Total Posts:32|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

President Obama's true agenda emerges

DoubtingDave
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 10:30:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Bill O'Reilly: President Obama's true agenda emerges

I was watching The O'Reilly factor last night and I was listening to his talking points memo and he really nailed what was going on:


You may have noticed The Factor has not covered the fiscal debate very much. Not going to use that cliche, not going to say it. That's because it was a fake crisis as the "Wall Street Journal" says today in its lead editorial.

The deal Congress struck last night could have been done last August. But the politicians in both parties wanted to posture, setting up phony scenarios for their own personal aggrandizement.

So here is really what's going on. President Obama has succeeded in raising taxes on every working American. Every one of us, those who are doing well will now pay close to 50 percent of their income to the feds. Those making below $400,000 a year will pay a variety of new Obamacare taxes and see a two percentage point rise in their Social Security payment.

So everybody gets hit. If you invest, you will be paying about nine percentage points more in capital gains and dividends tax. If you die and your estate is worth more than $5 million bucks you will pay 40 percent of death tax to the feds. President Obama is not finished. He wants more from the affluent.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: We can't simply cut our way to prosperity. Cutting spending has to go hand in hand with further reforms to our tax code so that the wealthiest corporations and individuals can't take advantage of loopholes and deductions that aren't available to most Americans.
(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'REILLY: No question now. No question that the American people have voted for a president who wants to redistribute income. He is not going to stop. The socialist tenet where a central government takes and gives as it pleases. That will have many unintended consequences beginning with the economy. If the higher tax rates slow business in the USA then President Obama's second term will be a disaster.
Also, it's now clear that Mr. Obama doesn't much care about federal spending. You simply don't run up deficits of more than a $1 trillion dollars a year, even with all this new revenue. Even with that. You don't run up those deficits if you are concerned about fiscal responsibility.

Clearly the President has not offered any meaningful spending cuts or entitlement reform. And after four years he has not offered any solutions to the crushing $16 trillion debt.

Now, in the past, that would have sunk an incumbent president. Not today. "Talking Points" believes Mr. Obama won the election largely on emotion. Millions of voters supported him because Mitt Romney didn't really run his campaign with any urgency or emotional appeal. While Mr. Obama promised working Americans stuff.
So now we're all on the same lifeboat. President Obama is going to take as much money as he can from successful people and dole it out. He's not going to make any meaningful cuts in government spending. Not going to do it. And he might even expand the entitlement culture. I believe this will lead to economic disaster for the country.

But as always, I could be wrong. And that's "The Memo."


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com...
The Great Wall of Fail

"I have doubts that anti-semitism even exists" -GeoLaureate8

"Evolutionists think that people evolved from rocks" -Scotty

"And whats so bad about a Holy war? By Holy war, I mean a war which would aim to subdue others under Islam." -Ahmed.M

"The free market didn't create the massive wealth in the country, WW2 did." -malcomxy

"Independant federal regulators make our capitalist society possible." -Erik_Erikson
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 10:42:35 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Though I'm right wing I still very much so dislike Ann Coulter, and to a lesser degree these Fox News people. They just stir up so much hate and partisanship and are some of the cause of why America's Congress can't get anything done.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 10:43:25 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Somebody needs to read Atlas Shrugged.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 10:47:31 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 10:43:25 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Somebody needs to read Atlas Shrugged.

Which one of us are you talking about.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 10:48:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 10:47:31 AM, Contra wrote:
At 1/3/2013 10:43:25 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Somebody needs to read Atlas Shrugged.

Which one of us are you talking about.

Obama.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 10:55:03 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 10:42:35 AM, Contra wrote:
Though I'm right wing I still very much so dislike Ann Coulter, and to a lesser degree these Fox News people. They just stir up so much hate and partisanship and are some of the cause of why America's Congress can't get anything done.

Disagree. They make sensible points and Liberals hate that.

Charles Krauthammer
Chris Wallace
Kimberly Guilfoyle
Neil Cavuto
Megan Kelly
O'Reilly (Sometimes)
Sean Hannity (Joined the Patriots, now on Patriot XM)
John Stossel
Greg Gutfeld

MSNBC are the ones who spread not only hate but stupidity.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 11:03:33 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 10:55:03 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/3/2013 10:42:35 AM, Contra wrote:
Though I'm right wing I still very much so dislike Ann Coulter, and to a lesser degree these Fox News people. They just stir up so much hate and partisanship and are some of the cause of why America's Congress can't get anything done.

Disagree. They make sensible points and Liberals hate that.

