Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,909 Year: 4,166/9,624 Month: 1,037/974 Week: 364/286 Day: 7/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   George W. Bush's qualifications to be President
nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 51 of 247 (135625)
08-20-2004 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Minnemooseus
08-19-2004 3:46 AM


Re: Does Bush think he lives in a Democracy?
quote:
Any thoughts on how Kerry/Bush debates are going to go? What the debates would need is a moderator that forces true debate, rather than exchanges of pre-canned statements.
I vote for John Stewart.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-19-2004 3:46 AM Minnemooseus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Silent H, posted 08-20-2004 10:58 AM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 59 of 247 (135726)
08-20-2004 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Mammuthus
08-20-2004 11:01 AM


Ok, then what about Molly Ivins?
I's love to see Al Franken, though.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Mammuthus, posted 08-20-2004 11:01 AM Mammuthus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Silent H, posted 08-20-2004 5:52 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 62 of 247 (135803)
08-20-2004 8:57 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Silent H
08-20-2004 5:52 PM


She is a very, very funny (and, by definition, smart) political writer.
She's also a Texan.
I think you would like "Bushwhacked", and I like her older book, "Molly Ivins Can't Say That, Can She?" a lot, too.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Silent H, posted 08-20-2004 5:52 PM Silent H has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 81 of 247 (136928)
08-26-2004 12:41 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by johnfolton
08-26-2004 12:20 AM


Re: Maybe whatever will answer my question here?
Whatever, where are the WMD in Iraq?
Who told us that he knew where the WMD's in Iraq were in the run up to the war?
Where is Osama bin Laden?
What has happened with the war lords in Afghanistan since we invaded?
What were the nationalities of almost all of the 9/11 WTC bombers?
What family in the middle east is the Bush family very, very close to?
What has happened to the national debt in the last 4 years?
What is GWB's military record like?
Did he ever have a problem with drugs or alcohol?
What kind of success did he have as a businessman?
What economic group does his proposed tax cut help in the form of reducing their tax burden?
What economic group does his proposed tax cut hurt in the form of increasing their tax burden?
What did he do for 7 minutes after he learned that the second plane had hit the WTC?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by johnfolton, posted 08-26-2004 12:20 AM johnfolton has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by jar, posted 08-26-2004 12:58 AM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 84 of 247 (136939)
08-26-2004 1:10 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by jar
08-26-2004 12:58 AM


Re: Maybe whatever will answer my question here?
Well, yeah, I'm a dreamer.
Silence can be filled with meaning, you know?
I didn't ask a lot of things, it's true.
I thought I'd let everyone else add to the list.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by jar, posted 08-26-2004 12:58 AM jar has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 105 of 247 (137248)
08-26-2004 11:20 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by PecosGeorge
08-26-2004 1:54 PM


Re: Maybe whatever will answer my question here?
quote:
I may have done more than wet my pants at that moment. A million paralyzing thoughts may have crossed his mind. Apply it to yourself. What do humans do under extreme duress? I have seen some laugh. Is it not easy to give directions from this angle? He should have......
....immediately left the photo-op to begin taking in information about the situation so that he, as our Commander in Chief of the military, could make the most informed, intelligent descisions possible about what to do, what was possibly coming next.
You know, he needed to lead.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by PecosGeorge, posted 08-26-2004 1:54 PM PecosGeorge has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 106 of 247 (137252)
08-26-2004 11:37 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by PecosGeorge
08-26-2004 10:34 PM


Re: an image of leadership?
quote:
Osama thinks Americans will cook his goose, including those who are momentarily confounded by evil news.
I doubt that he feels much in the way of fear at the moment.
We are too occupied in Iraq to bother with Bin Laden.
Al Qaida has been reorganizing, and the warlords are back at their thing in Afghanistan because we didn't finish what we started there.
quote:
If Osama didn't think that, he would not be hiding. He also knows it, he knows doomsday comes in red, white, and blue, and soars like an eagle.
That's a lot of talk, but why hasn't the best intelligence and military in the world apprehended him yet?
It's because GWB doesn't give a shit.
http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/...004_archives/001333.html
"The last time Bush spoke protractedly about bin Laden was at a March 2003 news conference. Bush was asked then by Kelly Wallace of CNN why he so rarely mentioned bin Laden, and whether bin Laden was, in fact, dead or alive. Bush's answer: "Well, deep in my heart, I know the man is on the run if he's alive at all. Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not? We haven't heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person is -- really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission.
"Terror is bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person who's now been marginalized. His network is -- his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match. He is -- as I've mentioned in my speeches, I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death, and he himself tries to hide -- if, in fact, he's hiding at all.
"So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. . . . I truly am not that concerned about him."
He's more interested in Iraqui oil.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by PecosGeorge, posted 08-26-2004 10:34 PM PecosGeorge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by Yaro, posted 08-31-2004 12:23 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 130 of 247 (138376)
08-31-2004 8:55 AM


