kelpdiver 2 #1 February 19, 2008 I'm surprised we don't have a thread on this, or maybe it's deep in that angry white men thread I ignored. I wonder if 1) people will buy into this after how it worked on 1988. Bush was a one term president- was renegging on this pledge a big part of the reason, or just a small one aside the recession in 1990 and his obviousness to the lower classes? 2) would he pledge to resign before imposing taxes? 3) would he claim that revenue enhancements aren't taxes? Are expiring Bush tax cuts included? What about neutral tradeoffs - AMT fix coordinated with additions elsewhere? For those who consider the deficit a weakness for our country, his refusal to even consider the tax side is an immature stance. Alternatively, since he wouldn't make the pledge last year, it's a sign that he'll say anything up until November. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #2 February 19, 2008 Can you link him actually saying that; prefer video if possible.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #3 February 19, 2008 I read it in the Chronicle as an AP article discussing a news show from Sunday. So it may be gettable in the direct form. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/02/17/politics/p115009S56.DTL&hw=mccain+taxes&sn=001&sc=1000 (02-17) 13:04 PST WASHINGTON, (AP) -- Republican John McCain says there will be no new taxes during his administration if he is elected president. "No new taxes," the likely GOP presidential nominee said during a taped interview broadcast Sunday. McCain told ABC's "This Week" that under no circumstances would he increase taxes, and added that he could "see an argument, if our economy continues to deteriorate, for lower interest rates, lower tax rates, and certainly decreasing corporate tax rates," as well as giving people the ability to write off depreciation and eliminating the alternative minimum tax. ..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dannydan 5 #4 February 19, 2008 QuoteI read it in the Chronicle as an AP article discussing a news show from Sunday. So it may be gettable in the direct form. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/02/17/politics/p115009S56.DTL&hw=mccain+taxes&sn=001&sc=1000 (02-17) 13:04 PST WASHINGTON, (AP) -- Republican John McCain says there will be no new taxes during his administration if he is elected president. "No new taxes," the likely GOP presidential nominee said during a taped interview broadcast Sunday. McCain told ABC's "This Week" that under no circumstances would he increase taxes, and added that he could "see an argument, if our economy continues to deteriorate, for lower interest rates, lower tax rates, and certainly decreasing corporate tax rates," as well as giving people the ability to write off depreciation and eliminating the alternative minimum tax. ..... WOW!!!!! I cant believe He (McCain) actually thinks/believes He can be POTUS and during 4years he should not have to raise taxes.... That is the kind of Tequila I want in my stock.....!! lol Thats drove the last nail in his campaign Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 235 #5 February 19, 2008 That was foolish of him. It'll be easy to run against him and tout that the last republican to say "No new taxes" renegged."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #6 February 19, 2008 QuoteCan you link him actually saying that; prefer video if possible. Ask and ye shall receive: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUK_QmxRsbY"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #7 February 20, 2008 QuoteThat was foolish of him. It'll be easy to run against him and tout that the last republican to say "No new taxes" renegged. The last Republican presidential candidate to say "Nation building - absolutely not" has spent the last 5 years on a very expensive nation building exercise in Iraq. Maybe the message is: whatever Republican presidential candidates promise, expect the exact opposite from them if elected.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SimonBones 1 #8 February 20, 2008 QuoteMaybe the message is: whatever Republican presidential candidates promise, expect the exact opposite from them if elected. I think people can argue the same thing about at least a few politicians from every political party in every country around the world. It's the nature of the business. Not just a Republican thing.108 way head down world record!!! http://www.simonbones.com Hit me up on Facebook Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dannydan 5 #9 February 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteMaybe the message is: whatever Republican presidential candidates promise, expect the exact opposite from them if elected. I think people can argue the same thing about at least a few politicians from every political party in every country around the world. It's the nature of the business. Not just a Republican thing. how VERY true.... not just a repuke thAng! There is common sense out here still!! TY... peace :dd Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #10 February 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteMaybe the message is: whatever Republican presidential candidates promise, expect the exact opposite from them if elected. I think people can argue the same thing about at least a few politicians from every political party in every country around the world. It's the nature of the business. Not just a Republican thing. Can you give a non GOP example of a candidate promising one thing and delivering the exact opposite?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #11 February 20, 2008 Quote Can you give a non GOP example of a candidate promising one thing and delivering the exact opposite? FDR 1940 comes to mind first - promising he would not send sons into a foreign war. His opponent charged we would be at war by April 1941, and he wasn't far off. This is the closest to No New Taxes I can think of. It's a bit harder doing non GOP when Clinton is the only one most of us can recall any campaigns for. You have to rely on second hand sources in an era where every newspaper article is available only on microfilm, not a computer with a google search engine. Carter probably promised coherent (and not just moral) leadership, and I bet LBJ made a lot of BS promises. Kennedy campaigned on a false bomber gap and amp'd up the Cold War at a juncture where it might have been reduced. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #12 February 20, 2008 Quote Quote Can you give a non GOP example of a candidate promising one thing and delivering the exact opposite? FDR 1940 comes to mind first - promising he would not send sons into a foreign war. His opponent charged we would be at war by April 1941, and he wasn't far off. This is the closest to No New Taxes I can think of. Yes, blame FDR for the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and Hitler's declaration of war on the USA. Bit of a stretch, don't you think? Quote It's a bit harder doing non GOP when Clinton is the only one most of us can recall any campaigns for. You have to rely on second hand sources in an era where every newspaper article is available only on microfilm, not a computer with a google search engine. Carter probably promised coherent (and not just moral) leadership, and I bet LBJ made a lot of BS promises. Kennedy campaigned on a false bomber gap and amp'd up the Cold War at a juncture where it might have been reduced. So - 68 years ago for a non GOP candidate about which you are certain, and that only after 2 other nations declared war on us in 1941. And 2 GOP presidents since 1988 who completely reversed their campaign promises. And let's not forget Bush's "Number one priority" in 2004. Haven't heard much about that recently.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #13 February 20, 2008 QuoteMaybe the message is: whatever Republican presidential candidates promise, expect the exact opposite from them if elected. Sorta like all those "first 100 hours" promises and that whole "most ethical Congress" bit, hmm?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #14 February 20, 2008 Quote Quote FDR 1940 comes to mind first - promising he would not send sons into a foreign war. His opponent charged we would be at war by April 1941, and he wasn't far off. This is the closest to No New Taxes I can think of. Yes, blame FDR for the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and Hitler's declaration of war on the USA. Bit of a stretch, don't you think? Not really. FDR wanted in the war, he cut off the oil supply to Japan, he knew some sort of attack was coming (likely a less successful one) and he allowed it to happen. Germany's subsequent declaration of war was a given and we were already supplying England against them. You're in a better position to speak on LBJ or Carter, but you're not known for admitting anything that goes against your argument. For those of us who only know Clinton as a Democratic President, the main lie we remember is 'I did not have sex with that lady.' Maybe in the next 4 years we can further test their honesty. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