Charles Krauthammer
Chris Wallace
Kimberly Guilfoyle
Neil Cavuto
Megan Kelly
O'Reilly (Sometimes)
Sean Hannity (Joined the Patriots, now on Patriot XM)
John Stossel
Greg Gutfeld

Out of the guys you listed above, they still all contribute to the partisanship that makes liberals and conservatives rage at the heads of one another. Though maybe I haven't seen them enough. I like John Stossel's show, he's an exception. I haven't heard of people like Greg Gutfield or Megan Kelly.


MSNBC are the ones who spread not only hate but stupidity.

MSNBC is pretty bad. I watch them occasionally just to get laugh and see what crap they have on. They have an obvious bias, even their slogan resembles Obama's.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 11:05:29 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
ZOMG guyz, Obama wants higher taxes, ESPECIALLY ON THE RICH!! WE MUST TELL THE PEOPLE! WHO KNEW THIS WAS COMING IT'S NOT LIKE HALF HIS CAMPAIGN WAS ON THIS ISSUE! HIS TRUE AGENDA EMERGES!!!
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 11:15:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Oh Geo you're so full of sh!t. Fox News is worse than MSNBC despite both of them being absolute garbage. While MSNBC is just as biased, it's also just as sensible in many if not more ways. Rachel Maddow is one of my favorites and talks a lot about issues that other pundits ignore or don't catch. I don't agree with her or Lawrence O'Donnell a whole lot, but they're not all bad (I hate Chris Matthews though - so obnoxious). I haven't watched John Stossel since he was on 20/20 lol but UMM NO Megan Kelly is definitely not someone on Fox I would look at and say "Gee, now there's a pundit." I dunno what the "Patriots" are but Sean Hannity is a Republican and equally misguided in what I've seen of him.

I agree with Contra that the Fox people are still hella partisan. There are a lot of libs on MSNBC for sure, but outside of Chris Matthews, none of them are like OMG STFU. They're just wrong. The people on Fox are not only wrong but condescendingly arrogant in their wrongness. They suck. I'm waiting for the day you wake the fvck up and realize that Republicans are not REALLY "small government." In fact, outside of lower taxes and deregulation (harmful in our current system) they're pretty much the same as Dems on economic issues, except they'd rather facilitate corporatism (anti-capitalism) by giving corporate welfare instead of social welfare. Both types of welfare are bad.

Republican policies are bad just like liberal policies are bad. I have no idea why you insist on Republicans being the And Republicans can, have and will continue to strip away rights via the authoritative nanny state. You, Geo, seem concerned about surveillance in particular... do you think the "WE NEED MOAR SAFETY" Republicans are gonna be the ones who respect your "freedom" from their surveillance? No. Being against gun control (only because they're given lotsa $ by the NRA) and using talking points like the words "liberty" and "freedom" does not anti-government one make.

(Btw police around the country have already been using spy cams/drones-- I heard about a case in Maine I think it was...)
President of DDO
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 11:16:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 10:55:03 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Charles Krauthammer
Chris Wallace
Kimberly Guilfoyle
Neil Cavuto
Megan Kelly
O'Reilly (Sometimes)
Sean Hannity (Joined the Patriots, now on Patriot XM)
John Stossel
Greg Gutfeld
Greta Van Susteren should be on the list. Probably on top.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 11:17:03 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 11:16:13 AM, Mirza wrote:
Greta Van Susteren should be on the list. Probably on top.

Being a Scientologist makes me doubt her credibility to be rational. I admit my bias.
President of DDO
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 11:19:27 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 11:17:03 AM, Danielle wrote:
At 1/3/2013 11:16:13 AM, Mirza wrote:
Greta Van Susteren should be on the list. Probably on top.

Being a Scientologist makes me doubt her credibility to be rational. I admit my bias.
I read about that recently and it was a surprise -- but besides that she has class and intellect. I think plenty Fox News anchors are often too close-minded, but she's a good one to watch.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 11:20:09 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 11:03:33 AM, Contra wrote:
Out of the guys you listed above, they still all contribute to the partisanship that makes liberals and conservatives rage at the heads of one another.

For decades Republicans wanted government to grow at 3-4% and Democrats wanted government to grow at 6-8%. They compromised at 5% and everyone got along swell. Unfortunately the happy compromise is a fatal illness. Liberals will never compromise at anything less than more government every year forever. Cutting government is to them so disgusting that they cannot abide anyone who even suggests it. There is no way to resolve that without confrontation.

