Obama Ads Portray Romney as Tax Evader

[okb2]

Knightmare wrote:

<quoted text>
Unfortunately they have caved to media attacks from progressive liberals including the President.
In other words it is both sides that have driven us to the brink of the debt problem and no jobs.
What we all need to do is clean house, senate and the white house voting all new people in. No one left of the old.

How about the world and the United States have changed since 1950 and if we are to survive perhaps we should recognize those changes and adapt accordingly?

It has to do less with Congress and more to do with what they are telling us to believe. It is us that has to change.

[okb2]

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
how can one house of congress reduce spending?

By not approving spending. BOTH the House AND the Senate have to approve spending for it to take place. If the House had only approved $2 Trillion instead of $3 Trillion then only $2 Trillion would have been spent.

It really is that simple.

[okb2]

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
on budget matters it only takes 51 votes, but since Reid even bring the bills up for debate they can't be voted on.

It only takes 51 if they go into reconciliation.

Understand, I am not saying the Dems are innocent on spending, but you are sure trying to make it look like the Republicans are innocent.

Why?

[McGruff]

Black Rhino wrote:

<quoted text>Yes it did.

You chose not to except it.

Most can read for comprehension, it appears your reading is not fundamental.

Give it another shot. Take notes. Show me where you are not clear on the information.

I read it. It didn't say it.

[McGruff]

Black Rhino wrote:

<quoted text>Your stats are tainted.

Americans were not better off under Bush. Supply side economics that Bush supported was a failure. His own father called supply side economics, a failure.

The fact you received a 300 dollar free tax return from Bush is your only barometer.

Pathetic.

they are not my states nitwit. They are stats from the Obammy adm. They are obammys statsx

[McGruff]

okb2 wrote:

<quoted text>By not approving spending. BOTH the House AND the Senate have to approve spending for it to take place. If the House had only approved $2 Trillion instead of $3 Trillion then only $2 Trillion would have been spent.

It really is that simple.

it really isn't that simple. You see obammy the economist hasn't had a budget. Much of the spending taking place today isn't even approved by congress.

[McGruff]

okb2 wrote:

<quoted text>It only takes 51 if they go into reconciliation.

Understand, I am not saying the Dems are innocent on spending, but you are sure trying to make it look like the Republicans are innocent.

Why?

they don't need reconciliation of its a budget matter. You can't fillibuster a budget matter .

[OregonSUX]

Joey Sanchez wrote:

<quoted text>
Many Americans are self loathing enough to prefer Obama to Romney. But, are the majority committed to failing our families??

SmutFaced Romney promises a return to Bush but on steroids.

Bush: losing 850,000 jobs A MONTH
Romney: promises to lose 1,000,000 jobs A MONTH

Bush: started 2 ineptly run wars for $3 TRILLION in deficits
Romney: promises to find a way to start a war with Russia and promises UNLIMITED money for the biggest military the world has ever seen.

Bush: ruinous and unpaid for tax cuts that resulted in NEGATIVE JOB GROWTH
Romney: promises zero or nearly zero taxes for millionaires, billionaires, investors and global corporations. Promises to pay for all but $5 TRILLION of this by eliminating Medicare and privatizing Social Security aka stealing it.

SmutFaced Wimp Romney has made oodles of promises that enrich HIMSELF. He has made oodles of promises that hurt AMERICANS. SmutFaced Wimp Romney is telling the truth even when he thinks he is hiding his true intentions: making YOUR money HIS.

[Billy Ringo]

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
it really isn't that simple. You see obammy the economist hasn't had a budget. Much of the spending taking place today isn't even approved by congress.

TS - Congress is never in session to do anything. They take more vacations than Shrub did.

[okb2]

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
it really isn't that simple. You see obammy the economist hasn't had a budget. Much of the spending taking place today isn't even approved by congress.

President Obama has had a budget each and every year. As is current practice he has submitted said budget to the House of Representatives to use as a starting point for their Constitutional responsibility to write a budget. Congress, thanks to the obstructionist Republicans has refused to pass a budget any year.

Every single dime spent today is approved by Congress. Either that or Darrell Issa has a lot of investigating and impeaching to do. The Constitution DEMANDS every dime spent be approved the House.

Are you sqaying the Republicans in the House are not doing their job? REALLY?

And yes, it really is that simple.

[okb2]

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
they don't need reconciliation of its a budget matter. You can't fillibuster a budget matter .

McGruff, you are embarrassing yourself so bad..........
On the initial vote of any Bill it is open to filibuster. Reconciliation is the process where the Senate changes the House budget submission, votes for cloture (end of debate needing 60 votes) and then votes to pass the Bill (51 votes required.)
It goes back to the House because the Senate changed the Bill and the House does something other than accept 100% of what the Senate did, but passes the bill again. Now it returns back to the Senate where only a vote of 51 is needed to pass it, no vote of cloture is required.
Only spending bills are subject to the second (or more votes) in the Senate without voting on Cloture. However, on the first vote, it has to pass a vote of Cloture.

