]

Yep.

 

Of course we won't hear about the exorbitant (sp.) costs of anything Obama does, because he's the Messiah.

 

Except that you obviously have. And I have. And so has anyone else who's watched the news this week.

[BigSqwert]

Except that you obviously have. And I have. And so has anyone else who's watched the news this week.

 

Don't let that stop him from overusing his LOL emoticon when posting.

[lostfan]

Yep.

 

Of course we won't hear about the exorbitant (sp.) costs of anything Obama does, because he's the Messiah.

I don't follow the logic, if there wasn't enough outrage over Bush doing it, why would there be for Obama?

[BigSqwert]

I don't follow the logic, if there wasn't enough outrage over Bush doing it, why would there be for Obama?

Exactly!!

 

/kaperbole

 

 

[mr_genius]

I don't follow the logic, if there wasn't enough outrage over Bush doing it, why would there be for Obama?

 

Actually there was a ton of outrage for Bush doing it. I saw tons of stories on deficits and spending. I myself did much complaining. The Democrats and their followers all cried "Reckless spending!!!"

 

Now Obama is going to run deficits that will absolutely destroy deficit spending records under GW Bush but it's "Good" now.

[BigSqwert]

Actually there was a ton of outrage for Bush doing it.

 

For evidence it's probably not a good idea to refer to articles that begin with "The D.C. press corps failed to ask hard questions about the inauguration's huge cost".

[mr_genius]

For evidence it's probably not a good idea to refer to articles that begin with "The D.C. press corps failed to ask hard questions about the inauguration's huge cost".

 

The only thing that would have made that journalist happy is if the press core arrested GW Bush; tried and convicted him in the basement of the NY Times. I saw a number of MSM news media expose on the extravagent GW Bush inaguration 'While troops are dying, Bush parties'.

 

Salon.com is not a reputable source for opinions or news most of the time.

Edited January 14, 2009 by mr_genius

[BigSqwert]

Salon.com is not a reputable source for opinions or news most of the time if you are a conservative.

 

fixed

[mr_genius]

fixed

 

It's not a good news source for anyone.

Edited January 14, 2009 by mr_genius

[BigSqwert]

 

Glenn Greenwald is a highly reputable progressive blogger.

[mr_genius]

Glenn Greenwald is a highly reputable progressive blogger.

 

He's basically the type of blogger that should only be read by the ignorant that need their world views confirmed.

[lostfan]

Actually there was a ton of outrage for Bush doing it. I saw tons of stories on deficits and spending. I myself did much complaining. The Democrats and their followers all cried "Reckless spending!!!"

 

Now Obama is going to run deficits that will absolutely destroy deficit spending records under GW Bush but it's "Good" now.

"IF" is the operative word here because that's what kapkomet was saying. If his post was meant to be taken at face value, then it makes no sense.

 

Besides, even if it did make sense, it's not valid anyway, as StrangeSox already pointed out, because s***, people are complaining about it right now. I'm also raising the BS flag on the notion that nobody ever criticizes Obama. Liberals have done nothing BUT b**** from the moment Obama nominated Rahm Emanuel.

[lostfan]

salon.com has some smart people writing some good opinion pieces about issues. It's a good place to go for someone who honestly wants to hear the liberal point of view on something for whatever reason. For people who complain about how much everybody sucks, not so much.

[Balta1701]

Actually there was a ton of outrage for Bush doing it. I saw tons of stories on deficits and spending. I myself did much complaining. The Democrats and their followers all cried "Reckless spending!!!"

 

Now Obama is going to run deficits that will absolutely destroy deficit spending records under GW Bush but it's "Good" now.

Actually, there's some legit economics that would say that running deficits at a time of economic growth is a bad thing, because the growth always stops at some point, and when that happens, you actually need the government to go in to deficit. The ideal time to balance the budget and pay down some portion of the debt would have been the period from say 2003-2006. Instead we were $200-$400 billion in the hole every one of those years.

[mr_genius]

Actually, there's some legit economics that would say that running deficits at a time of economic growth is a bad thing, because the growth always stops at some point, and when that happens, you actually need the government to go in to deficit. The ideal time to balance the budget and pay down some portion of the debt would have been the period from say 2003-2006. Instead we were $200-$400 billion in the hole every one of those years.

 

There are also a great number of well respected economists that will tell you running annual deficits of 2 trillion are a disastrous policy. The numbers that Obama is planning on running in deficit spending are staggering. The deficits were horrible under GW Bush and they are going to sky rocket to dangerous levels under Obama. What is being planned is completely reckless and needs to be stopped.

[kapkomet]

I don't follow the logic, if there wasn't enough outrage over Bush doing it, why would there be for Obama?

