doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Maybe our days are numbered?

like many of the liberals,he does not have the stugats to play with the big boys.Bunch of keyboard cowboys all cowardswho would not say what they post here.Remember the names !!

BTW B Hussian Obama would not answer when asked if those making under 250k would be taxed more.hmmmmm.I know lots folks who make under 250k who will be hurt by the raise in cap gains (note the biggest drop ever in the DOW for the first two days after the he was elected!!)

Davidm, Most of us here are probably old enough to remember the days when the wealthy were in 90% tax brackets. We also remember that virtually all of those wealthy folks were savvy enough to have their accountants exploit a myriad of loopholes that allowed them to pay little or nothing. Enough of those loopholes have been eliminated or reduced that what Obama proposes will have a chilling effect in comparison to the era you cite. Later, you take someone here to task, asking if they even read the link you posted. I would suggest that you also do a little more reading. Instead of swallowing what Obama says, look at what he has done in his short career, especially as it relates to his outright attacks on the Second Amendment. You are now on a Shotgun Forum. You will not find many of us agreeing with your enthusiasm for Obama. Most of us have seen these tactics used before. You have obviously drank the Kool-Aid, but you seem intelligent enough that I have high hopes that you will X-ray the Trojan Horse and see what danger lurks inside. Seriously, before you respond, check his record on handguns, semi-automatics, concealed carry, ammunition bans, firearms taxes, FFL dealer restrictions, self defense in the home, magazine capacities, appointments of pro 2nd Amendment judges, ad nauseum. Please show us proof that we can trust him with our gun rights, not by what he says, but by what he has done. This little excercise will be the beginning of the healing process. The realization that you have been fooled may be a bitter pill, but we're pulling for you and I really hope you will come back from the brink. P.S., I truthfully wasn't all that enthused with McCain either.

keith, in the last 40 days, Obama's message on tax cuts was pure Reagan. That did it. With so much economic anxiety, tax-cutting was his constant refrain. Both candidates offered tax cuts to roughly 100 million people. Obama's were directed to the middle class and the working poor. McCain directed tax cuts to investors. The electoral merits of Obama were obvious regardless of feelings of the different proposals.

Consider what Obama wrote about Reagan in his autobiography The Audacity of Hope, "giving the old man his due,"

"Reagan's message spoke to the failure of liberal government, in a period of economic stagnation, to give middle class voters any sense that it was fighting for them," he said. "He fundamentally changed the terms of the political debate. The middle class revolt became a permanent fixture in national politics and placed a ceiling on how much the federal government could expand."

Of all the presidents of the last 60 years, Obama wrote that Ronald Reagan loomed "largest of all." US presidents almost always cut taxes in recessions. Obama will almost certainly do so again. No matter how you parse this, Obama's tax message was right out of the Gipper's playbook. It's hard to understand why McCain and Company couldn't see it.

Reminded of the anecdote I heard yrs. ago at Atlantic Aviation. H. B. duPont came in one day with a grandson to look over the "spread". Break time so the anecdoter was in the lunchroom and HB stepped up and asked if he could get a dime for the machine to get the lad a soda. "I hever carry money," he said. I have a healthy respect for captains of industry and other well-insulated sorts but I don't worry about their welfare as they have proven proficiency in that dept. Lot of folks out there who have dibs on "my" dime.

jack

Middle class is a new code word for the poor...nobody wants to be known as poor, so its middle class now.
The real middle class will be fine - but we'll have to pay for the really never got off their butts poor. Thats the plan - its payback time.

They didn't see it because it wasn't there. The assertion of your post above is an amazing fantasy of an uneducated imagination.

When Reagan came into office in 1981, the top marginal personal income tax rate was 70%. As he had pledged, the Economic Recovery Act of 1981 cut rates across the board, the top rate being cut from 70% to 50%. In his second term, the 1986 Reform Act cut the top rate from 50% to 28%. In both cases, the "rich" got the biggest cuts because the rates at the top end were so steep. Sadly, the 28% rate never fully phased in, a decision that cost Bush Sr. the White House (the Klinton campaign ran Bush's famous quote "Read my lips - no new taxes" again and again).

Obama has pledged the exact opposite of what Reagan did - an increase in taxes on the "rich", and a cut for the "middle class". His campaign rhetoric was an age-old regurgitated marxist tactic - promising to steal from the rich to buy votes from the peasants. The assertion that "Obama's tax message was right out of the Gipper's playbook" is one of the most outrageous, ignorant, and partisan lies I've ever heard.

BREAD & CIRCUS

After 8 years we are left with only the Circus ...... and the noisy but colorful clowns.

Al

On the various posts I have made addressing Obama's marxist ideology, none of the "local socialists" have said anything about his tight ties to ACORN and its agenda.
Why could this be?

JC

JC, one of the explanations put forth on ACORN's activities is that no ballot box stuffing proceeded or could have proceeded from their overzealous "paper drive". Voter info was falsified rather than lifted from the grave registry, discovered, and tossed out. But Chicago is a toddlin town and historically the bosses know how to raise the dead.

I haven't found any Marxists under my bed. European Marxism replaced technocracies and plutocracies with bureaucracies. We appear to want to keep our plutocrats and technocrats happy, warm and well-fed. Of course, regulation of banking practise will create bureaucrats; fortunately some white-collar unemployment can be relieved by moving the big and medium size dogs from private E to the Federal Reserve (just happened to Bear Stearns' former risk-management expert).

Anyway, all my life I've heard friends and not-so enveigh against the "welfare state". Had a buddy from Corpus Christi in grad school. Real shite-stompin, pickemup truck-drivin, blue sky don't fence me in, I got my own you get yours Republican. When we graduated in '73, the economy wasn't all that hot. He got a CETA (Comprehensive Employment Training Act) job as a historian with a county historical society. I got a job laying up fiberglass in a local boatyard. His daughter is my god-daughter and I still consider him a self-serving hypocrite and pretty much told him as much. With the exception of the GI Bill education allowance and a few bouts of unemployment insurance, I haven't leaned all that hard on our government for handouts. A lot of this crap about "card-carrying liberals" and "Marxist socialists is just crap. I'd as soon see my taxes pay to feed the poor as pay to shoot them.

jack

Nitro, you may impute any motive to me you like but you show no respect for your character or others by calling me a liar---one who says what he knows not to be true. Insults have no place on this board. You should be aware that McCain advocated a 4-per-cent tax cut for the rich and an 0.2-per-cent tax cut for the working poor, perceived as callous and gauche by many.

The Obama plan provided a tax cut of $567 for a family income of $19,000; the McCain plan $19. At $37,000 a year, a tax cut by Obama's plan of $1.024; McCain's $319. Only at $110,000 did the two plans converge. Moreover, Obama promised tax cuts for 90 per cent of all American families. Obama adapted Reagan and Kennedy policies for himself: nonpartisan, nonideological, smart politics.

What's untruthful of Obama's message having a Reagan resonance---of Reagan's tapping into middle class dissatisfaction---and the debate over before it began? As others pointed out here, given the average person's limited capacity to fret over the rich, McCain's drawing attention to Obama's proposed higher tax rates for wealthy Americans was an improbable strategy.