[McGruff]

okb2 wrote:

<quoted text>President Obama has had a budget each and every year. As is current practice he has submitted said budget to the House of Representatives to use as a starting point for their Constitutional responsibility to write a budget. Congress, thanks to the obstructionist Republicans has refused to pass a budget any year.

Every single dime spent today is approved by Congress. Either that or Darrell Issa has a lot of investigating and impeaching to do. The Constitution DEMANDS every dime spent be approved the House.

Are you sqaying the Republicans in the House are not doing their job? REALLY?

And yes, it really is that simple.

nope. Obammys budget has failed to even get a single vote.

Why didn't the house pass a budget when Pelosi was in charge? Funny how that is republicans fault.

Thank God that Isa is looking out for us by indicting the powerful who break laws and then cover it up. It's his job.

No not every single dome is approved by congress. Obammy has been ruling by decree. This president doesn't know much about the constitution. He seldom obeys it.

[okb2]

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
nope. Obammys budget has failed to even get a single vote.
Why didn't the house pass a budget when Pelosi was in charge? Funny how that is republicans fault.
Thank God that Isa is looking out for us by indicting the powerful who break laws and then cover it up. It's his job.
No not every single dome is approved by congress. Obammy has been ruling by decree. This president doesn't know much about the constitution. He seldom obeys it.

Why should President Obama's budget get a single vote. Constitutionally the House is charged with writing the budget, are you saying the President should do their job for them?

Who has Issa indicted? More BS from you showing you know nothing.

You got two choices here, you can either agree that Congress has to approve every dime of spending OR you can agree that the Republican House is not doing their job of impeaching the President for spending money not approved by Congress.

Which is it?

[Black Rhino]

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>I read it. It didn't say it.

With all those facts, you don't see why companies moved headquarters overseas under the Bush tax cuts???

Is that what you're telling me?

[McGruff]

okb2 wrote:

<quoted text>Why should President Obama's budget get a single vote. Constitutionally the House is charged with writing the budget, are you saying the President should do their job for them?

Who has Issa indicted? More BS from you showing you know nothing.

You got two choices here, you can either agree that Congress has to approve every dime of spending OR you can agree that the Republican House is not doing their job of impeaching the President for spending money not approved by Congress.

Which is it?

why shouldn't it get a vote. It was brought up before the house. Why didn't any liberals vote for it? Not a one.

No one yet. Holder maybe. Maybe obammy himself. If we are lucky.

Obammy spends lots of money without the approval of congress. Just like he dropped bombs on Libya, refuses to uphold immigration laws and many other things he should be impeached for.

[McGruff]

Black Rhino wrote:

<quoted text>With all those facts, you don't see why companies moved headquarters overseas under the Bush tax cuts???

Is that what you're telling me?

you didn't give any facts nitwit. And the article wasn't even about that nitwit.

[Black Rhino]

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>you didn't give any facts nitwit. And the article wasn't even about that nitwit.

Then you can't read.

Thanks.

[okb2]

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
why shouldn't it get a vote. It was brought up before the house. Why didn't any liberals vote for it? Not a one.
No one yet. Holder maybe. Maybe obammy himself. If we are lucky.
Obammy spends lots of money without the approval of congress. Just like he dropped bombs on Libya, refuses to uphold immigration laws and many other things he should be impeached for.

I think you are trying to draw attention from the Fact that it is the House responsible for the budget and how many did you say had been passed?

But that meets your standard doesn't it? Don't point out real problems because that might involve Republicans, just throw rocks at the Dems and throw as many as possible. Whether or not they should be thrown in the first place.

Says a lot about you, doesn't it

[McGruff]

okb2 wrote:

<quoted text>I think you are trying to draw attention from the Fact that it is the House responsible for the budget and how many did you say had been passed?

But that meets your standard doesn't it? Don't point out real problems because that might involve Republicans, just throw rocks at the Dems and throw as many as possible. Whether or not they should be thrown in the first place.

Says a lot about you, doesn't it

the house has passed budgets. The senate hasn't taken them up. You know the house has passed budgets. Well they have since republicans have been inn charge but they didn't when Pelosi was speaker.

So you lie. Now what does that say about you?

[OregonSUX]

The Republiscum House does NOTHING most of the time. Oh, that's right, they spent $51 MILLION of taxpayer money lollygagging with 31 votes against ObamaneyCare when they were 100% sure those votes meant absolutely nothing.

Republiscum, acting like the little children they are throwing tantrums and crying that Daddy will not let them **** the USA again.