Cite?
Cite?
And the Republicans want lower taxes on the rich and higher taxes on the middle and lower classes. Which is also redistribution of wealth and class warfare. I guess they must be Communists too!
Either the Republicans do too, or they’re not serious about the scope of cutting government spending they have proposed. Communists or liars - your choice.
So you admit you were wrong about affirmative action, and I’m not seeing the Fairness Doctrine on that page either (I’m aware that some Democratic groups are for reinstating it but Obama has opposed this in the past). This argument is going well for you.
That is such an obvious lie. In 2001 the top 1% paid 33.89% of the federal income tax while the bottom 50% paid 3.97%. In 2009 the top 1% paid 36.73% of the federal income tax while the bottom 50% paid 2.25%.
So the share of income taxes paid by the top 1% increased while the share paid by the bottom 50% decreased after the Bush tax cuts.
http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-individual-income-tax-data-0
Romney wants to cut everyone’s income taxes across the board.
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/tax
Defense is one of the few Constitutionally mandated and authorized responsibilities of the federal government. The $487 billion in cuts to the DoD over the next decade will have cuts devastating consequences. It will force massive layoffs and diminish our technological advantage. Also, remember that defense is only 19% of the federal budget. What really needs to be cut is social programs such as entitlements, welfare, foodstamps, etc, etc..
Not if he keeps his other promise to make tax cuts revenue-neutral.
And so, according to Article I, Section 8, is providing for the general welfare, which you have described as “redistribution of wealth, class warfare, affirmative action, minimum wage, social programs, government education, foodstamps, etc.”
Would those be the same $487 billion in cuts which Republicans voted for last year in exchange for dropping their threat to force a default on the national debt? The ones they made provisional on the Congressional “supercommittee”'s spending plan being voted down - which they then voted against unanimously? Those spending cuts?
More of a “shoe fits” situation.
Spending cuts will pay for the tax cuts.
You are confused. Welfare meant something different back then. This is the definition of welfare according to the 1828 Webster’s dictionary.
Romney has not elaborated on how he intends to cut spending enough to pay for the fantastical tax cuts he has promised, nor how he intends to convince Congressional Democrats to repeal the 20th century. Ergo, your claim is unsubstantiable.
In what sense does that definition vary from the one I am using?
Which comprise what percentage of the federal budget?
Romney doesn’t feel he needs to explain the arithmetic…
(Didn’t he hear the teacher explain about “showing your work”–not just writing down an answer?)
Suppose they did. Suppose they exactly equalled the tax cuts. You haven’t reduced the deficit by a cent. Revenue neutral schemes don’t help a bit.
Yes he has.
Medicare, Medicaid and CHIP are 21%, Social Security is 20% and Safety Net Programs are 13%.
[QUOTE=Mitt Romney]
•Repeal Obamacare — Savings: $95 Billion.
[/QUOTE]
What I meant to say, obviously, is that Romney has yet to elaborate on what spending cuts he means to make without resorting to blatant lies.
Censorship of the media is a weak charge if you use any reasonable definition of censorship, but all the others look pretty good to me. It’s baffling that you’d even try to deny them.
I think a lot of us would like to see you expound on that “treason” charge re American demographics, Polecat.
So are tax CUTs for the rich then.
The Fairness Doctrine is alot of things, but it is by no means censorship.
“Beware the Military-Industrial Complex” - parting words from Dwight D. Eisenhower, leaving the presidency, retired General, and all-around Communista…:rolleyes:
This is inflammatory and very far off topic. Let’s return to the subject of the video, please.
Save it for the Pit.
Silly hyperbole – the GOP lacks the artistic imagination to be fascist.
If only! 