RINOS in 2012

More ass-backwards counter-reality from you. :D

The last time we had a conservative, Reagan, he won two landslide elections. The last RINO was McCain - lost the presidential election. When conservatives went on the march in 2010 with the conservative tea party, we took the house, and would have taken the senate if they had all been up for re-election.

Stick to "progressives", where you may know a little of what you're talking about. :rolleyes:

Sorry Reagan was a RINO....your Repulican man crush's just don't let you admit it.
 
Werbung:
.....Paul Ryan, not Ron Paul.
Sorry, Ryan plan is so extreme that it also will polarize the electorate. He leaves no room for compromise and his voucher plan is essentially the end of medicare. Going to the private sector for health insurance is the opposite thing I want to do, I do not believe health care is a product, I believe it is a necessity and therefore should be available to all Americans. Ryans plan also does not include increase in revenues and has been scored a bust. We need both increase in revenues (tax the rich) and painful cuts to entitlements. I would be for increasing the age of eligibility for SS and Medicare and tax reform in the way of a national sales tax, gradually phasing out income tax. The national sales tax would affect all equally, the poor simply could no longer afford that which they do not need and the rich would pay for the luxuries they don't need, I think that is fair. I give Ryan credit for showing his Libertarian beliefs, but I do not agree with the ideology
 
You are ignorant of history and don't know what you're talking about. This problem you have of ignoring facts, of inventing your own "facts", is really tiresome.

I'm not making up facts. The GOP is not now and never has been conservative. This has been gone over in detail on this forum. There is a conservative wing in the GOP but it doesn't appear to have very much power, if it did our budget wouldn't look the way it does right now.

I know you want your version of reality to be true, but the GOP agrees with the Dems far more than they disagree, and even when they do disagree, it's mostly in the press. The way they've been voting tells a different story. It's the die-hard conservatives that don't really belong in the GOP and all you're doing by continuing to blindly support the GOP is marginalizing yourself.
 
I'm not making up facts. The GOP is not now and never has been conservative. This has been gone over in detail on this forum. There is a conservative wing in the GOP but it doesn't appear to have very much power, if it did our budget wouldn't look the way it does right now.

I know you want your version of reality to be true, but the GOP agrees with the Dems far more than they disagree, and even when they do disagree, it's mostly in the press. The way they've been voting tells a different story. It's the die-hard conservatives that don't really belong in the GOP and all you're doing by continuing to blindly support the GOP is marginalizing yourself.

Nonsense. :D
 
Sorry, Ryan plan is so extreme that it also will polarize the electorate. He leaves no room for compromise and his voucher plan is essentially the end of medicare. Going to the private sector for health insurance is the opposite thing I want to do, I do not believe health care is a product, I believe it is a necessity and therefore should be available to all Americans. Ryans plan also does not include increase in revenues and has been scored a bust. We need both increase in revenues (tax the rich) and painful cuts to entitlements. I would be for increasing the age of eligibility for SS and Medicare and tax reform in the way of a national sales tax, gradually phasing out income tax. The national sales tax would affect all equally, the poor simply could no longer afford that which they do not need and the rich would pay for the luxuries they don't need, I think that is fair. I give Ryan credit for showing his Libertarian beliefs, but I do not agree with the ideology

OK, I'll list your lies, misconceptions, and truth-twisting. Maybe I'll live to see the day when at least a few lefties don't use the same stale "shock and scare" Democrat talking points, and actually do some research and make valid arguments based on FACTS.

1. Ryan's Medicare plan is NOT a "voucher" program. In fact, beginning in 2022, current Medicare recipients will be enrolled in the same medical plan that CONGRESS enjoys. Future Medicare recipients will choose from several new plans that offer GUARANTEED coverage options.

2. Health care is already "available" to ALL Americans, and NON-Americans, for that matter. Nobody in this country is denied health care based on their ability to pay. That is simply a LIE. Every state in this country guarantees health care for ALL citizens. A person may not get treated at the Mayo Clinic or Cedars-Sinai, but EVERY state has hospitals that will provide health care to EVERYBODY, regardless of their financial "fitness".

3. You don't increase revenues by raising taxes. You increase revenues by reducing government spending, and getting government off the backs of the private sector businesses so the PRIVATE SECTOR can create more jobs. This simple idea seems to elude the big-government leftists.

4. A national sales tax simply won't work, for the exact reasons you used to SUPPORT a national sales tax. The FAIR TAX PLAN, which is a "hybrid" and much more sensible form of a national sales tax, is the only viable alternative to the present ridiculously cumbersome tax system.

