Obama speaks of “redistributing wealth” on WEBZ radio in 2001

Ah yes… the Obama cyber hit squad is out in droves with Alinsky’s Rule #3

Wherever possible go outside of the experience of the enemy. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.

Guess what, Lindsay… won’t work here. We’re not “confused” by you misrepresenting what he’s doing as nothing more than what’s been done for decades. The “progressive tax system” campaign camp talking point just isn’t a good “distraction”.

So before you decide to wander in here and call anyone a “moron”, I’d suggest you put your rocks down as you stand in your glass house, and have a read about what your leader is *not* telling you about his tax policy.

Hint… he’s either deplorable at math, or he’s more interested in keeping “the faithful” in the dark.

Nice try… no dice in this forum.

BTW, what do *you* call taxpayer funded preschool and college, taxpayer funded work programs and training, taxpayer funded national healthcare, taxpayer funded energy programs… etc etc.

Sorry your socialist guy is too expensive for this country. BTW… he’s already spent 3x the amount of McCain, and he’s run out money to fund his latest big party. Did you get the call they need yet more money?

Funny… for all that spending, you’d think he’d be double digits ahead of the ol’ guy, eh? Then again, as he’s proven with his CAC experience, Obama knows how to raise money from others, spend everyone else’s money, and have little to show for it…. except, of course, quite a few enriched Chicago political friends and some Greek columns in a warehouse somewhere.

Southern Yankee, if you read anything but fashion magazines and soundbytes, you’d know that the quote you decided to except from the article was not from four months about, but over four years ago.

So let’s provide the facts that you either are not aware of, or choose to ignore… just like you ignore your candidate’s a socialist.

The FULL quote for you… one of the reading and research challenged.

Perhaps no issue has tested McCain over the years more than taxes. Four years ago, before he launched his second campaign for President, McCain was the keynote Republican speaker at a bipartisan conference on the budget titled “Restoring Fiscal Sanity – While We Still Can.” The event was sponsored by a half-dozen think tanks representing all points on the political spectrum. “I’m a proud Republican,” McCain said by way of introduction. “I’m a Barry Goldwater Republican. I revere Ronald Reagan and his party of limited government. Sadly, that party is no longer.” He went on to sharply criticize colleagues on both sides of the aisle for runaway “pork-barrel spending” and “expanding entitlements,” but he didn’t quit there. He also talked about taxes. “And why do we have to have tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans when the gap between the wealthiest Americans and the poorest Americans is growing?” he wondered. Later he added, “We’re at war. Tell me one time in the history of this country when this nation was at war when we’ve enacted tax cuts, especially for the wealthiest.”

[Mata note: The above comments were *still* from the conference speech FOUR YEARS AGO]