In my view, O'Reilly is hit and miss. he can dominate some of his guests, but Krauthammer, Rove, Goldberg, Miller and others handle him quite well in debate. His show is interesting not because he's always right, but because he discusses important issues in a practical way. I'm not a Hannity fan because he rarely gets beyond repeating mantas, no fun. Coulter is great because liberals have no idea how to take a joke, and she makes that clear. Her books are really thoughtful and well-researched -- so much so that libs have to dismiss them rather than argue them.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 11:26:06 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Michelle Malkin used to anchor for to the O'Reilly factor some years ago, though now she contributes on Fox News once in a while. If you want some conservative Rachel Maddow -->
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 11:43:26 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 10:49:22 AM, darkkermit wrote:
Bill O'reilly can be as anti-market as a liberal as demonstrated by this clip. I'm not a fan of O'reilly myself.
Ditto. He's also incredibly rude!

*********************

At 1/3/2013 10:55:03 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Charles Krauthammer
Establishment guy.

Chris Wallace
Good reporter.

Kimberly Guilfoyle
Good opiner.

Neil Cavuto
Excellent reporter.

Megan Kelly
Good opiner.

O'Reilly
OK opiner; rude as a mo fo.

Sean Hannity
Great opiner.

John Stossel
Great reporter; great opiner.

Greg Gutfeld
Great opiner; funny as a mo fo!

MSNBC are the ones who spread not only hate but stupidity.
The worst crap on tv.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 11:57:11 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 11:15:53 AM, Danielle wrote:
Oh Geo you're so full of sh!t. Fox News is worse than MSNBC despite both of them being absolute garbage. While MSNBC is just as biased, it's also just as sensible in many if not more ways. Rachel Maddow is one of my favorites and talks a lot about issues that other pundits ignore or don't catch. I don't agree with her or Lawrence O'Donnell a whole lot, but they're not all bad (I hate Chris Matthews though - so obnoxious).

Maddow has her moments.

I haven't watched John Stossel since he was on 20/20 lol but UMM NO Megan Kelly is definitely not someone on Fox I would look at and say "Gee, now there's a pundit."

Stossel is a big time Libertarian and has his own show.

I dunno what the "Patriots" are but Sean Hannity is a Republican and equally misguided in what I've seen of him.

I simply meant the Libertarians aka Patriot Movement. I listen to Hannity sometimes on XM Patriot and he's been bringing up points that Alex Jones does and that impressed me, for example he brought up Obama's murdering eugenecist Science Czar John Holdren.

I agree with Contra that the Fox people are still hella partisan. There are a lot of libs on MSNBC for sure, but outside of Chris Matthews, none of them are like OMG STFU. They're just wrong.

They constantly bash Republicans. Fox bashes the Liberal ideology. MSNBC makes it a partisan point, Fox makes it an ideological point.

The people on Fox are not only wrong but condescendingly arrogant in their wrongness. They suck.

Not the people I just listed except for maybe two of them.

I'm waiting for the day you wake the fvck up and realize that Republicans are not REALLY "small government." In fact, outside of lower taxes and deregulation (harmful in our current system) they're pretty much the same as Dems on economic issues, except they'd rather facilitate corporatism (anti-capitalism) by giving corporate welfare instead of social welfare. Both types of welfare are bad.

Republican policies are bad just like liberal policies are bad. I have no idea why you insist on Republicans being the And Republicans can, have and will continue to strip away rights via the authoritative nanny state. You, Geo, seem concerned about surveillance in particular... do you think the "WE NEED MOAR SAFETY" Republicans are gonna be the ones who respect your "freedom" from their surveillance? No. Being against gun control (only because they're given lotsa $ by the NRA) and using talking points like the words "liberty" and "freedom" does not anti-government one make.

Both Republicans and Democrats are bight and paid for at the top levels. Boehner sucks no doubt. So does Mitch McConnel and McCain.

Here's the line though. Half of the Republicans in the House and a quarter of the Republicans in the Senate are Libertarian or at least close to it. Democrats kicked out their last Libertarian, Dennis Kucinich. The Democratic Party does not tolerate Libertarians. Republicans at least respect and partially embrace it and more and more now, many mainline Republicans are embracing Libertarianism openly. I hear Charles Krauthammer on Fox News suggesting that people should shoot down domestic drones out of the sky and the panel sat there not objecting.

Rand Paul, Ron Paul, Jim DeMint, Ted Cruz, Justin Amash, all Libertarians and all embraced by Republicans, or at least most. Nearly 100% of Republicans were outraged when Boehner kicked out all Libertarians from the financial committees in Congress.

Where's the Democrats embrace of Libertarianism?

