View Full Version : Rick Perry running for President
Melonie
08-20-2011, 03:36 PM
^^^ actually, a very 'sane' conservative candidate is available ... Rep. Ron Paul. However, with the near total disregard by mainstream media, he doesn't have a prayer of being taken seriously. Romney has too much baggage from his RINO days to ever sell to the 'Tea Party'. Newt Gingrich has successfully been 'branded' as a 'blast from the past'. Michelle Bachman is potentially too extreme as well as too inexperienced. All other potential candidates lack presidential 'gravitas'.
Thus the available slate of potential Republican presidential candidates doesn't offer much hope that President Obama can actually be defeated in 2012. And this is even more the case when one considers that the 47% of the population who don't actually have to pay income taxes, the 14% of the population whose paychecks come from working directly for a government agency, the 9% of the population collecting extended unemployment benefits, plus the 12% of the population who are virtually guaranteed to vote for Obama no matter what he has or hasn't done ( i.e. black Americans ), all have nothing to lose by voting for Obama ( again ).
If you had said Huntsman i would not have choked on my frosted flakes.
Kellydancer
08-20-2011, 04:14 PM
Actually, while I don't agree with everything he stands for, but I do think Paul is decent and honest. I had his people come to my door and I was talking to them saying I normally vote Dem but would be open to voting for him. However, he doesn't stand a chance.
eagle2
08-20-2011, 05:39 PM
^^^ actually, a very 'sane' conservative candidate is available ... Rep. Ron Paul.
Ron Paul is completely nuts. He doesn't see anything wrong with Iran acquiring a nuclear bomb.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/1106063162001/ron-paul-why-shouldnt-iran-want-a-nuclear-weapon/
He believes in creation fairy tales.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw
eagle2
08-20-2011, 06:09 PM
Thus the available slate of potential Republican presidential candidates doesn't offer much hope that President Obama can actually be defeated in 2012. And this is even more the case when one considers that the 47% of the population who don't actually have to pay income taxes,
This is a dishonest statement conservative ideologues keep repeating to make it look as if the system is somehow tilted towards poorer Americans. Nothing could be further from the truth. Conservative ideologues select one specific tax where the wealthy pay a higher percentage than the rest, and they leave out all of the other taxes where the poor and middle class pay a much higher percentage in taxes than the very rich. Almost all poor and middle class workers pay Social Security and Medicare taxes at a much higher rate than the wealthy. The poor and middle class pay a much higher percentage of their income on sales tax and gasoline tax than the wealthy. This is especially true in conservative states with no income tax. Poor and middle class home owners pay a much higher percentage of their income in real estate taxes than the very wealthy. Of course the conservative ideologues ignore all of these taxes because it doesn't fit in with their scenario of a system that is completely tilted against the wealthy and towards the poor.
Conservative ideologues have this completely backward view of the world, where the wealthy are just barely getting by while the poor are living lives of luxury in their air-conditioned homes with televisions.
The reality is, the income gap in America is the largest it's been in over 80 years and is even greater than many third world countries. The wealthiest Americans are making more money than ever before and paying less taxes than they've been in decades.
In Melonie's mind, the poor Walmart workers take advantage of their greater numbers and use their votes to force the Walton family, who are barely getting by on their $80 billion fortune, to pay their employees $7.25 an hour. In addition to forcing the Walton family to pay their employees this rate, the poor take advantage of the system to require the Waltons to pay taxes that go towards food stamps for their employees, on top of the $7.25 an hour they are already getting!
Melonie
08-20-2011, 06:33 PM
^^^ I'll bite my lip re the dishonesty claims ... but I will say this. I have no problem with the concept of additionally taxing the Walton heirs who are legally avoiding having to pay the 20-25-30% tax rates that 'middle class' Americans' paycheck incomes are subjected to. However, doing things like abolishing the tax exempt municipal bonds, ending the tax advantaged green energy production tax credits, etc. that actually allow many American millionaires to legally minimize their effective tax rate would have far reaching consequences. In other words, I would not want to be a California or Illinois or Massachusetts or especially Michigan taxpayer if those states lost their ability to offer tax exempt status to investors purchasing their state bonds ... thus forcing gov't borrowing costs ( via interest rates ) to levels that were competitive with 'high risk' open market corporate debt. I would attempt to make the point that there is a 'crony gov't economy' where Democratic politicians, uber rich liberal municipal bond / green energy investors, and poor gov't benefit recipients, form a closed loop that exploits the 'middle class', but that would only force me to spend hours dredging up supporting evidence to prove the obvious. After all, Obama is only vacationing in Martha's Vineyard ... the ultimate uber rich liberal enclave ... because of the quality of the golf course, right ?
