McCain: Example Seniors Shouldn't be allowed to run for pres.

Quote from Trendytrader:

"... I can only watch in "shock and awe" as a resident alien in the USA why there is such voter apathy.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html
More...

Unfortunately, it's a sign of how smart we are. We recognize our choice is between a Giant Douche and a Turd Sandwich, so what's the point... why bother?

The system is rigged to thwart any legitimate candidate, and the only way we'll ever change the system is a Second American Revolution.:mad:
 
Quote from scriabinop23:

Excellent. $400B+ of tax revenue decreases. Only $100B of spending cuts. And best yet, we stay in Iraq and spend $700B+/yr on Military. If this nut whack gets elected, Eurusd at 3.00 here we come.

(personally I think we need to increase infrastructure and energy spending, cut military spending to maintenance requirements, and just cut medicare and soc sec benefits to levels that guarantee solvency long term.. and do this with a balanced budget. Impossible? no.)



http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=a72L7_AJ5P9c&refer=home

McCain's $3.3 Trillion Tax Cut, Budget Pledge at Odds (Update3)

By Ryan J. Donmoyer and Indira Lakshmanan

April 18 (Bloomberg) -- John McCain's plan to cut taxes and balance the budget wins praise from fellow Republicans. Economists and nonpartisan analysts say his numbers don't add up.

McCain's proposal, outlined April 15, would extend President George W. Bush's tax cuts, reduce the top corporate rate, repeal the alternative minimum tax and double exemptions for dependents. Price: $3.3 trillion by the end of a President McCain's second term in 2017, according to figures from his campaign and the Treasury.

The Arizona senator said that would be offset by eliminating pork-barrel spending, freezing a portion of the budget, and saving from Medicare spending. He could cut the budget by $100 billion a year ``in a New York minute,'' he said in a Bloomberg Television interview yesterday.

Robert Bixby, executive director of the Washington-based Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan group that advocates budget restraint, said ``the huge imbalance'' in McCain's plan ``is that the tax cuts are specific and large and the spending cuts are small and vague.''

Once, McCain was a deficit hawk, Bixby said, but ``strange things happen when people run for president.''

Tax Cuts

Extending Bush's tax cuts would cost $1.5 trillion through the end of a hypothetical second McCain term, according to Treasury Department figures. His proposal to reduce the corporate tax rate to 25 percent would cost $100 billion a year, McCain's campaign estimates. Doubling the exemption for dependents to $7,000 a year would cost another $65 billion annually and the AMT repeal adds another $60 billion a year, his campaign said.

McCain released tax returns today that showed he paid $5,413 in AMT in 2007 and $6,979 in 2006.

McCain's spending cuts, combined with increased revenue from economic growth, total $1.5 trillion over eight years, leaving a $1.8 trillion net increase to the national debt.

``This is really a massive increase in the deficit,'' said Joel Slemrod, an economist specializing in tax policy at the University of Michigan.

Two Washington research groups said McCain's plan would cost more. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated his tax cuts would total $5 trillion over a two-term presidency. The Tax Policy Center, run jointly by the Brookings Institution and Urban Institute, said they would cost at least $5.7 trillion.

McCain senior economic adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin dismissed such estimates as ``fantasy-land budgeting.'' McCain's proposals, Holtz-Eakin said, would balance tax and spending cuts to meet his balanced-budget goals.

Romney's Reaction

``The numbers add up,'' former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said in an interview.

In an interview today on Bloomberg Television's ``Political Capital with Al Hunt,'' McCain said budget slashing is essential because ``we Republicans presided over the largest increase in the size of government since the Great Society,'' referring to a series of government entitlements, including Medicare, that were enacted in the 1960s.

To help pay for the tax cuts, Holtz-Eakin said he would save $30 billion a year by eliminating so-called ``rifle shot'' provisions. Those include items such as tax breaks for small insurance companies.

A Treasury Department report Holtz-Eakin cited as the source of his estimate states $27 billion could be raised by eliminating narrowly used tax preferences spread over a decade, not a single year.

The Discrepancy

When asked about the discrepancy, Holtz-Eakin replied that McCain would start with those provisions and target others like them to recover $30 billion annually.

Len Burman, director of the Tax Policy Center and a former Clinton administration Treasury official, said that is unrealistic. ``We looked for loopholes when I was there and couldn't even come up with $10 billion a year,'' he said.

McCain, 71, said he would offset the costs of lower corporate tax rates by freezing spending growth for a year on items unrelated to defense, veterans or entitlement programs like Medicare. So-called discretionary spending, which includes programs such as medical research and space exploration, makes up 18 percent of the budget. McCain said the freeze would save $15 billion.

There's a precedent. Former President Jimmy Carter attempted to implement ``zero-based budgeting'' that would have forced each agency to undergo an annual review and start from scratch. The idea ``didn't really work,'' Bixby said.

Tax Reduction

To balance the rest of the cost of the corporate tax reduction, McCain would eliminate spending on lawmakers' pet projects, known as earmarks, added in the last two years. That would save $35 billion. McCain also assumes $20 billion in additional tax revenue stemming from stronger growth.

The senator said he would also eliminate $65 billion worth of federal programs, including $2 billion in savings by charging affluent Americans more to participate in Medicare's prescription drug program.

McCain's campaign said a 10 percent tax credit for research for businesses and a provision that would allow companies to expense equipment purchases in the first year of use would come at no added expense.

Treasury Report

A Treasury Department report said those come with a cost. Extending a permanent research credit would cost the government about $13 billion a year, and a less generous form of his expensing provision would cost more than $34 billion annually, according to the report.