Paul Ryan's budget proposal cuts $6.2 trillion in spending from Obama's budget over the next 10 years, reduces the debt as a percentage of the economy, and puts the nation on a path to actually pay off our national debt.

Ryan's budget proposal brings federal spending to below 20% of gross domestic product (GDP), consistent with the postwar average, and reduces deficits by $4.4 trillion.

A study just released by the Heritage Center for Data Analysis projects that Paul Ryan's "Path to Prosperity" will help create nearly one million new private-sector jobs next year, bring the unemployment rate down to 4% by 2015, and result in 2.5 million additional private-sector jobs in the last year of the decade.

It spurs economic growth, with $1.5 trillion in additional real GDP over the decade. According to Heritage's analysis, it would result in $1.1 trillion in higher wages and an average of $1,000 in additional family income each year.
 
Gee, where to start,
1-Recipients will receive credits toward buying private insurance that has been scored by the GAO as being up to $6K short per year. credit=voucher
2-Everybody gets healthcare now? Why am I working at a charity fundraising carwash on Saturday to help pay for my friends post-kidney transplant medication?
3-Create jobs by cutting their taxes? Hasn't worked in the 8 years since Bush cut them, but I do remember plenty of jobs during the Clinton admin. when the taxes were high.
4.The fair tax plan is a good start, I can work with that
5. and finally, if you wish to use partisan conservative think-tanks to justify your hero's libertarian social engineering (I love that quote), is it OK if I use MSNBC? Just joking, I won't. It's just that back in 2001 the heritage Center for Data Analysis also predicted with uncanny accuracy that the tax cuts would increase payroll enrollment in leaps and bounds, instead, it is down to 2001 levels despite growth in population. The also predicted household incomes would skyrocket as a result of these payroll employment growth figures and they were absolutely right if you think that -.01% is a positive increase. You really should read different data sources, you know, kinda get different points of view before you put in writing the above insane post.
 
Well, cutting taxes doesn't help job growth, and taxing the segment of population making over 250K ain't gonna make a differance since it didn't back in the 90's (incidentally, the longest period of sustained growth in the history of America). So, yes, why not?
 
Well, cutting taxes doesn't help job growth

Yes it will. :rolleyes:


and taxing the segment of population making over 250K ain't gonna make a differance since it didn't back in the 90's

Ascribing a whole decades economic state to just tax policy is stupid. Another factor: the republican congress held spending in check.
 
Werbung:
Gee, where to start,
1-Recipients will receive credits toward buying private insurance that has been scored by the GAO as being up to $6K short per year. credit=voucher
2-Everybody gets healthcare now? Why am I working at a charity fundraising carwash on Saturday to help pay for my friends post-kidney transplant medication?
3-Create jobs by cutting their taxes? Hasn't worked in the 8 years since Bush cut them, but I do remember plenty of jobs during the Clinton admin. when the taxes were high.
4.The fair tax plan is a good start, I can work with that
5. and finally, if you wish to use partisan conservative think-tanks to justify your hero's libertarian social engineering (I love that quote), is it OK if I use MSNBC? Just joking, I won't. It's just that back in 2001 the heritage Center for Data Analysis also predicted with uncanny accuracy that the tax cuts would increase payroll enrollment in leaps and bounds, instead, it is down to 2001 levels despite growth in population. The also predicted household incomes would skyrocket as a result of these payroll employment growth figures and they were absolutely right if you think that -.01% is a positive increase. You really should read different data sources, you know, kinda get different points of view before you put in writing the above insane post.

1. A misconception and a lie. The GAO is supposed to "independent", but anybody who pays attention knows that they are shills for whatever political party is in power.
2. I never said FREE healthcare or FREE prescription drugs. Health care is not a "right". It is a necessity if you are seriously ill or injured, and SOMEBODY has to pay the doctors and hospitals and pharmacies for their services. The big question is.......WHO should pay.
3. There was no job creation during Bush's eight years? Better check your FACTs on that one. You're embarrassing yourself with your lack of knowledge.
4. Agreed. Common ground!
5. You are blaming Bush for Obama's job-crushing borrow and spend economic "plan". Check the statistics. Come back and tell everybody if Bush CREATED jobs during his Presidency or if he destroyed jobs during his Presidency (like Obama is doing).

Another 400,000+ first-time unemployment enrollees last week. But the economy is in "recovery" mode. :rolleyes:
 
Back
Top