My earlier point was pretty simple to understand. When a voter has no personal 'skin in the game', i.e. their social welfare benefit check or gov't paycheck or extended unemployment check will not be adversely affected by voting ( again ) for President Obama and the policies he advocates, or their personal income tax payments won't go up because their incomes are low enough that they aren't actually required to pay any income tax in the first place, that voter probably has very little concern for the negative aspects of President Obama's policies upon higher earning Americans or the future American economy.
eagle2
08-20-2011, 06:39 PM
^^^ I'll bite my lip re the dishonesty claims ...
I'm not saying that you're dishonest, but the people who came up with these figures and started using them as conservative talking points are. Those 47% of Americans who don't pay federal income taxes do pay a significant amount in other taxes.
Melonie
08-20-2011, 06:49 PM
Those 47% of Americans who don't pay federal income taxes do pay a significant amount in other taxes.
Circular argument ... yes all working Americans pay dedicated Social Security / medicare taxes, which are expected to be used to finance their own future Social Security retirement checks and retirement age medical care. Gov't accounting sleight of hand aside, none of this dedicated tax money was supposed to be used to finance green energy companies or wall st. bailouts or any other federal gov't expenditures.
Yes all Americans living in states and cities that levee them must pay sales taxes. However, this dedicated tax money is spent at the local level by those states and cities and is thus not used to finance federal gov't expenditures either. Same applies to local property taxes paid by low income 'subprime' homeowners etc.
No it is almost exclusively the 'privelege' of the 53% of American taxpayers who actually do have to pay income taxes ( along with US businesses that are not dependent on gov't subsidies and thus generate actual taxable profits ) to finance federal gov't expenditures. And from that perspective, the 47% of American taxpayers who DON'T actually have to pay income taxes aren't personally affected if Obama's policies call for increased federal gov't expenditures / increased federal income tax rates on those Americans who DO actually have to pay income taxes. Herein lies the risk of 'Tyranny of the Majority'.
Also, while many 'liberals' are loathe to concede the possibility, there is substantial evidence that 'tax and spend' policies DO adversely affect the 47% of Americans who don't actually have to pay income taxes eventually. But whatever cause and effect relationships that eventually take form usually have enough time delay and enough abstraction to avoid the drawing of 'smoking gun' connections. Greece is of course an example that when the gov'ts financial situation gets bad enough, that the 'smoking gun' connections can no longer be hidden. America isn't at that point yet, but very well could be after four more years of Obama policy.
~
bem401
08-20-2011, 07:05 PM
I am not an Obamatron but do not think the Republicans stand a chance unless their candidate is sane and most of them are not.
The Democrat strategy will be to portray whoever goes up against Obama as way outside the mainstream to divert attention from how far outside the mainstream their guy is.
Melonie
08-20-2011, 10:05 PM
^^^ unfortunately, the 'Tyranny of the Majority' overtone is that the 'mainstream' of American voters is changing. Or more specifically, that more than 50% of American voters are NOT required to make personal financial sacrifices in order to fund Obama's policies. The 47% of US tax filers that aren't actually required to pay income taxes, combined with additional higher earning voters whose "inflation indexed" paychecks come from a gov't entity, exceeds the 51% tipping point !!!
bem401
08-20-2011, 10:30 PM
These people can't be allowed to remain in power. They spend 50-60% more than they collect in taxes. That's a recipe for financial ruin. No financial entity, be it a corporation, a person, or a government can operate like that and remain afloat. Despite that, Obama, the Dems, and the MSM will portray anyone advocating cutting spending in order to come as close as possible to balancing the budget as the ones with screws loose.
MargaritaVillain
08-21-2011, 06:16 PM
Photographer snaps pic at a very inopportune moment for Rick Perry.
I'll bet he did nazi this one coming...
http://i.imgur.com/AZk3f.png
Melonie
08-22-2011, 03:45 AM
The only response to that image I can think of making ... from the safety of way south of the border ... is that the world might learn something from history.
- we've already got a ( repeat ) situation of a bad economy that has 'stolen' the hopes and dreams of many citizens
- we've now got a situation where a particular segment of the population ( i.e. the 'rich' ) are being targeted as being responsible for those 'stolen' hopes and dreams
- we've increasingly got a situation where street mobs are attacking particular businesses and individuals
- we've also got a situation where the purchasing power of the currency is eroding
- we've additionally got a situation where the foreign owners of the country's huge levels of debt are becoming 'nervous' as to whether the full value of that debt can ever be repaid
... research Germany 1932-33