McCain tried valiantly to hold the line. Twice he voted against Bush’s tax cuts, in 2001 and 2003, angering many in his own party. But that was then. Now, first step, McCain wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent; then he wants to keep going. He would repeal the alternative minimum tax, slash the corporate tax, increase the tax exemption for children, and, at least temporarily, allow businesses to write off the full cost of capital investments in one year.

~~~

Anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), who has sharply criticized McCain in the past, says now, “I’m happy.” Norquist still can’t get McCain to sign ATR’s no-new-taxes pledge, but he has the next best thing: video of the candidate promising as much on national television, three times. “With the campaign’s approval,” says Norquist, “we took those three YouTube videos and sent them to everybody and their brother on the planet.” Now when Norquist convenes his weekly Wednesday strategy meeting at ATR headquarters in Washington, there’s always a McCain campaign representative at the table. Apparently all is forgiven. “He was just voting against Bush in general” is how Norquist explains McCain’s reversal. “I think it was pique.”

That was then… of which most of us here supporting with McCain have been disgruntled at his johnny-come-lately support of the tax cuts. But this is now. And late is better than not and all, or increasing them…. using seriously faulty math to boot, as your guy is.

Bet you’re just gullible enough to think his economic plan is all and only about “tax cuts for 95% of Americans”, right? Ever think about what Obama’s *other* plans are going to cost? Or, what he’s not telling you, the blind faithful?

Take a walk thru reality every once in awhile. You owe that to the country before you cast a ballot. The rest of us shouldn’t have to live with idiot policies implemented by uneducated voters who become all dewy eyed over speeches and sound bytes instead of facts.

Suggest *you* be careful what you wish for. Especially when you show up here with no ammo…

RAP/Sky55110, your problem is you gauge the fate of the nation’s economy and future health on your personal wallet. Then again, it’s part of the problem America has now.. the narcissistic ‘tude. ala rephrased: “ask not what you can do for your country… ask what your country and fellow taxpayers can do for you” type existence.

Congrats on being tunnel visioned and focused only on self. That’s exactly how Obama wants you to think prior to casting a ballot. You surprise me not.

Now that you’ve bought Obama’s “tax cuts for 95% of Americans” hook, line and sinker – interesting since only 60-62% approx Americans even *pay* income taxes – would you care to have a gander at the costs of his other “feel good” programs”?

His taxpayer funded education for college and preschool, perhaps? His taxpayer funded work training programs? His taxpayer funded energy programs? How about the future government departments and the staff required he will be creating? The list goes on and on… to the tune of about 177 programs and increased government departments. And the liberal-but-non-partisan Tax Policy Center has only been able to assess about 70 or so of those in their estimated costs. So their $4.3 trillion figure is low.

But then, that’s not part of what you want to talk about, right? That it’s structured to quash wealth creation instead of enhance wealth creation. Afterall, *you’ll* do better.

I swear… sometimes an idiot test prior to voting sounds really good, if not unConstitutional… But guess what. If Obama wins, I’ll revise my retirement plans and become an Obama welfare baby in my golden years. Why bother to work? I can do better to keep my income below tax repercussions, and seize that tax credit refund instead.

AD, if you will note in my post #18, you are not telling we McCain supporters anything new about his suggestions in 2000. Why do you think we were luke warm to begin with?

You will also note in the same post that McCain has changed his tax tunes. A flip flop? Yep. And most definitely a welcome flip flop. Per the same Fortune magazine that the dodohead, Southern Yankee, didn’t link to…

… If he’s in favor of tax cuts now, the explanation goes, that’s because he’ll insist on linking them to spending cuts, which President Bush was never willing to do. And besides, allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire in 2010 would be tantamount to a tax increase. “Why hammer the economy at a time when it’s weak?” says Holtz-Eakin. Fair enough, although clearly it remains a sensitive issue for McCain, as does the question of how much his larger views have shifted and why, as he takes his last shot at winning the presidency.

“My principles and my practice and my voting record are very clear,” McCain told Fortune near the end of our interview, and as he said so, he sat forward in his seat and looked us in the eye. “Not only from 2000 but 1998 and 1992 and 1986. And you know, it’s kind of a favorite tactical ploy now that opponents use, of saying the person has changed.

Look, none of my principles or values have changed. Have I changed position on some specific issues because of changed circumstances? I would hope so! I would hope so That sound like straight talk to you? He sure hopes so.

Yep… we’re pissed he wasn’t right to begin with. But we’ll take a correct decision late, as opposed to a promist to never be correct from Obama.

Aye Chi, Stix… you’re throwing too many water wings into the pond for those that can’t swim, ya know. Asking them to comprehend that Obama’s “tax cuts” are based on the figure it will be after they are raised by the Bush tax cuts sunsetting 2010 is waaaaaay too much to ask.

He did say that, Rocky B… prior to the Fannie/Freddie collapse. As of the beginning of Sept, he was considering “delaying” rescinding the Bush tax cuts.

Note that you can only delay these until they sunset. So his intent remains the same… rescind, unless the economic situation warrants. While that’s a plus in his favor, as I said, his intent is still to raise the taxes by not extending them.

I’ve also seen it put that Obama will do the tax cut by extending the Bush tax cuts, but only to the “middle class”.

All in all, what an Obama POTUS would do morphs daily. I can only go on his historical political philosophic record… which the media and Obama prefer to ignore.