Examples like that show difference between a True Believer and a Poser. It should also be noted that with the exception of a few people like Ron Paul, True Believers are rarely elected and mainly exist in conservative think tanks and right-wing media circles. (Not that I really care about the difference since I wouldn’t vote for them anyway.)
Guys, guys, there’s been a huge misunderstanding here.
It’s Demonrat.
Didn’t you read the OP? Hatch observed, hyperbolicly, that some Democrats see tax increases as the default answer to every problem. And, exactly as he mentioned, most of the rest of the OP, and many subsequent posts, were complaints that taxes had not been raised.
I assume you are playing stupid for the peanut gallery. Have fun - they appreciate that sort of thing.
Regards,
Shodan
Orrin Hatch deserves censure not for being stupid or lying (on this occasion) but for being hyperbolically partisan and more interested in demonizing Democrats than in finding a workable solution to runaway deficits.
Republicans can’t abide the thought of higher taxes, though the Bush cuts helped produce the current mess. Democrats recognize that some higher taxation is necessary, though for the moment they’re pretending that a hike is only needed on The Rich. Neither party has any realistic plan for reducing “entitlement” spending, which is the other major job that has to be tackled.
Apart from his party’s general cowardice and partisan bullshit, I would prefer for now to loathe Orrin Hatch for being one of the biggest Congressional shills for the "nutritional supplement’ industry and for opposing attempts to adequately regulate it.
Just because some people think that some taxes should be raised at the current time does not mean that it’s the default answer to every problem.
Did you really use the term “Obamacare”? Dead give-away.
Honestly, I don’t think the Repubs care much about the average Joe’s taxes, as Joe can’t do much for them. They just want Joe to believe that they’re on his side, while actually working for the corporations and upper echelon.
Of course I read the OP. It was very clear. But I was responding to a direct quote from you, not Orrin Hatch or th eOP. I know digression and non sequitors are sort of your stock and trade, but I’ll post it again in hopes of getting a straight answer.
[QUOTE=Shodan]
No, Obama and certain unnamed Congresscritters always want to raise taxes - it is just that they are sometimes too frightened or incompetent to be able to do so.
[/QUOTE]
So I ask again - how in the hell do you know that Obama always wants to raise taxes?
Nope, the fail’s on you. Nowhere in the OP’s cite does it say anything about Democrats lowering taxes. The OP itself is vague on the point, saying only that a “formerly Domocratic controlled government” lowered taxes (but the government is “formerly Republican controlled” as well, and it will always be both).
From the OP’s cite (to be fair to you, you had to actually click the primary link at the blog post):
[QUOTE=USA Today]
The latest dip in the tax burden came from a Social Security tax cut included in a December budget deal between Democrats and Republicans. It will reduce taxes $100 billion this year.
[/QUOTE]
Someone who is political aware would know that this deal occured during the lame-duck session in which the Democratic Party controlled both houses of congress.
ETA: Here’s the link so you don’t have to click twice: http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2011-05-05-tax-cut-record-low_n.htm
ETA2: Another quote from the OP’s cite
[QUOTE=USA Today]
The 2007-09 recession and new tax cuts in Obama’s stimulus effort accelerated the change.
[/QUOTE]
So there’s two direct quotes about Democrats lowering taxes.
Ah, but using Shodan’s mind powers, we can clearly see that they didn’t want to.
Thanks for opposing me.
Here’s a cite about Gitmo: Obama signs order to close Guantanamo Bay facility. Here’s a quote:
That was 1-09. Why isn’t Gitmo closed? I don’t know. Looks like the executive branch had their eye on the ball on this issue- Obama issued an executive order as promised. What happened? Is this really a black eye for Obama?
I think you use the word taxes in this context the same way some people use the word ‘drugs’ in discussions about legalizing mj.
Why not check out whatthefuckhasObamadonesofar.com?.*
Since when is “Mr Competent” an ad hominem? 
I don’t get it.
I second the request for you to explain it to us. I’m not very shy about my ignorance: fight it!
- dated material. Obama has also overseen the dispatching of Usama bin Laden since then, for instance
Well, in fairness, Mr Smashy did not explicitly identify himself as one of the [somewhat less than] 2 percenters.
I’ll take a stab at answering. The simple fact is that it is a lie to say that they are taking away oil company subsidies. They are taking away tax deductions that every single other industry is allowed from five specific companies.
A person could make an argument that oil companies are indirectly subsidized by the U.S. millitary protecting their ability to operate overseas or by the taxpayers and tollpayers that pay for infrastructure to be built. You could also make an argument that they are not bearing the “true” cost of their operations (pollution). However, it is absurd to say that they are being subsidized and point out depletion, manufacturing tax deductions, or foreign income tax deductions. For that matter being able to expense intangible drilling costs is not really a subsidy since it doesn’t cost anything in terms of taxes and in fact probably increases tax revenues for the state.
The only real tax item that could be considered a subsidy is depletion allowance. However, this only applies to very small companies and individuals and would only be a subsidy in certain select instances.
Who cares? We (lefties) post about what the Republicans really want all the time. We’re usually right, of course, but if we get to use our telepathy why can’t Shodan?
Maybe some do, sure. But generally, at least speaking for myself, I try to look at what they actually do, or try to do, or at least say they’re going to try to do.
Claiming the GOP wants to radically change Medicare? Sure, they have proposed a plan that does that. They have all voted for it in the House. Many will likely vote for it in the Senate.
Claiming the GOP would prefer to privatize Social Security? Well, they’ve campaigned on that for years, and GWB tried to do it after his re-election.
Claiming the GOP prefers an individual mandate and universal health-care coverage? Oh, wait, that was just Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich a few years ago… 
Claiming that Democrats always want to raise taxes, in response to everything? Obama certainly didn’t campaign on that. He certainly hasn’t done that. In fact, they have done the opposite, cutting taxes at least twice by significant amounts.
At some point it’s not hyperbole - it is lying.
Frame Hatch’s words as hyperbole if you insist, but my OP was not about complaining that taxes were not raised. I was pointing out that the tax rate (not revenues depressed because of the recession) is at a 5+ decades low, precisely because of tax cuts by the (formerly) Democratic Party controlled US government. Which exposes either the lie or the stupidity in residence in the soul of Orrin Hatch. I concede the possibility it’s a case of both. I also concede to Rand Rover that I was not precisely clear enough I meant ‘the Democratic Party’s government trifecta of Obama’s first years in office.’