Obama: No more debates before May 6th

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Ramo

Btw, psychoanalytical??? How so? I spoke towards the mans lack of truthfulness and his politics of socialism not why he hates his daddy and mommy. Do you need some tutoring on English and phraseology as well?

The psychoanalysis is that you're turning the idea that Obama wants a more progressive tax distribution into some kind of hatred of the rich.

Really??? I had no idea I was intimating such motives on Obama. Here I thought I was implying he was a panderer doing such measures as a means to play to the populist sentiment. (which funny enough if DD is right he gets dead wrong just like Kansas.) Thanks again for clearly telling me what I was thinking. I had no idea I thought Obama capable of such hatred.

Utter nonsense. If you look at the transcript, it's pretty clear that he expects a capital gains tax increase that he'd pass to increase revenues. And specifically, that he'd time the tax increase to maximize revenue:
"It depends on what's happening on Wall Street and how business is going. I think the biggest problem that we've got on Wall Street right now is the fact that we got have a housing crisis that this president has not been attentive to and that it took John McCain three tries before he got it right.

And if we can stabilize that market, and we can get credit flowing again, then I think we'll see stocks do well. And once again, I think we can generate the revenue that we need to run this government and hopefully to pay down some of this debt. "
https://<br /> <br /> <a href="htt...271&page=3</a>

Ohh what fun we have with out of context quotes. That little tidbit came after his admission that revenue wasn't his consideration (as if to implicitly deflect the points Gibson made and facts supporting it to his overriding concern) moreover fairness was.

Later when pushed by Gibson he said he would wait until damage wouldn't be felt as badly. So yes timing is an issue but only to the extent that the economy can bear being hurt by an asinine measure. Kudos. :b

The real money quote:

GIBSON: All right. You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital gains tax. As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, "I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton," which was 28 percent. It's now 15 percent. That's almost a doubling, if you went to 28 percent.

But actually, Bill Clinton, in 1997, signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent.

OBAMA: Right.

GIBSON: And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent.

OBAMA: Right.

GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down.

So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?

OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.

[Ramo]

But he didn't say that. Since he talking about raising revenues to pay for social programs and to cut the deficit. Responding to the points about capital gains:

But what I also want to make sure is that [...] we are able to finance health care for Americans who currently don't have it and that we're able to invest in our infrastructure and invest in our schools.

And you can't do that for free.

And once again, I think we can generate the revenue that we need to run this government and hopefully to pay down some of this debt.

The fairness grounds he was referring to was about the progressivity of our tax code. Not leveling of wealth.

[Ramo]

You can choose to misinterpret what Obama said. And I would say that he inartfully expressed his point. But it's clear that he expects a capital gains tax to increase revenues.

[Ramo]

Really??? I had no idea I was intimating such motives on Obama. Here I thought I was implying he was a panderer doing such measures as a means to play to the populist sentiment. (which funny enough if DD is right he gets dead wrong just like Kansas.) Thanks again for clearly telling me what I was thinking. I had no idea I thought Obama capable of such hatred.

You didn't say that Obama simply wanted to "punish" the "fat cats"?

Ohh what fun we have with out of context quotes.

What was out of context? He was clearly talking about raising revenues when Gibson asked him about it capital gains. Again:

But what I also want to make sure is [...] that we are able to finance health care for Americans who currently don't have it and that we're able to invest in our infrastructure and invest in our schools.

And you can't do that for free.

What you're doing is using out of context quotes to misrepresent what he's saying.

[Ramo]

That little tidbit came after his admission that revenue wasn't his consideration

That is false. He was saying that capital gains would be taxed specifically due to making the tax code more progressive. He didn't explicitly talk about revenues in the first sentence, but he implicitly was talking about revenue increases in subsequent ones. When Gibson followed up on revenues, he said that it depends on the climate on Wall Street, and was again implicitly talking about revenue increases.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Ramo

Really??? I had no idea I was intimating such motives on Obama. Here I thought I was implying he was a panderer doing such measures as a means to play to the populist sentiment. (which funny enough if DD is right he gets dead wrong just like Kansas.) Thanks again for clearly telling me what I was thinking. I had no idea I thought Obama capable of such hatred.

You didn't say that Obama simply wanted to "punish" the "fat cats"?

