Why don't our leaders say THIS:

[Ken Burch]

"If those tax cuts for the rich are so freaking crucial, shouldn't they have kept us OUT of recession?"

[RandomThoughts]

1. We are reaching a point where some of the arguments are ignored

And replaced with spin to keep people from seeing what is going on.


Instead of why don't they say, thinking that they don't know what to say, look at it as why they don't say, because they have a different motive.


Once an issue is stated, and it is not countered or argued against, then when it is ignored it is no longer lack of information, but a difference of intent.


At that point education steps out, and the other side steps in to correct the problem. Once they know, and still choose to not correct, then education has been done, and responsibility it assigned.


That was the meaning of this clip.
3 Doors Down - Kryptonite Note the lyrics,

"I don't mind what happens now and then, as long as you will be my friend in the end"
It is a shift in method. Although not what I do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lg8gEIBs5CU

And the libertarian Microsoft bunch are assembly line Deltas :)

Get use to it. :)



And Skeletons can't swim.

And a few other hundred comments.

[Booster]

2. Because most of them, if not all of them, fall into the

category of the filthy rich.

[Exilednight]

3. The party at large can not put together a cohesive message ...........

As you look across the country, the one thing you will notice is that rethugs are generally on the same page when it comes to their talking points: less taxes, less spending, blah blah blah. We all know the repug mantra by heart.

On the other hand, Democrats are busy running 100+ different campaigns just for the House. I heard one ad on NPR today where a Democrat (her name escapes me) was touting her vote against the PO.

How do you run a national ad campaign when so many Dems are trying to distance themselves from the presidents agenda?

[HillbillyBob]

6. Programming.

How do you suppose they do that?

[Exilednight]

8. You have to find two or three topics that every Democrat in the senate ..........

agrees on, and one that the mass majority of Democrats in the HoR, also, agree.

Everyone is focusing on the rich, but Democrats need to change that. One conservative economist; Stephen Moore, Dick Armey's go to economic guy; actually argued for raising taxes on the poor and keep the cuts for the rich. The GOP is quick to link themselves with conservative tea-party economists who argue for trickle down economics, this would put them on their heals and make them begin to backpedal pretty quick.

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/08/moore-taxes/

Next, I would find a video clip of Warren Buffet saying that we need to raise taxes on the top 1%.

Finally, I would challenge rethugs to find video of sitting CEOs of large corporations saying that they would increase salaries and higher more people if they only had bigger tax-cuts for the wealthy. They'd be hard pressed to find such video from sitting CEOs.

The other ad that could be run is an overlay of working class Americans stating how salaries have gone flat since the Bush tax cuts were imposed while blending in the salaries of their CEOs from the time of the Bush tax cuts were first passed and what they are making today.

[Exilednight]

9. I attempted to edit, but time had expire. So, here is what I wanted to fix ...........

"where a Democrat (her name escapes me)"

It was Blanche Lincoln. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129693170

[ProSense]

4. How would that work

in trying to extend the middle class tax cuts?

I think the message I've heard (often) that the Bush tax cut for the rich aren't stimulative and added to the deficit is a good counter to the Repubs' talking points.

[dkf]

5. That doesn't work as a comparison.

Think of your own situation...what would happen if you got a paycut? What would happen if you got a pay increase? Were those two actions exactly opposite? Or were you more adversely affected by the cut than assisted by the increase?

[ProSense]

7. The message has been

constant and clear:

In his press briefing this afternoon, Gibbs responded to Orszag's comments, emphasizing that while the White House is committed to extending tax cuts for middle and low-income Americans, it stands firm in its belief that maintaining similar breaks for the nation's highest earners is fiscally unsustainable.

"Our viewpoint on this is that we should and must pass legislation that extends the tax cuts for middle-class families," he said. "But we cannot afford, in this environment to -- in our budgetary and fiscal environment to extend the tax cuts for those that make more than $250,000 a year."

"I don't think the president believes that we are a $100,000 tax cut from a millionaire away from an economy that works for families that are making $40,000 a year," Gibbs said.

link