Nobel Prize winners endorse Kerry
August 26, 2004 - 8:54AM
Concerned over Republican President George W Bush's handling of the US economy, 10 Nobel laureates in economics announced in a public letter their endorsement of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.
The Nobel winners include 1970 laureate Paul Samuelson from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and 2001 laureate Joseph Stiglitz from Columbia University, a former chief economist at the World Bank and former adviser to president Bill Clinton.
According to the letter, the Bush administration has "embarked on a reckless and extreme course that endangers the long-term economic health of our nation."
Kerry "understands that sound economic policy requires a substantial change in direction, and we support him for president."
The differences between Bush and Kerry regarding leadership on the economy "are wider than in any other presidential election in our experience.
Bush believes "that tax cuts benefiting the most-wealthy Americans are the answer to almost every economic problem." But the tax cuts "were poorly designed and therefore have given insufficient stimulus to job creation."
The main effect of Bush's fiscal policies "has been to turn budget surpluses into enormous budget deficits. President Bush's fiscal irresponsibility threatens the long-term economic security and prosperity of our nation."
At a time when the country should be saving to pay for retirement benefits for the large post-World War II generation - known as the "baby boomers" - the US national debt "is swelling; the social contract that binds one generation to another is being threatened with unravelling."
In contrast, the Nobel laureates believe that Kerry "will restore fiscal responsibility" and is committed to helping families meet rising the cost of higher education and health care, and is committed "to work with our allies and trading partners to promote global growth that lifts up workers around the world."
The letter was also signed by George Akerlof (2001), Daniel McFadden (2000), Kenneth Arrow (1972), William F. Sharpe (1990), Daniel Kahneman (2002), Lawrence Klein (1980), Douglass North Washington (1993), and Robert Solow (1987).
2004 AFP

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by RAZD, posted 08-31-2004 10:15 AM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 154 of 247 (138748)
09-01-2004 9:47 AM


request for reply tally: 4
Whatever, do you not mind paying more of the tax burden while wealthy people pay less of the tax burden?
MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos
Since 2001, President Bush's tax cuts have shifted federal tax payments from the richest Americans to a wide swath of middle-class families, the Congressional Budget Office has found, a conclusion likely to roil the presidential election campaign.
The CBO study, due to be released today, found that the wealthiest 20 percent, whose incomes averaged $182,700 in 2001, saw their share of federal taxes drop from 64.4 percent of total tax payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year. The top 1 percent, earning $1.1 million, saw their share fall to 20.1 percent of the total, from 22.2 percent.
Over that same period, taxpayers with incomes from around $51,500 to around $75,600 saw their share of federal tax payments increase. Households earning around $75,600 saw their tax burden jump the most, from 18.7 percent of all taxes to 19.5 percent.

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by Jackal25, posted 09-01-2004 6:12 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 168 of 247 (138944)
09-01-2004 9:14 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by Jackal25
09-01-2004 6:12 PM


Re: request for reply tally: 4
quote:
but I think they deserve a tax break for taking care of oh i dont know 84 percent of the tax load.
I'll use an analogy I read somewhere a decade or so ago about the relative consumer power of the wealthiest people compared to middle class people.
As a percentage of our relative income levels, a Porche is the same to Bill Gates as a can of Coke is to us.
Therefore, the wealthiest people can get taxed at a much higher rate than middle class people and not have it affect their ability to send their kids to school, start businesses, conduct business, buy homes, travel, take vacations, retire early, invest, give to charity, etc..
They could take on even more of the burden and not feel it.
By contrast, middle class people are greatly affected by the tax burden they currently shoulder, making it difficult for them to send their kids to college, start businesses, travel, invest, save for retirement, retire at a reasonable age, purchase housing, etc.
The reason the wealthiest people pay the most taxes is because they hold a hugely disproportionate amount of the nation's wealth, not because they are "shouldering any burden".
It isn't a burden to them, but it is a burden to the middle class.
Bush has just shifted the tax burden away from the people who can most afford to pay it without feeling it and onto the people who are already struggling to get ahead.
Therefore, Bush is encouraging the trend in the US in which the few rich posess more and more of the nation's wealth and the many middle class and poor people are competing for the remaining, dwindling piece of the pie.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Jackal25, posted 09-01-2004 6:12 PM Jackal25 has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 169 of 247 (138949)
09-01-2004 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by johnfolton
09-01-2004 12:26 PM