Sure did that is a classic populist appeal, no?
Doesn't mean he hates anyone. His sycophantic audience probably does tho'.

[Ramo]

Sure did that is a classic populist appeal, no?
Doesn't mean he doesn't hate anyone. His sycophantic audience probably does tho'.

1. That's a distinction without a difference. My original point stands.
2. No, that's not a classic populist appeal ("hey, let's take all the money from the fat cats and burn it!").
3. No, that's not what Obama said.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Ramo

Ohh what fun we have with out of context quotes.

What was out of context? He was clearly talking about raising revenues when Gibson asked him about it capital gains. Again:

But what I also want to make sure is [...] that we are able to finance health care for Americans who currently don't have it and that we're able to invest in our infrastructure and invest in our schools.

And you can't do that for free.

What you're doing is using out of context quotes to misrepresent what he's saying.

Good lord you are reading defficient. The full quote.

Well, Charlie, what I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.

We saw an article today which showed that the top 50 hedge fund managers made $29 billion last year -- $29 billion for 50 individuals. And part of what has happened is that those who are able to work the stock market and amass huge fortunes on capital gains are paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries. That's not fair.

And what I want is not oppressive taxation. I want businesses to thrive, and I want people to be rewarded for their success. But what I also want to make sure is that our tax system is fair and that we are able to finance health care for Americans who currently don't have it and that we're able to invest in our infrastructure and invest in our schools.

And you can't do that for free.

All this section talks to is fairness of taxation. He goes onto to walk it back a bit by saying he doesn't wish to have oppressive taxation. Hence the business thrive people rewarded section. This entire portion has f*ck all to do with increasing revenue and everything to do with taxation fairness giving some examples of why taxation is needed in the first place.

[Ramo]

Good lord, you're functionally illiterate. I repeat:

Charlie Gibson asked Obama about revenues and fairness (that 100 million people, supposedly, would be affected).

In the first sentence, he was saying that capital gains would be taxed specifically due to making the tax code more progressive. He didn't explicitly talk at all about revenues in the first sentence, but he implicitly was talking about revenue increases in subsequent ones:

But what I also want to make sure is [...] that we are able to finance health care for Americans who currently don't have it and that we're able to invest in our infrastructure and invest in our schools.

And you can't do that for free.

When Gibson followed up on revenues, he said that it depends on the climate on Wall Street, and was again implicitly talking about revenue increases:

And once again, I think we can generate the revenue that we need to run this government and hopefully to pay down some of this debt.

[Ramo]

You have to deliberately misread Obama's words to come up with your absurd interpretation.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Ramo

Sure did that is a classic populist appeal, no?
Doesn't mean he doesn't hate anyone. His sycophantic audience probably does tho'.

1. That's a distinction without a difference. My original point stands.

A rather large difference. I think of Obama as I do most politicians, saying what is required to be elected. Do I hold him in contempt for having hateful motives? No moreso than any other politician who suck up to their electoral niche.

[Ramo]

No significant niche wants to take away the rich's wealth when no one else gains. You're attributing a ridiculous straw man to Obama.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Ramo
You have to deliberately misread Obama's words to come up with your absurd interpretation.

I am not the hack who continues to edit the quote as follows

But what I also want to make sure is [...] that we are able to finance health care for Americans who currently don't have it and that we're able to invest in our infrastructure and invest in our schools.

And you can't do that for free.

where [...] = that our tax system is fair and

in order to make the passage appear to be something it is not. The point he wanted make sure is the tax is fair as it was the first and fore most point, anything afterwards was simply afterthought or lessor in importance.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Ramo
No significant niche wants to take away the rich's wealth when no one else gains. You're attributing a ridiculous straw man to Obama.

Way to miss my hat tip to DD that Obama read the mood of the US population dead wrong.

[Ramo]

I am not the hack who continues to edit the quote as follows

where [...] = that our tax system is fair and

in order to make the passage appear to be something it is not.

Hack? You're an idiot. The passage is about revenues. Hence the "and." It is of course also about having a progressive tax distribution, and I snipped out that part to highlight the other point. This is really effin' simple.

Way to miss my hat tip to DD that Obama read the mood of the US population dead wrong.

You're confusing Obama's read on the population with your inability to read.