logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!
> Republican Pledge to America, Pros and Cons Debate
AuthorMusician
post Sep 24 2010, 02:44 PM
Post #1


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,346
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



The Republican Party has come out with this:

The Pledge to America

It's a simple debate question:

What are the Pros and Cons regarding this Pledge to America?

And just for grins:

What is your personal take on the Pledge to America from any of these viewpoints -- or others you deem fit; these are simply suggestions: political strategy, originality, rhetorical effectiveness, historical connections, logical flow, sincerity?

This post has been edited by AuthorMusician: Sep 24 2010, 02:48 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
5 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 >  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 59)
Raptavio
post Sep 27 2010, 03:13 PM
Post #41


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,515
Member No.: 10,458
Joined: April-27-09

From: Rosemount, MN
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Amlord @ Sep 27 2010, 09:58 AM) *
So you don't believe the "we lost our way" line of thinking? You've seen nothing to indicate that the Republicans want to do something different than they did during the Bush administration? Have you heard of this thing called the Tea Party?

Many Republicans have apologized for what happened during the Bush years. They've acknowledged that they made mistakes. How can you sit there and say "they are not talking like it"? That is all they are doing.


Simple question, Amlord.

What is in the Pledge that is significantly different from what the GOP has promised or done during their last chance at the reins of power?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
akaCG
post Sep 27 2010, 03:43 PM
Post #42


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
August 2012

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,846
Member No.: 10,787
Joined: November-25-09

Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



Two somewhat different takes:
QUOTE
...
I didn't write the "Contract With America." I didn't even name it. But I was the pollster who "messaged" it, testing how voters responded to the language. And I have always been proud of how that document contributed to the Republican landslide in 1994 and how it served as an organizing plan for congressional Republicans in 1995.

This past Thursday, House Republicans unveiled their own "Pledge to America," which, according to GOP House Whip Eric Cantor, is meant to "change the culture of Washington, returning power, control and money back to the people where it belongs." I wasn't involved with this document, but I have moderated almost 50 instant-response focus groups with thousands of voters this year, and I do have a good idea of what they really want.

So, how does the Pledge stack up against the Contract -- and might it lead to similar success? Let's break them down, point by point.
...

Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0092402436.html

QUOTE
...
On Sept. 27, 1994, 367 Republican House members and candidates stood on the steps of the Capitol and endorsed what they called the Contract With America. On Sept. 23 last week, 12 Republican House members stood in a hardware store in Sterling, Va., and issued a Pledge to America.

The interesting thing is that this year's Pledge to America concentrates more on substantive issues of governance than the Contract With America did 16 years ago.
...

Link: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/...ing_107312.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Amlord
post Sep 27 2010, 03:49 PM
Post #43


Group Icon

**********
The Roaring Lion

Sponsor

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,884
Member No.: 572
Joined: March-4-03

From: Cleveland suburbs, OH
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



QUOTE(Raptavio @ Sep 27 2010, 11:13 AM) *
What is in the Pledge that is significantly different from what the GOP has promised or done during their last chance at the reins of power?



Page 6:

QUOTE
we will roll back government spending to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels, saving us at least $100 billion in the first year alone and putting us on a path to balance the budget and pay down the debt.


The Republicans were largely on board for the stimulus and bailouts. This is reiterated on page 21.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raptavio
post Sep 27 2010, 03:53 PM
Post #44


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,515
Member No.: 10,458
Joined: April-27-09

From: Rosemount, MN
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Amlord @ Sep 27 2010, 10:49 AM) *
QUOTE(Raptavio @ Sep 27 2010, 11:13 AM) *
What is in the Pledge that is significantly different from what the GOP has promised or done during their last chance at the reins of power?



Page 6:

QUOTE
we will roll back government spending to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels, saving us at least $100 billion in the first year alone and putting us on a path to balance the budget and pay down the debt.


The Republicans were largely on board for the stimulus and bailouts. This is reiterated on page 21.


No, they were not on board for the stimulus. The stimulus passed with almost no Republican support. The bailouts, yes.

And they have not specified what they will cut to roll back spending, have they.

Try again.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dontreadonme
post Sep 27 2010, 04:06 PM
Post #45


Group Icon

**********
I think, therefore I am an enemy of the State....and Fox News

Sponsor
October 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,452
Member No.: 359
Joined: December-25-02

From: Nestled in the Shenandoah
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Libertarian



QUOTE(Amlord @ Sep 27 2010, 10:58 AM) *
It is interesting to note that you're an avid reader of Salon.com. ermm.gif ermm.gif


Yep, what of it? I get news and commentary from a wide array of sources, unlike most it seems, who get them from sources who merely echo their worldview and preconceived notions.

QUOTE
So you don't believe the "we lost our way" line of thinking? You've seen nothing to indicate that the Republicans want to do something different than they did during the Bush administration? Have you heard of this thing called the Tea Party?


Oh, the GOP has most certainly lost it's way. And the tea party doesn't really consist of much more than anti-Obama Republicans, as evidenced by their statements and platform. Republicans may want to alter the current paradigm of politics in Washington.....but I'm not buying it until I see proof. I've given the GOP enough support in the past, and been lied to, that I won't easily fall into that trap again.

Even the tea party doesn't seem too enamored with the pledge:

QUOTE
Among some tea partiers, there was disappointment that the Republicans' recently released agenda doesn’t go far enough. There also were expressions of outright disgust at what some saw as a transparent ploy to quell tea partiers’ anger with the Republican establishment just long enough to get their votes Nov. 2.

“It’s a mealy-mouthed sop to the tea party movement that is rife with platitudes and little on substance,” e-mailed Andrew Ian Dodge, the Maine state coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots national coalition of local groups. “I have yet to see one person who is wholly impressed with it.”

Judson Phillips, founder of the tea party Nation online social network, called it “a nice PR piece, but I don't think it is even showing up on our radar.” Most tea partiers, he said, “are skeptical.”

Politico

QUOTE
Many Republicans have apologized for what happened during the Bush years. They've acknowledged that they made mistakes. How can you sit there and say "they are not talking like it"? That is all they are doing.


Your concept of apologizing and acknowledging must be vastly different than mine. When I see them back in power and checking against the expanded powers of a unitary executive [and not just a POTUS of the opposition], I'll grant them some amount of rehabilitation.

This post has been edited by Dontreadonme: Sep 27 2010, 04:09 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gray Seal
post Sep 27 2010, 04:29 PM
Post #46


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 2,404
Member No.: 335
Joined: December-12-02

From: Edwardsville, IL
Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE
we will roll back government spending to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels, saving us at least $100 billion in the first year alone and putting us on a path to balance the budget and pay down the debt.

The above is a good example of tepid language to deal with a gigantic problem. "..100 billion.." is trivia. "..pre-stimulus levels, pre-bailouts levels.." sure sounds like they have no clue about the excesses during the Bush years. "..a path to balance the budget.." is just meaningless jargon to sum up tepid steps and nonrecognition of the Republicans huge mistakes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raptavio
post Sep 27 2010, 09:46 PM
Post #47


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,515
Member No.: 10,458
Joined: April-27-09

From: Rosemount, MN
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



FactCheck.org has come out with its analysis of the Pledge, and -- surprise! -- it's packed with some real whoppers:

QUOTE
It declares that “the only parts of the economy expanding are government and our national debt.” Not true. So far this year government employment has declined slightly, while private sector employment has increased by 763,000 jobs.
It says that “jobless claims continue to soar,” when in fact they are down eight percent from their worst levels.
It repeats a bogus assertion that the Internal Revenue Service may need to expand by 16,500 positions, an inflated estimate based on false assumptions and guesswork.
It claims the stimulus bill is costing $1 trillion, considerably more than the $814 billion, 10-year price tag currently estimated by nonpartisan congressional budget experts.
It says Obama’s tax proposals would raise taxes on “roughly half the small business income in America,” an exaggeration. Much of the income the GOP is counting actually comes from big businesses making over $50 million a year.


Of course the "liberal" media is far too lazy to do this kind of due diligence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Maybe Maybe Not
post Sep 27 2010, 10:55 PM
Post #48


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 4,392
Member No.: 10,303
Joined: January-17-09

From: Michigan, U.S.A.
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(Amlord @ Sep 27 2010, 10:58 AM) *
Many Republicans have apologized for what happened during the Bush years. They've acknowledged that they made mistakes. How can you sit there and say "they are not talking like it"? That is all they are doing.
Yep. As I noted:
QUOTE(Maybe Maybe Not @ Sep 25 2010, 06:41 AM) *
Both the "Plan to Reform Congress and Restore Trust" and the "Checks and Balances" sections could be replaced easily by a single statement: "We promise not to do that stuff anymore."
The "not talking like it" accusation refers (at least in my mind) not to the specifics of the pledge, but to the inherent hypocrisy. Basically, Obama and the Democrats are being blamed by the Republicans for continuing Republican policies.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Sep 29 2010, 07:30 PM
Post #49


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,415
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Raptavio @ Sep 27 2010, 05:46 PM) *
FactCheck.org has come out with its analysis of the Pledge, and -- surprise! -- it's packed with some real whoppers:

QUOTE
It declares that “the only parts of the economy expanding are government and our national debt.” Not true. So far this year government employment has declined slightly, while private sector employment has increased by 763,000 jobs.
.


Of course the "liberal" media is far too lazy to do this kind of due diligence.

Ya. And the key line in this "view" is – “so far this year”.

Lets look at some history since the start of the recession - here:


Classic for Dems. Private sector cuts back while we load up on bureaucrats …

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2...nment-employees

This post has been edited by Ted: Sep 29 2010, 07:43 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Maybe Maybe Not
post Sep 30 2010, 10:37 AM
Post #50


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 4,392
Member No.: 10,303
Joined: January-17-09

From: Michigan, U.S.A.
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(Ted @ Sep 29 2010, 03:30 PM) *
Classic for Dems. Private sector cuts back while we load up on bureaucrats …

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2...nment-employees
From the article you cite:

If you look at the actual numbers instead of just percentages, you will see that government at all levels added a net 64,000 jobs since the beginning of the recession, while the private sector lost 7,837,000 jobs. I wouldn't call adding to government 0.82% of the private employment losses exactly "loading up."

In a recession it's hardly remarkable to see that government employment has remained fairly steady (with federal government employment increasing, and state and local government employment decreasing) while private employment has suffered tremendously.

And tying the employment trends that followed the recession to the Democrats who got elected in part because of that recession is, to say the least, questionable.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
akaCG
post Sep 30 2010, 12:06 PM
Post #51


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
August 2012

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,846
Member No.: 10,787
Joined: November-25-09

Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Maybe Maybe Not @ Sep 30 2010, 06:37 AM) *
...
If you look at the actual numbers instead of just percentages, you will see that government at all levels added a net 64,000 jobs since the beginning of the recession, while the private sector lost 7,837,000 jobs. I wouldn't call adding to government 0.82% of the private employment losses exactly "loading up."
...

Federal: up 200,000.
State: down 6,000.
Local: down 128,000
Private sector: -8,000,000

The further you are from the corridors of federal power, the more screwed you are. It's good to be the king. Bad times, like paying taxes, are just for the little people.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Sep 30 2010, 01:24 PM
Post #52


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,415
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE
MMN
In a recession it's hardly remarkable to see that government employment has remained fairly steady (with federal government employment increasing, and state and local government employment decreasing) while private employment has suffered tremendously.


Well this tells me how you think. Why is it than in a recession only the private sector takes the hit while the government actually increases. And pleeeeeeese don’t tell me they are all teachers, police and firemen.

And clearly the states (where balanced budgets are most often required) would have seen a much bigger drop in their employment if not for the government sending them 10s of billions to save their bureaucrats.

And this is part of the reason this recovery is so weak. Lots of money went to save Union and state/federal workers and not enough to small business.

This post has been edited by Ted: Sep 30 2010, 01:25 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BoF
post Sep 30 2010, 07:13 PM
Post #53


**********
Giga-bite: "I catch mice & rats - 2 & 4 legs."

Sponsor
October 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,126
Member No.: 3,423
Joined: August-14-04

From: Texas
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



What is your personal take on the Pledge to America from any of these viewpoints -- or others you deem fit; these are simply suggestions: political strategy, originality, rhetorical effectiveness, historical connections, logical flow, sincerity

Albert Einstein got it right.

QUOTE
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.
http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/254.html

Yet, Republicans like Sarah “Tweetie Pie” Palin constantly talk about “common sense conservative values,” as if, common sense exists and it is the exclusive property of conservatives.
http://syrin.vox.com/library/post/you-know...ml?_c=feed-atom

The authors of “The Pledge” picked up on this and used this meaningless phrase five times – once on page 8, and twice on pages 23 and 29.

“The Pledge” is best described as a snow job.

This post has been edited by BoF: Sep 30 2010, 07:21 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
akaCG
post Sep 30 2010, 07:41 PM
Post #54


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
August 2012

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,846
Member No.: 10,787
Joined: November-25-09

Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



“One pound of learning requires ten pounds of common sense to apply it.”
--- Persian proverb

“The best prophet is common sense, our native wit.”
--- Euripides

“Common Sense is that which judges the things given to it by other senses.”
--- Leonardo da Vinci

“I can never fear that things will go far wrong where common sense has fair play.”
--- Thomas Jefferson

"Common sense is as rare as genius, - is the basis of genius”
--- Ralph Waldo Emerson

“It is a thousand times better to have common sense without education than to have education without common sense.”
--- Robert Green Ingersoll

“The three great essentials to achieve anything worth while are, first, hard work; second, stick-to-itiveness; third, common sense.”
--- Thomas Edison

“Everybody gets so much information all day long that they lose their common sense.”
--- Gertrude Stein

“I do not believe that any political campaign justifies the declaration of a moratorium on ordinary common sense.”
--- Dwight Eisenhower

And, last but not least:

“Do not be bullied out of your common sense by the specialist; two to one, he is a pedant”
--- Oliver Wendell Holmes
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BoF
post Sep 30 2010, 08:06 PM
Post #55


**********
Giga-bite: "I catch mice & rats - 2 & 4 legs."

Sponsor
October 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,126
Member No.: 3,423
Joined: August-14-04

From: Texas
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(akaCG @ Sep 30 2010, 02:41 PM) *
“One pound of learning requires ten pounds of common sense to apply it.”
--- Persian proverb

“The best prophet is common sense, our native wit.”
--- Euripides

“Common Sense is that which judges the things given to it by other senses.”
--- Leonardo da Vinci

“I can never fear that things will go far wrong where common sense has fair play.”
--- Thomas Jefferson

"Common sense is as rare as genius, - is the basis of genius”
--- Ralph Waldo Emerson

“It is a thousand times better to have common sense without education than to have education without common sense.”
--- Robert Green Ingersoll

“The three great essentials to achieve anything worth while are, first, hard work; second, stick-to-itiveness; third, common sense.”
--- Thomas Edison

“Everybody gets so much information all day long that they lose their common sense.”
--- Gertrude Stein

“I do not believe that any political campaign justifies the declaration of a moratorium on ordinary common sense.”
--- Dwight Eisenhower

And, last but not least:

“Do not be bullied out of your common sense by the specialist; two to one, he is a pedant”
--- Oliver Wendell Holmes

Ah, no commentary; no links. down.gif

I am surprised akaCG, that someone who seemingly fancies himself such an intellect, would defend a nebulous and vacuous phrase like “common sense.”

We can keep throwing up quotations as long as you like. The highlighted portions of the H. L. Mencken's line seems to describe "The Pledge.”

