myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
common sense prevails
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2704

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You've done it again!! Six years...........I repeat, six years of complete control of the House and Senate by Democrats. Nearly three years of control of the White House.........and you want to point the finger of blame at Republicans who have controlled the House for about six months, and especially the few Tea Party members? Where were the Democrat proposals throughout those six years including the ones President Obama promised before he was elected? At least you have taken a balanced approach toward corporate culpability.............you are blaming them for stopping immigration legislation AND for keeping the immigration dilemma on the front burner!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5878

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 6:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Let's be honest mrgybe, and admit that the "complete control" thing that you so easily broadcast is just clever BS. Given Ted Kennedy's health concerns and eventual death, you know that Democrats had maybe 2-3 months of complete control. The Republican filibuster routine was all that was needed to crap on almost everything in the meantime.

One only has to reflect on the control and finesse that Nancy Pelosi pulled off in the House as the Speaker of the House. No doubt, a big reason why she remains on the Republican's most hated list. The right wing dialog here is wholly testament to that. Boehner has a long way to go to reflect the power and control that Pelosi displayed. Obviously, her bane was the Senate.

Even for a relative lightweight like myself, the truth is still quite apparent.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2704

PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Clearly you have forgotten the 2008 elections when Democrats took their majority in the Senate from 2 to 17 and had a huge majority in the House. Perfect time for the long promised immigration reform. Where was it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stevenbard



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 4209

PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2011 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe wrote:
Clearly you have forgotten the 2008 elections when Democrats took their majority in the Senate from 2 to 17 and had a huge majority in the House. Perfect time for the long promised immigration reform. Where was it?


They forgot about that, and gay marriage, and don't ask don't tell etcetera.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5337

PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2011 12:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've heard that corporations, despite paying only a fraction of the taxes they paid in the 1960's, are also "taxed enough." I also understand that complaints about Exxon are particularly unfair and unfounded. Really?

It is true that oil companies pay substantial taxes. Seeking Alpha reports that Exxon made $39.5 in profit in 2006, and paid $28 billion in taxes. For 2007 they estimate $40.6 and $30 billion. Of course that is a little misleading because the total revenue is about 10 times that. USA consumption is 7 billion barrels a year.

Of course, some of that comes back as subsidies, some written as special rules during the tenure of Bush and Cheney—oil men themselves. Obama’s letter to congress urging an end to oil subsidies estimated them at $4 billion a year. Here's an example of the kinds of insider rules made during the Bush presidency: a

Quote:
2004 rule that gives oil and other companies a special deduction for their U.S. operations could save the oil industry $18.2 billion over 10 years. A rule that allows faster depreciation of the value of oil and gas wells could save independent companies — those that only explore and produce oil but don't refine it — about $11 billon over a decade http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42807557/ns/business-oil_and_energy/t/exxon-kinda-sorry-it-made-b-quarter/


There’s a lot of back and forth that trhe subsidies oil gets are identical to those of other businesses--not so, There's and even more spin about how much oil companies make on a gallon of gasoline. They even have Senators who will repeat the company line essentially verbatim:

Quote:
In opposing the Senate bill to repeal tax breaks for oil and gas companies, Paul claimed that the federal government makes more money in taxes on a gallon of gasoline than oil companies earn in profits. He presented a chart that carried the header “Regular Gasoline Tax v. Oil Company Profit, Per Gallon,” showing 7 cents per gallon for the oil companies and 18.4 cents per gallon for the federal government. (In his May 17 speech (link 1 below), he said 7 cents and 18.4 cents per dollar, but it was clear from his chart that he meant per gallon.)
But the 7-cents-per-gallon figure grossly underestimates the industry’s earnings. It includes only earnings from the sale of gasoline and not earnings on producing and selling crude oil. There are no independent figures on how much oil companies earn on a gallon of gasoline.
Paul’s per-gallon figure is consistent with a claim ExxonMobil Vice President for Public and Government Affairs Ken Cohen wrote in his blog, “Perspectives (link 2 below),” when the company released its 2011 first quarter earnings in April. http://oilstocks.info/your-questions-about-how-much-do-oil-companies-make-on-a-gallon-of-gas/


Of course Exxon transports much of its oil to American markets through ports improved using public taxes. Imported cargo pays tariffs that cover more than the maintenance cost of such facilities. Is it not fair to ask oil companies to do the same?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 3599
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2011 9:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe wrote:
You've done it again!! Six years...........I repeat, six years of complete control of the House and Senate by Democrats. Nearly three years of control of the White House.........and you want to point the finger of blame at Republicans who have controlled the House for about six months, and especially the few Tea Party members? Where were the Democrat proposals throughout those six years including the ones President Obama promised before he was elected? At least you have taken a balanced approach toward corporate culpability.............you are blaming them for stopping immigration legislation AND for keeping the immigration dilemma on the front burner!!

Im lost . Nancy took the gavel in Jan 2007, gave it up in Jan 2011, how is that "six years"?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 3599
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2011 9:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe wrote:
Clearly you have forgotten the 2008 elections when Democrats took their majority in the Senate from 2 to 17 and had a huge majority in the House. Perfect time for the long promised immigration reform. Where was it?

In todays Washington DC , you need 60 votes in the Senate, it doesnt take a Philadelphia lawyer to do that math. I could use the same argument you are to say : why didnt Tom Delay and Bill Frist get rid of Fannie Mae, and Freddie MAc when they had complete control of all three branches. You would say that the Dems would filibuster, and you would be correct. In order to move major legislative initiatives through the Beltway, you need 60 votes, 60.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5878

PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2011 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe, how conveniently you forget to acknowledge President Bush's power of veto. Are you claiming that he never used it to ditch Democratic legislation coming out of the Senate in 2007 and 2008?

Back during the Bush/Cheney Administration, the Democrats did produce legislation addressing our illegal immigration problem, and even had President Bush's promised approval, but it was essentially the Republicans in the Senate that killed it. Also, I hope you remember back at that time that Senator McCain was a strong supporter of immigration reform. Yet, when he ran for president in 2008, he had to bury his prior position and come out hard against it to have any chance in hell to win the needed support in the nomination process.

Then or now, the Republicans really don't want to address our illegal immigration problem in a meaningful way.


Last edited by swchandler on Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:14 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5878

PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In reading your earlier post, I mis-read it thinking you were talking about the Democrat's win of both the House and Senate in November 2006. While my above post reflects that misunderstanding in my comments, the bottom line still yields the same outcome. Republicans are not interested in generating important legislation to solve our illegal immigration problem.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2704

PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

George Bush issued less vetoes than any president in the 20th century.........about one a year. Clinton issued vetoes at more than 3 times that rate. None of the Bush vetoes had anything to do with immigration.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 6 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group