What do Bush & Kerry have in common?

[rock jock]

favors low taxes for the wealthy at the expense of the middle class

Oh sure, the Democrat definition of "wealthy" - any family with a combined income of $30K or more. Yup, gotta hate those filthy rich secretaries and laborers driving around in their luxury Honda Civics and beat up F150's. How dare they?

 

[bountyhunter]

Oh sure, the Democrat definition of "wealthy" - any family with a combined income of $30K or more. Yup, gotta hate those filthy rich secretaries and laborers driving around in their luxury Honda Civics and beat up F150's. How dare they?

That is truly funny.... back in 1982 when reagan "cut" everybody's taxes, it was the upper middle class (dual income) families who had their taxes go up. Out here in the bay Area, a family with two parents working and a couple of kids qualifies as the people who are "starving slowly". But, the first year I was married (1981 under Reagan) I was introduced to the "marriage penalty" and my wife and I paid an extra $2000 in federal taxes for the priviledge of being married (compared to what we paid as singles).... under the regime of the man screaming about family values.

Then when the reagan tax "cuts" were put into law, it shifted the break points on the tax brackets and also raised the itemized deductions "deductible line" and we got screwed out of an ADDITIONAL $2000. But, those "deductions" we were trying to claim were just frivolous expenses...... the $6000 a year my wife and I paid out of our own pockets to cover the air fare, rental cars, uniforms, etc it cost for my wife to drill in her unpaid Navy reserve position every month after they had reposted her into a billet 1500 miles away. Yeah, tell me that one about how much the reagan administartion did for the military and the working class.......

 

[rock jock]

under the regime of the man screaming about family values.

Reagan didn't write the tax laws - the dems did. The only way he got any tax cuts was to bypass Congress and go directly to the American people. In the end, he got the best deal he could based on the fact that he had to negotiate with the enemy. Your alternative would have been Carter. You should shudder trying to envision those possibilities.

 

[Dave R]

Gordon Fink, two questions:

1. How do you figure Bush supports tax cuts for the wealthy at the expense of the midle class? Any legislation or positions to back that up? I got a nice tax cut from Bush this past tax year, and I'm sure not wealthy...

2. How do you figure Kerry is in favor of 'some' gun control? He's got positively the worst anti-gun rating a politician can get.

I think rock jock nailed the differences perfectly.

 

[BryanP]

Pretty much say it all.

 

[Gordon Fink]

Ha-ha! You G. W. Bush apologists only seem to take exception to my taxation comments, which were my most flippant. On general principle, I would support the President’s tax cuts, if they went along with cutting government spending. However, someone will have to pay for his wars, secret police, steel tariffs, farm subsidies, and Medicare drug benefits.

I said Kerry favors most gun control—almost everything but outright confiscation. Oh, he’ll leave your skeet guns alone, but not much else. G. W. Bush, on the other hand, favors just some “reasonable†gun control, like the “assault-weapons†ban. He’ll let you keep your skeet guns and your revolvers.

~G. Fink