QUOTE
All professional philosophers tend to assume that common sense means the mental habit of the common man. Nothing could be further from the mark. The common man is chiefly to be distinguished by his plentiful lack of common sense: he believes things on evidence that is too scanty, or that distorts the plain facts, or that is full of non sequiturs. Common sense really involves making full use of all the demonstrable evidence—and of nothing but the demonstrable evidence.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/mencken.htm

This post has been edited by BoF: Sep 30 2010, 08:17 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
akaCG
post Sep 30 2010, 11:36 PM
Post #56


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
August 2012

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,846
Member No.: 10,787
Joined: November-25-09

Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(BoF @ Sep 30 2010, 04:06 PM) *
QUOTE(akaCG @ Sep 30 2010, 02:41 PM) *
“One pound of learning requires ten pounds of common sense to apply it.”
--- Persian proverb

“The best prophet is common sense, our native wit.”
--- Euripides

“Common Sense is that which judges the things given to it by other senses.”
--- Leonardo da Vinci

“I can never fear that things will go far wrong where common sense has fair play.”
--- Thomas Jefferson

"Common sense is as rare as genius, - is the basis of genius”
--- Ralph Waldo Emerson

“It is a thousand times better to have common sense without education than to have education without common sense.”
--- Robert Green Ingersoll

“The three great essentials to achieve anything worth while are, first, hard work; second, stick-to-itiveness; third, common sense.”
--- Thomas Edison

“Everybody gets so much information all day long that they lose their common sense.”
--- Gertrude Stein

“I do not believe that any political campaign justifies the declaration of a moratorium on ordinary common sense.”
--- Dwight Eisenhower

And, last but not least:

“Do not be bullied out of your common sense by the specialist; two to one, he is a pedant”
--- Oliver Wendell Holmes

Ah, no commentary; ...

Oh, but there is. The last 3 lines of my post ARE the commentary part:
QUOTE
...
And, last but not least:

“Do not be bullied out of your common sense by the specialist; two to one, he is a pedant”
--- Oliver Wendell Holmes

I'm surprised that a boffin such as yourself didn't catch that.

QUOTE(BoF @ Sep 30 2010, 04:06 PM) *
...
... no links. down.gif

Oops. You're right. Here you go:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=quotes+about+...sk=&sc=1-25
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BoF
post Oct 1 2010, 12:37 AM
Post #57


**********
Giga-bite: "I catch mice & rats - 2 & 4 legs."

Sponsor
October 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,126
Member No.: 3,423
Joined: August-14-04

From: Texas
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(akaCG @ Sep 30 2010, 06:36 PM) *
“Do not be bullied out of your common sense by the specialist; two to one, he is a pedant”
--- Oliver Wendell Holmes

I'm surprised that a boffin such as yourself didn't catch that.

There is a difference between not catching and ignoring.

QUOTE
II. Personal attacks, name-calling, or belittling another member. This includes telling other members to shut up or be quiet, as well as telling other members they are not qualified to post their opinions.

http://americasdebate.com/?page=rules

Despite the rule about name calling, you can’t seem to call me BoF.

I addressed you as akaCG. I expect the same courtesy from you, though I'm beginning to think you are incapable of such.

On the other hand, I'm sure you made this silly little pun in the most positive way.

QUOTE
The word 'boffin' (or 'boff'—often as an insult[1]) can also be used to refer to any particularly clever person. The closest American equivalent is "egghead".[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boffin

This post has been edited by BoF: Oct 1 2010, 03:27 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Maybe Maybe Not
post Oct 1 2010, 01:38 AM
Post #58


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 4,392
Member No.: 10,303
Joined: January-17-09

From: Michigan, U.S.A.
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(akaCG @ Sep 30 2010, 08:06 AM) *
Bad times, like paying taxes, are just for the little people.
As we evaluate the Republican's Pledge, it's good to look at how the paying of taxes has differed under Republican and Democratic administrations.