.
.
.
.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 12:00:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
How is Charles Krauthammer an establishment guy?
He said ban domestic drones and shoot them out of the sky.
He also said abolish the Income Tax and instate the Consumption Tax.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 12:45:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
This is nothing "new", this is exactly what Obama campaigned on. In fact, Obama campaigned to raise taxes on everyone over 250K and ended up raising them on everyone over 450K. So, if anything, Obama's "true agenda" is more conservative.
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 12:50:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 12:00:43 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
How is Charles Krauthammer an establishment guy?
Look at his support for Romney from the get go. Whenever it's the Tea Party vs the establishment he sides with the establishment.

He said ban domestic drones and shoot them out of the sky.
I have no problem with domestic drones so long as they are used for border security & warfare (outside USA.)

He also said abolish the Income Tax and instate the Consumption Tax.
Not sure about that. How does that work?
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
slo1
Posts: 4,314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 12:50:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
More intellectual dishonesty by O'Reilly. The mandatory $600B spending cuts are still on the table. The agreement simply chose to forego settling spending cuts and raising the debt limit for two months because the Treasury found a way to get along for two months without raising it.

Spending cuts are yet to come because the Repubs feel they have enough leverage with the debt ceiling. To blame Obama for not having any spending cuts is just intellectually dishonest.

Since I'm not in the $450,000 club I have a 2% increase. Not including the obama care tax on the rich, which is separate legislation

O'Reilly gets the same 2% payroll tax increase on only his salary. (capital gains are not subject to SS tax). He gets hit with 4.8% increase on income tax over $400,000 assuming he is single) I haven't yet found it, but I think there is something with capital gains too, so the uber rich like Romney don't get away with paying less taxes than me because they primary income came from investment income which was taxed at 15%.

Stop your crying, everyone gets hit, and focus on across the board spending cuts, which is where we really need the attention on. That is where it gets really ugly.
slo1
Posts: 4,314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 12:52:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
oh yeah, O'Reilly only gets hit with the full 6.2% social security tax for the first $113,000 of his salary, then it goes to 0%. I pay 6.2% on 100% of my salary.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 12:57:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 11:19:27 AM, Mirza wrote:
I read about that recently and it was a surprise -- but besides that she has class and intellect. I think plenty Fox News anchors are often too close-minded, but she's a good one to watch.

That's true. She seems to have integrity from what I've researched on her in the past. I admit I don't watch her show enough to have an opinion on her views now.
President of DDO
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 1:05:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 12:50:02 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
At 1/3/2013 12:00:43 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
How is Charles Krauthammer an establishment guy?
Look at his support for Romney from the get go. Whenever it's the Tea Party vs the establishment he sides with the establishment.

Recently he has supported Ron Paul and spoke of the Libertarian wave in the Republican Party in a positive light.

He said ban domestic drones and shoot them out of the sky.
I have no problem with domestic drones so long as they are used for border security & warfare (outside USA.)

Do you know what "domestic" means? I'm not talking about borders and especially not "warfare outside USA" (how is that even domestic, that is precisely the opposite).

Domestic drones are drones flying over American cities. It is NOT the establishment view that patriots should "use their 2nd Amendment weapon to shoot down a drone."

He also said abolish the Income Tax and instate the Consumption Tax.
Not sure about that. How does that work?

Thats Gary Johnsons tax plan. Instead of revenue from income tax, have a national consumption tax. What's confusing about it.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 1:13:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 1:05:32 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/3/2013 12:50:02 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
At 1/3/2013 12:00:43 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
How is Charles Krauthammer an establishment guy?
Look at his support for Romney from the get go. Whenever it's the Tea Party vs the establishment he sides with the establishment.
Recently he has supported Ron Paul and spoke of the Libertarian wave in the Republican Party in a positive light.
Yes, but I still see him as a supporter of the establishment like Karl Rove. With the exception of foreign policy (and a few other issues), I do like the Libertarian platform.

He said ban domestic drones and shoot them out of the sky.
I have no problem with domestic drones so long as they are used for border security & warfare (outside USA.)
Do you know what "domestic" means? I'm not talking about borders and especially not "warfare outside USA" (how is that even domestic, that is precisely the opposite).

Domestic drones are drones flying over American cities. It is NOT the establishment view that patriots should "use their 2nd Amendment weapon to shoot down a drone."
Like I said, I am in favor of border patrol use but NO other domestic use.

He also said abolish the Income Tax and instate the Consumption Tax.
Not sure about that. How does that work?
Thats Gary Johnsons tax plan. Instead of revenue from income tax, have a national consumption tax. What's confusing about it.
How does it work? Like a national sales tax? Why all the hostility?
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
DoubtingDave
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 1:13:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 11:15:53 AM, Danielle wrote:
Oh Geo you're so full of sh!t. Fox News is worse than MSNBC despite both of them being absolute garbage.