tally of reply requests: 5
Whatever, do you not mind paying more of the tax burden while wealthy people pay less of the tax burden?
MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos
Since 2001, President Bush's tax cuts have shifted federal tax payments from the richest Americans to a wide swath of middle-class families, the Congressional Budget Office has found, a conclusion likely to roil the presidential election campaign.
The CBO study, due to be released today, found that the wealthiest 20 percent, whose incomes averaged $182,700 in 2001, saw their share of federal taxes drop from 64.4 percent of total tax payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year. The top 1 percent, earning $1.1 million, saw their share fall to 20.1 percent of the total, from 22.2 percent.
Over that same period, taxpayers with incomes from around $51,500 to around $75,600 saw their share of federal tax payments increase. Households earning around $75,600 saw their tax burden jump the most, from 18.7 percent of all taxes to 19.5 percent.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by johnfolton, posted 09-01-2004 12:26 PM johnfolton has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 170 of 247 (138951)
09-01-2004 9:24 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by johnfolton
09-01-2004 1:00 PM


request for reply tally: 5
Whatever, do you not mind paying more of the tax burden while wealthy people pay less of the tax burden?
MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos
Since 2001, President Bush's tax cuts have shifted federal tax payments from the richest Americans to a wide swath of middle-class families, the Congressional Budget Office has found, a conclusion likely to roil the presidential election campaign.
The CBO study, due to be released today, found that the wealthiest 20 percent, whose incomes averaged $182,700 in 2001, saw their share of federal taxes drop from 64.4 percent of total tax payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year. The top 1 percent, earning $1.1 million, saw their share fall to 20.1 percent of the total, from 22.2 percent.
Over that same period, taxpayers with incomes from around $51,500 to around $75,600 saw their share of federal tax payments increase. Households earning around $75,600 saw their tax burden jump the most, from 18.7 percent of all taxes to 19.5 percent.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by johnfolton, posted 09-01-2004 1:00 PM johnfolton has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by nator, posted 09-09-2004 12:21 AM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 177 of 247 (141133)
09-09-2004 12:21 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by nator
09-01-2004 9:24 PM


Re: request for reply tally: 6
Bump for whatever...
Helloooo??
Whatever, do you not mind paying more of the tax burden while wealthy people pay less of the tax burden?
MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos
Since 2001, President Bush's tax cuts have shifted federal tax payments from the richest Americans to a wide swath of middle-class families, the Congressional Budget Office has found, a conclusion likely to roil the presidential election campaign.
The CBO study, due to be released today, found that the wealthiest 20 percent, whose incomes averaged $182,700 in 2001, saw their share of federal taxes drop from 64.4 percent of total tax payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year. The top 1 percent, earning $1.1 million, saw their share fall to 20.1 percent of the total, from 22.2 percent.
Over that same period, taxpayers with incomes from around $51,500 to around $75,600 saw their share of federal tax payments increase. Households earning around $75,600 saw their tax burden jump the most, from 18.7 percent of all taxes to 19.5 percent.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by nator, posted 09-01-2004 9:24 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by johnfolton, posted 09-09-2004 12:38 AM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 182 of 247 (141182)
09-09-2004 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 178 by johnfolton
09-09-2004 12:38 AM


Re: request for reply tally: 6
Rei addressed the particulars, but I just want to know why you brought up business taxes when I was talking about personal federal income taxes?
Don't change the subject.
The Bush tax "cuts" gave an almost one percent increase to the middle class by shifting the tax burden to them.
The bush tax cuts reduced the tax burden on those making $1.1 million or more by almost two percent.
So, that means that the middle class, which is already struggling in this sluggish economy to pay their bills, send their kids to college, and to save for retirement, were just hit with an increase in their taxes.
The rich, who have plenty of money to pay their bills, send their kids to college, save for retirement (if they aren't already retired), just saw their taxes go down about twice as much as the middle class saw their taxes go up.
So, I guess you actually don't mind getting a tax increase under Bush, then, eh?
That is your answer?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by johnfolton, posted 09-09-2004 12:38 AM johnfolton has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 196 of 247 (141280)
09-09-2004 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 194 by johnfolton
09-09-2004 3:56 PM


Re: Kerry is quite the lemon, says one thing votes the other, can't be trusted, etc...
quote:
you all got what you voted for with Clinton
Yeah.
The longest run of economic prosperity in the history of the country.
A large budget surplus.
Progress towards peace between Israel and Palestine.
Several thwarted terrorist plots on american soil.
When one succeeded at the WTC, he apprehended those responsible and brought them to justice.
He identified Osama bin Laden as a major threat and had a standing assasination order out on his head.
He shrank the size of government.
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 09-09-2004 03:16 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by johnfolton, posted 09-09-2004 3:56 PM johnfolton has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024