Any chance of getting a breakdown on how many of the people who owe back taxes are Republican appointees vs. Democratic appointees? Any chance of getting some stats from you regarding the size of the departments these tax cheats work in differed from one administration to the next?



QUOTE(Ted @ Sep 30 2010, 09:24 AM) *
Why is it than in a recession only the private sector takes the hit while the government actually increases.
It's because the government provides things society has determined (at least through their elected representatives) are necessary, and are not consistently provided otherwise.

The private sector provides things that people decide are either worth it or not worth it depending on how much money they have. When people have less money, the government still provides the "necessary" things, and the private sector suffers because they are providing things society has not determined should be provided by government.

You can argue that society has made the wrong choices in this regard, and you may even be correct in your assessment. But the explanation for government's relative immunity from economic ebbs and flows is no great mystery.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
akaCG
post Oct 1 2010, 02:45 AM
Post #59


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
August 2012

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,846
Member No.: 10,787
Joined: November-25-09

Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Maybe Maybe Not @ Sep 30 2010, 09:38 PM) *
QUOTE(akaCG @ Sep 30 2010, 08:06 AM) *
Bad times, like paying taxes, are just for the little people.
As we evaluate the Republican's Pledge, it's good to look at how the paying of taxes has differed under Republican and Democratic administrations.

Any chance of getting a breakdown on how many of the people who owe back taxes are Republican appointees vs. Democratic appointees? ...
...

1. I'm pretty sure that the 41 Obama White House aides who owe $831,000 in back taxes are not Republican appointees.

2. I'm also pretty sure that I couldn't possibly manage to provide more information about the other tax scofflaw people/groups than the IRS does:
QUOTE
...
The IRS information does not identify delinquent taxpayers by name, party affiliation or job title and does not indicate whether members of Congress are among the scofflaws. ...
...

Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...src=nl_polalert

QUOTE(Maybe Maybe Not @ Sep 30 2010, 09:38 PM) *
...
Any chance of getting some stats from you regarding the size of the departments these tax cheats work in differed from one administration to the next?
...

I don't understand what the above means, and therefore what it means to address.

This post has been edited by akaCG: Oct 1 2010, 03:01 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hobbes
post Oct 1 2010, 04:49 AM
Post #60


Group Icon

**********
No More Mr. Nice Guy!

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 5,311
Member No.: 1,155
Joined: September-8-03

From: Dallas, TX
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



What are the Pros and Cons regarding this Pledge to America?

USA Today had a good article reviewing the provisions. Essentially, while there are some things that might actually come of it, the Pledge is primarily a political ploy.


What is your personal take on the Pledge to America from any of these viewpoints -- or others you deem fit; these are simply suggestions: political strategy, originality, rhetorical effectiveness, historical connections, logical flow, sincerity?

1) Political Strategy: I think it is good political strategy. It seems to focus on the hot button issues of the day, and while it won't do that much to address them, it will create good talking points and sound bites...which is about all that is necessary today (strange how the more information we have available, the less we seem to avail ourselves of any of it).

2) Originality: Pledge to America. Contract for America. Nope, no points for originality.

3) Historical Connections: See above. At least they paid attention to history. Say what you want about it, the Contract certainly help propel the Republicans to large gains that year. Clearly, they're hoping the Pledge will do the same.

4) Rhetorical effectiveness: I think it will do ok. Not great, not terrible.

5). Sincerity: I firmly believe that the Republicans sincerely want to gain as many seats in Congress as they can, and will do mostly whatever it takes to get them. Oh, you mean the sincerity of the pledge itself? On health care, probably, although they won't repeal it, just modify or refuse to fund certain portions. On requiring a Constitutional test prior to bringing forward legislation? Most of the rest is more politically geared than sincere beliefs they would die before giving up.

6). Logical flow: I think they went through most of the hot button issue of the day pretty clearly, and did spell out their 'stance' in an effective manner, politically. Past that...what? You expect logical flow from politicians? Come on!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: June 23rd, 2018 - 07:52 PM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.