And McCain's AMT repeal estimate falls short of an analysis prepared last year by the nonpartisan congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, which put the cost of repeal at $100 billion a year. The AMT was created in 1969 to prevent 155 wealthy Americans from avoiding federal income tax and now ensnares about 4 million people.

McCain's plan doesn't address the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which now total more than $12 billion a month.

He also said he'd back a permanent overhaul of the estate tax that exempts the first $10 million from any tax and subjects the rest to a 15 percent rate. Such a policy would cause the government to forgo $278 billion during an 8-year presidency, according to the Tax Policy Center.

The estate tax is being temporarily phased out. It will impose a top rate of 45 percent on estates valued at more than $7 million a year for couples in 2009, will disappear in 2010, and return in 2011 with a top rate of 55 percent on estates valued at more than $1 million.

Ultimately, said Stan Collender, a former analyst for the House and Senate budget committees, it would take substantial cuts to Medicare and Social Security to balance the budget with the tax cuts McCain is proposing.

Even then, ``there's no way McCain could balance it by the time he leaves, unless he doesn't leave for 25 years,'' Collender said.

To contact the reporters on this story: Ryan J. Donmoyer in Washington at Indira Lakshmanan in Washington at ilakshmanan@bloomberg.net
More...

Two of our worst presidents in recent times were were Kennedy who was 42 and numbnuts Clinton who I believe was 46.

Clintons skills revolved around taking bribes and selling pardons.

One young President who did a great job was Teddy Roosevelt.

Generally, older Presidents make better presidents because of experience.



John
 
Quote from jficquette:

Two of our worst presidents in recent times were were Kennedy who was 42 and numbnuts Clinton who I believe was in his late 40's.

Older Presidents make better presidents because of experience.

John
More...

jfk and bill clinton were two of our worst presidents in recent times? What fucking planet are you from douche?
 
Quote from jficquette:

Take a guess cocksucker.
More...

Bush is the worst President the country has ever had, bar none, and by a long shot.

It amazes me how people even vote for Republicans. 100 years ago, the Republicans were a very small party, and only represented business interests. They still only represent business, but found idiots who love guns and religion would vote for them if they pretended to care about them, hence legitimacy.

Make no mistake, the Republicans want to turn this country into Mexico, with the top 1% extremely wealthy, and the rest of us peasants. Bush's attempt to privatize SS would have just been a huge Wall St money grab, leaving SS bankrupt, thus ending the program. That was the intent The rich are attempting to loot the treasury.
 
Quote from Triple X:

Bush is the worst President the country has ever had, bar none, and by a long shot.

It amazes me how people even vote for Republicans. 100 years ago, the Republicans were a very small party, and only represented business interests. They still only represent business, but found idiots who love guns and religion would vote for them if they pretended to care about them, hence legitimacy.

Make no mistake, the Republicans want to turn this country into Mexico, with the top 1% extremely wealthy, and the rest of us peasants. Bush's attempt to privatize SS would have just been a huge Wall St money grab, leaving SS bankrupt, thus ending the program. That was the intent The rich are attempting to loot the treasury.
More...

Bush is one our greatest presidents and historian 100 year from now with name him a such.

Kennedy was a drug addict, sex addict, inept at foreign policy and domestic policy. Had his brother appointed as Attorney General who got Hoover to spy on MLK.

Kennedy destroyed what little relations we had with the Soviets over the bay of pigs. Got us into Viet Nam. Picked a fool for a VP in LBJ who got us into Vietnam in a big way. Kennedy managed to get himself murdered by the Mafia. Quite a list of accomplisments for one so young.

Clinton was 46 and managed to get impeached and disbarred. Sold Pardons to people such as Marc Rich who was the arms dealer supplying the terrorists in the Middle East.

Clinton also took bribes from the Chinese for missile guidance technology in exchange for campaign donations and for his library. Clinton also took bribes from the Saudis for his Library in exchange for turning his back on Mid East Terrorism. Osama was a Saudi Prince. Odd that Clinton refused to apprehend him at the same time he was getting money from the Saudis.

Claiming Bush was worst then those two just shows how stupid you are.

John
 
Quote from BSAM:

(John McCain advisor to John)---

Come here John.....

Now look John.....You got Shiites and you got Sunnies.
Then there's the Al Qaeda group. You've got to keep all this straight.

Then there's Iraq and then there's Iran.

Now you need to say this over and over till you get it. You don't want to keep looking dumb before the voters.


McCain: (Scratching head with bewildered look on his face.) Uh, let me see.....Can you go over that one more time for me? Wait, I got an idea. I'll just carry Joe Lieberman with me everywhere I go.


This man is too damn old to be the President.
More...

I don't necessarily think he is too old but he is not smart enough. A young fool usually ages into an old fool. He has been in national politics for years and does not understand our economy, anyone else have a problem with that. The republicans are getting into a bad habit of electing low IQ presidents.
 
We do need a US president who can strong-arm congress into passing a balanced budget, or will simply refuse to sign an unbalanced one. If congress refuses to go along, I see nothing wrong with a goverment shut-down untill a true balanced budget is passed. After-all, a Goverment shut-down would inherently
produce a surplus! Sadly, I know this will never happen. The US
is headed for a monumental monetary disaster akin to national bankruptcy. The citizenry is to blame for this. I believe that this failure to live within our monetary means is emblematic of the decline of our educational standards in the US.
 
We need a President like Ron Paul. He has a freaking clue and doesn't lie.

Unfortunately if you don't lie and tell the people like it is, the vast majority will not vote for you because Americans don't like hearing the bad medicine that a fiscaly responsible president would have to give out.
 
he's a wacko nutjob!

he wanted to eliminate the CIA?

I don't care how nasty the CIA is, we need national security on that level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top