I actually disagree with this. Although I'm not too keen on either one, MSNBC is far worse than Fox News. I'll let Pew Research take it from here


MSNBC featured 71 percent negative coverage of Mitt Romney, whereas Fox coverage of Obama was only 46 percent unfavorable. What's more, positive Romney stories on MSNBC reached all the way to a soaring three percent!

David Zurawik of the Baltimore Sun exactly pegs these results. Of MSNBC, Zurawik says, "That's not a news channel."

That's a propaganda machine, and owner Comcast should probably change [MSNBC President] Phil Griffin's title from president to high minister of information, or something equally befitting the work of a party propaganist [sic] hack in a totalitarian regime. You wonder how mainstream news organizations allow their reporters and corrdespondents [sic] to appear in such a cauldron of bias.


http://www.breitbart.com...
http://www.journalism.org...
The Great Wall of Fail

"I have doubts that anti-semitism even exists" -GeoLaureate8

"Evolutionists think that people evolved from rocks" -Scotty

"And whats so bad about a Holy war? By Holy war, I mean a war which would aim to subdue others under Islam." -Ahmed.M

"The free market didn't create the massive wealth in the country, WW2 did." -malcomxy

"Independant federal regulators make our capitalist society possible." -Erik_Erikson
TheElderScroll
Posts: 643
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 8:01:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The deal Congress struck last night could have been done last August. But the politicians in both parties wanted to posture, setting up phony scenarios for their own personal aggrandizement.

True. Actually the whole thing is the remnant of 2011 debt ceiling showdown (+ the extension of Bush Tax Cuts). The deal can be struck long long time ago (or completely avoided).

So here is really what's going on. President Obama has succeeded in raising taxes on every working American. Every one of us, those who are doing well will now pay close to 50 percent of their income to the feds. Those making below $400,000 a year will pay a variety of new Obamacare taxes and see a two percentage point rise in their Social Security payment.

How did he get number 50 percent? The marginal tax rate for the wealthy Americans (>400,000 for individual & 450,000 for couples) is about 39%. Even by adding 3% on top of it (due to ObamaCare tax, according to the Heritage Foundation), the number is no where near 50%.

So everybody gets hit. If you invest, you will be paying about nine percentage points more in capital gains and dividends tax. If you die and your estate is worth more than $5 million bucks you will pay 40 percent of death tax to the feds. President Obama is not finished. He wants more from the affluent.

Most properties are worth way much less than $5 million. Besides, most middle-class families do not invest substantial amount in stock markets. So it is no where closed to "everybody get hits."

O'REILLY: No question now. No question that the American people have voted for a president who wants to redistribute income. He is not going to stop. The socialist tenet where a central government takes and gives as it pleases. That will have many unintended consequences beginning with the economy. If the higher tax rates slow business in the USA then President Obama's second term will be a disaster.

No question? Well, how come whenever someone proposes to raise taxes, many people begin to call him/her socialist? However, I do agree that "if the higher tax rates slow business in the USA then President Obama's second term will be a disaster."

Also, it's now clear that Mr. Obama doesn't much care about federal spending. You simply don't run up deficits of more than a $1 trillion dollars a year, even with all this new revenue. Even with that. You don't run up those deficits if you are concerned about fiscal responsibility.

President Regan triples the debt.

Clearly the President has not offered any meaningful spending cuts or entitlement reform. And after four years he has not offered any solutions to the crushing $16 trillion debt.

The collapsed 2011 Grand Bargain includes many solutions to the crushing $16 trillion debt. Besides, before House Speaker John Boehner walked away (Plan B drama), President Obama proposed a $1.2 trillion in fresh revenue in exchange for $1.22 trillion in spending reductions.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 8:17:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/3/2013 11:15:53 AM, Danielle wrote:
Oh Geo you're so full of sh!t. Fox News is worse than MSNBC despite both of them being absolute garbage. While MSNBC is just as biased, it's also just as sensible in many if not more ways. Rachel Maddow is one of my favorites and talks a lot about issues that other pundits ignore or don't catch. I don't agree with her or Lawrence O'Donnell a whole lot, but they're not all bad (I hate Chris Matthews though - so obnoxious).

THIS! I tell them that all the time, I always admit that MSNBC is as bias, but it is in fact less hateful and less false. But they just dismiss me. I think they enjoy establishing a false symmetry between the stations maybe because it makes it easier for them to feel that their own news sources are superior to the two.

And I also hate Chris Matthews (not for his opinions, but his rudeness), and love Rachel Maddow because she's so reasonable and eloquent while still being funny.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault