U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-24-2009, 12:43 PM
 
5,697 posts, read 5,442,454 times
Reputation: 1937

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by oscottscotto View Post
What income tax has risen on those making less than 250k?



good grief
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-24-2009, 12:43 PM
 
Location: Northern Wi
1,530 posts, read 1,335,806 times
Reputation: 420
He would of also kept this Country safe!!

ThreatsWatch
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2009, 12:48 PM
 
Location: Yes
2,660 posts, read 6,016,014 times
Reputation: 884
Quote:
Originally Posted by georgia dem View Post
good grief
We who voted for Obama knew (at least I hope) that the whole "no tax increase under $250k" line was aimed at income taxes. It was a sly move to try to get any of the (in my opinion, dumb) "all taxes are evil" crowd to lay off. Of course other taxes would be have to be raised. To imput progressive govenment programs, taxes have to be raised in some form or fashion. I'd say that 95% of us who voted Obama knew this and are completely okay with it. Sorry if anyone was duped into thinking he meant "No new taxes" like the elder Bush meant. Obama ceratinly did not mean "No new taxes". He meant "No income tax increases on those making under this amont per year".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2009, 12:53 PM
 
Location: Northern Wi
1,530 posts, read 1,335,806 times
Reputation: 420
No--sorry your wrong. The people who voted for him that I know are VERY SORRY. They believed the change was something totally different, which was the plan for people to fall into it. He used words in different ways to bamboosal the people. In other words--he INTENTIONALLY hide his TRUE agenda.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2009, 12:54 PM
 
Location: Great Falls, Montana
3,983 posts, read 3,367,919 times
Reputation: 1301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jadex View Post
Obama didnt just say income taxes. He said NO tax of any kind you wont see a penny of your taxes go up

He raised taxes on Cigarettes and people smoke who earn less then 250k

There for the promise has been broken and about to be broken again if he signs this healthcare bill with all its taxes in there
Don't forget the new tax language included in your filings as it relates to healthcare reform .. (everyone gets to pay that by the way)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2009, 12:54 PM
 
631 posts, read 629,990 times
Reputation: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by oscottscotto View Post
We who voted for Obama knew (at least I hope) that the whole "no tax increase under $250k" line was aimed at income taxes. It was a sly move to try to get any of the (in my opinion, dumb) "all taxes are evil" crowd to lay off. Of course other taxes would be have to be raised. To imput progressive govenment programs, taxes have to be raised in some form or fashion. I'd say that 95% of us who voted Obama knew this and are completely okay with it. Sorry if anyone was duped into thinking he meant "No new taxes" like the elder Bush meant. Obama ceratinly did not mean "No new taxes". He meant "No income tax increases on those making under this amont per year".

exactly, and keep in mind all these guys have is one quote while he was stump speaking. At most in this ONE case he used a choice of words that people could twist into he's raising taxes. His overall message was to not raise income taxes on people make 250,000 or less. Anyone with half a brain knows that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2009, 12:59 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 72,290,637 times
Reputation: 27564
Quote:
Originally Posted by oscottscotto View Post
We who voted for Obama knew (at least I hope) that the whole "no tax increase under $250k" line was aimed at income taxes. It was a sly move to try to get any of the (in my opinion, dumb) "all taxes are evil" crowd to lay off. Of course other taxes would be have to be raised. To imput progressive govenment programs, taxes have to be raised in some form or fashion. I'd say that 95% of us who voted Obama knew this and are completely okay with it. Sorry if anyone was duped into thinking he meant "No new taxes" like the elder Bush meant. Obama ceratinly did not mean "No new taxes". He meant "No income tax increases on those making under this amont per year".
No, he said "not any of your taxes".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2009, 01:02 PM
 
Location: Great Falls, Montana
3,983 posts, read 3,367,919 times
Reputation: 1301
Quote:
Originally Posted by UpNort View Post
No--sorry your wrong. The people who voted for him that I know are VERY SORRY. They believed the change was something totally different, which was the plan for people to fall into it. He used words in different ways to bamboosal the people. In other words--he INTENTIONALLY hide his TRUE agenda.
I think he is making it up as he goes along.

When he was running for office, he didn't have any idea what the lobbyists would be writing for him to sign ..

B.S. is B.S. in any industry .. yes .. even in the Presidency .. we find that what one lacks in experience, they more than make up for in B.S.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2009, 01:10 PM
 
Location: OCEAN BREEZES AND VIEWS SAN CLEMENTE
19,899 posts, read 15,847,063 times
Reputation: 6453
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatyousay View Post
Don't beat yourself up too badly. He was very convincing in all his campaign speeches, promising an end to earmarks, business as usual, partisan politicking, lack of transparency, televised debates, etc, etc ... the list goes on.

I think he's a huge disappointment to MANY of the people that helped elect him, on both sides of the aisle.


But all of you who voted for him, made him a convencing candidate, you pushed him right along. When some one over and over and over again, you hear him say constantly CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE, Something is not right, i knew it. Disappointment to me right now, is a huge understatement, does he really have the American People's best interest, or is he working on an agenda.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2009, 01:14 PM
 
Location: Great Falls, Montana
3,983 posts, read 3,367,919 times
Reputation: 1301
Great expectation often times leads to great disappointment.

I can't say that I'm too disappointed, because over the years I've come to expect this sort of thing from our Congress and it's Presidents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:26 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top