I was not serious. Sorry. I should have put the Kaperbole ™ on there. My fault for not being clear on that one.

 

Actually, the inauguration funds are largely from private sources anyway. If these big corporation fat cats want to spend their money on this through their PAC's and other various assorted vehicles of hush pay for play money, they can. Hmmm. That might not be Kaperbole ™, I'll have to think about that one.

[lostfan]

I was not serious. Sorry. I should have put the Kaperbole ™ on there. My fault for not being clear on that one.

lol. I should know better by now.

[southsider2k5]

Its amazing already how many of the pointless arguements have switched side, yet the things that remain important aren't really changing. Am I the only one thinking that after the 8-9 weeks between the election and inauguration?

[NorthSideSox72]

Its amazing already how many of the pointless arguements have switched side, yet the things that remain important aren't really changing. Am I the only one thinking that after the 8-9 weeks between the election and inauguration?

I see people trying to make it that way, but I haven't actually seen it happen. I don't see Obama supporters on here that are using arguments that were used to support Bush, or ignoring arguments used against Bush. I just see a lot of people talking about "wait and see, it will happen". So far, it hasn't.

 

[Texsox]

Its amazing already how many of the pointless arguements have switched side, yet the things that remain important aren't really changing. Am I the only one thinking that after the 8-9 weeks between the election and inauguration?

 

• We will fail internally.
• We are our own worse enemy
• One person, even as President, can not move our country more than a nudge
• We all know this, but prefer debate at this level instead of the serious and hard decisions that need to be made
• Minor stuff is the wins and losses in elections

[lostfan]

I see people trying to make it that way, but I haven't actually seen it happen. I don't see Obama supporters on here that are using arguments that were used to support Bush, or ignoring arguments used against Bush. I just see a lot of people talking about "wait and see, it will happen". So far, it hasn't.

This.

 

Maybe in the overall political realm, which frankly is par for the course, but not here.

[EvilMonkey]

So, on both issues, it turns out it's actually quite a bit more complicated than presented here.

 

Secondly, the mistake he made - failing to pay the Social Security and Medicare taxes, is a common mistake made by employees of some organizations like the IMF, because the IMF pays your federal taxes through standard withholding but does not withhold social security and medicare taxes, and as such, the employee is expected to calculate and pay them on his or her own.

The "Immigrant" problem is bunk and shouldn't be a knock on him. He did his due diligence. The tax problem I could see being an issue...in the sense that I don't like my SecTreas making careless mistakes...but it's at least a complicated one.

No, it's not a complicated one. He KNEW he needed to pay the taxes, he even got an extra check just to cover the taxes. he even signed a form saying that he would use this extra check to pay the taxes that he owed. If he is that stupid, he doesn't desrve that kind of a job.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzJjO...jhlMWQ2MWZiNTA=

 

But the IMF took great care to explain to those employees, in detail and frequently, what their tax responsibilities were. First, each employee was given the IMF Employee Tax Manual. Then, employees were given quarterly wage statements for the specific purpose of calculating taxes. Then, they were given year-end wage statements. And then, each IMF employee was required to file what was known as an Annual Tax Allowance Request. Geithner received all those documents........But the IMF then gave them an extra allowance, known as a “gross-up,” to cover those tax payments. This was done in the Annual Tax Allowance Request, in which the employee filled out some basic information — marital status, dependent children, etc. — and the IMF then estimated the amount of taxes the employee would owe and gave the employee a corresponding allowance.

 

At the end of the tax allowance form were the words, “I hereby certify that all the information contained herein is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that I will pay the taxes for which I have received tax allowance payments from the Fund.” Geithner signed the form. He accepted the allowance payment. He didn’t pay the tax. For several years in a row.

 

That kind of blatent disregard for the tax laws would land you or me in jail. This guy is just another rich asshole gaming the system because he thinks he can get away with it, and hoping now that his 'friends' and connections can get him out of it. Jail him!

 

 

[StrangeSox]

I wouldn't have a problem if he hadn't paid the taxes, was audited for several years, paid those plus fees, and then amended his other filings. Even after he knew he had underpaid his taxes, he didn't go back and correct the unaudited years. That is very dishonest.

[southsider2k5]

No, it's not a complicated one. He KNEW he needed to pay the taxes, he even got an extra check just to cover the taxes. he even signed a form saying that he would use this extra check to pay the taxes that he owed. If he is that stupid, he doesn't desrve that kind of a job.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzJjO...jhlMWQ2MWZiNTA=

 

 

 

That kind of blatent disregard for the tax laws would land you or me in jail. This guy is just another rich asshole gaming the system because he thinks he can get away with it, and hoping now that his 'friends' and connections can get him out of it. Jail him!

 

Wow. That is pretty incredible.