12/4/10 - Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) Delivers Weekly GOP Address On Preventing Tax Hikes

[themetzman2000]

one word RINO,

[henleythecat]

According to Reuters

"Cost of keeping tax rates for the middle and lower income groups: $127 B. Cost to retain the top two income tax rates Obama originally opposed: $61 B.

* Keeps capital gains and dividends taxed at a top rate of 15 percent. Obama and Democrats had sought a 20 percent top rate. Cost: $54 B.

* Repeals certain limitations on deductions for high-earning individuals. Cost: $21B "

THAT $136B / Yr IN INCOME TAX BENEFITS GOING TO THE WEALTHY

HELL NO!!!

[hfe22]

.."americans have one of the highest taxrates in the world" ....lol

This guy is a certified moron.

[Einsteinbomb]

WOW he has not aged well at all.

[SpuddCroily02]

ROFL

GOP COWARDS AND LIARS, YOU SPAM HIDE ALL COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO YOU. MARK KIRK IS A COWARD, HE KNOWS IT IN HIS HEART, BUT HE USES MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO COVER UP THE COWARDICE IN HIS HEART, IT WILL NEVER GO AWARE KIRK, NO MATTER WHAT POSITION OF POWER YOU HAVE, OR HOW MUCH MONEY YOU HAVE, YOU WILL DIE A COWARD AND A SCUMBAG

YOU ALL LOVE LYNCHING

[mariyiful]

hello, i am from germany and i am intereseted in whats going on in amreca right now, i know that there was a bill from bush that made it possible to lower the taxes and this year it runs out. ia slo understood that is would be to expensive to pay for the bill, so the americans don´t know how their taxes rise in january, is that right so far? but what i do net understand are the talkes about " the top 2 %" and dreating jobs. i would be very glad if someone could axplain that to me.

thank you =)

[MrGeopolitical]

@mariyiful

Kommen Sie echt aus Deutschland? Bush in seiner Regierung hatte die Steuern verkleinert, aber es hat die USA Regierung insgesamt $1.4 Billionen gekostet. Jetzt sind wir im Krieg, und das kostet bis jetzt $3 Billionen. Aufgrund der Kriegen und der Steuersenkungen müssen wir mit Fremdmittel ausgeben, weil es kein Geld genug gibt und normalerweise erhöht man die Steuern, um 'was anders zu kaufen. Republikaner wollen die Steuern noch schwach halten, ohne ere Regierung leisten zu können

[replyform]

If you want to know the real reason tax cuts are given to the top 2%. All you have to notice is the number of American jobs going overseas. 1. The republicans give them the cuts. 2. They invest that money in the stock market. 3. The companies they invest in are sent overseas to increase the value of their stocks due to low wage worker. 4. They are greedy, so their republican friends in congress gave them more money to invest. 5. They will send more jobs overseas, say goodbye to the middleclass.

[replyform]

These taxcuts for the top 2% and the suffering and yes even many de*ths they have caused, if this was let's say China, these politicians who gave those tax cuts to the top 2% and cost the country over 12 trillion dollars, would have been executed. They have scammed America' to line their pockets. The more they scam, the more they invest, the more jobs go overseas to make more money off of the money they scammed from us. In other words, the only jobs they create are overseas slave wage jobs.

[replyform]

Reagan taxcuts for the rich increased the dificit by close to 5 trillion and Bush one increased the deficit close to 4 trillion. If these taxcuts for the top 2% are extended, it will increase the deficit by another 4 trillion and guess what? They haven't trickled a damn thing down and have hardly created any jobs. The only thing tax cuts for the top 2% do is line the pockets of the rich and the rest of us get p*ssed on. That must be the the trickle they are talking about. PEE PEE..

[replyform]

All together, the Reagan and Bush 2 taxcuts for the Rich, account for almost all of the deficit. They haven't created jobs and none of that money has trickled down. The rich don't get and stay rich by trickling down anything, if they can help it. They don't create jobs. They invest in the stock market and the companies they invest in, try to eliminate jobs to grow the bottom line and increase the value of their stocks. This senator got up their looking all professional and lied his ass off.

[replyform]

That's a lot of crap you are slinging. You are counting on low information voters falling for THAT? When Reagan signed the tax cut bill in the 80s, which was called voo doo and trickle down economics The debt exploded and didn't create jobs. The rich got much richer and none of it trickled down. When President George Bush gave tax cuts to the top 2%, the rich got richer and none of it trickled down to the rest of us and no jobs were created. The rich keep their money, that's how they GOT rich.

[flatmot]

Sen.Mark Kirk You mention a Death tax in your Weekly Address. When you discuss this with your family;do you say like now loved one, we need to see a Death lawyer or a Death attorney to be sure your Death money doesn't end up in the wrong place?

[truthforamerica]

Kirk is a RINO. He signals that he wants to be best buds with the "mushy moderate" caucus with Snowe, Murkowski, and the other Repubocrats. Hey Mark, we are watching you close! You ran as a Republican. Be sure to act like one. Don't be a sellout like Murkowski.

[lildwayne21]

Fuck Republicans

[MrGeopolitical]

Why are you continuing to pursue policies that have lead us to this mess? To the recession? To our deficit? Bush era policies lead a lot of the pain this way, and you want to further deregulate a market that has found itself in its present condition due to deregulation under the Bush years?

[truthforamerica]

@MrGeopolitical You prove why Democrats are idiots. Unemployement rate under Bush averaged around 5%. Obama has had 2 years to "prove" Keynsian economics of government spending works. It hasn't. It has made unemployment worse and made the economy tank. Yeah, that hope and change crap doesn't actually work in the real world.

[MrGeopolitical]

@truthforamerica

I'm a bit surprised by that comment. Really if you want to blame the economy on someone, blame whoever deregulated the markets (occured heavily under Reagan, Bush Sr., and Jr.) and blame the consumer for not continuing to spend. Unfortunatel and disgustingly that's how our economy works, based on consumption. When less of good x is consumed, less of good x is produced in the future and cuts are made to ensure efficiency in terms of cost and production.

[MrGeopolitical]

So while I say your political rhetoric is fun to look at, I have to say: Get Serious. Our deficit is at an unprecedented $14,000,000,000,000. The solution to that is not cut more revenue and make the government run more in the red every budget year without even contributing to our national deficit. Are you kidding me? It should not take a genius to see that in order to dig ourself out of the hole ALL AMERICANS ARE IN we need to increase revenue to offset what we're losing.

[MrGeopolitical]

When considering the fact that the Bush tax cuts cost this country needed revenue in the form of $1,350,000,000,000 over the past decade, not to mention two armed conflicts at a cost of $3,000,000,000,000, how can you justify further cuts? The government can't afford what we're doing now with the programs we have in place. There are some programs that actually need funding, and by continuously cutting funding for various NECESSARY programs, you are actually enabling us to run on borrowed monies.

[MrGeopolitical]

Another thing: the reason so many Americans voted against many incumbents were because they were tired of their government representatives 'not listening' to them. Yes they also do not want to be taxed, but if the tax cuts for those making over $250,000 were to expire, an amount of income that 80% of Americans do not make, then we can claim an additional $700 billion dollars in lost revenue.. Considering the deficit, isn't it better to have actual capital instead of borrowing more?

[MrGeopolitical]

"The current leaders of Congress should not move forward with plans that were just rejected by the American people, these leaders should not raise taxes and risk another recession. Instead, Congress should reduce spending and prevent another tax hike on American taxpayers."

Excuse me but the idea that raising taxes will risk another recession is an outright lie and you know. How can more revenue that is not borrowing induce another recession? Do not throw around assumptions that are unfounded.