'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate

Oct 1, 2010 | Posted by: Top Mod2 | Full story: thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com

"Fox News Sunday" is heading to Louisville, Ky. Jack Conway, Kentucky's attorney general and the Democratic candidate for Senate , and Rand Paul, the Republican nominee and son of Representative Ron Paul, Republican of Texas, have agreed to a live debate on "Fox News Sunday" on Oct.3 at 9 a.m. (Eastern time).

Comments
39,641 - 39,660 of 151,404 Comments Last updated 5 min ago
Jay

Paris, TN

#43633 Jul 12, 2012
Simpleminds wrote:
Funny no one ever heard Sam Walton bitch about taxes when he started making his first million and then billions. He was at his start in the 75% Tax Bracket. Funny how so many Billionaires were made in the 50s and 60s when taxes were MORE than double the rate they are now..
As for today I never heard one of the richest person in America, Bill Gates, bitch about taxes. Never heard him say he wasn't going to make another million per day because taxes are too high.
****

I never heard Sam Walton say anything. And I haven't talked to Bill Gates in ages.
lol

Glasgow, KY

#43634 Jul 12, 2012
frank wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL ... probably not the smartest thing you ever said! Do you at least manage to return your library books on time?
I'm disappointed in you fwankie! Is that the best reply you could come up with? Really? No, seriously? Poor guy, evidently you scraped the last drip-drop from the bottom of your barrel. You do know that we noticed you couldn't reply with even one small fact to dispute anything in WakeUp's post, right? Just a silly kiddie reply. No facts. No debate. Just your typical fwankie "I know you are but what am I, neener, neener, neener, library books, blah, blah, blah, boring attempt at distracting from the issues and facts. Does your obvious ignorance ever embarrass you at all? Don't you get tired of getting spanked on here day after day? Are you some kind of beat-freak and enjoy getting your old ass spanked every day? Oh well, wittle fwankie, whatever gets you through the nite. LMMFAO!
john

Perris, CA

#43635 Jul 12, 2012
frank wrote:
<quoted text>
The whole GOPer idea that there are some magic beings called the “Job Creators” is complete bunk and nothing more than a (tiresome) talking point. Anyone who has ever run a business, as owner or manager, knows that hiring employees is very expensive and is done as a last resort when the demand for your product or service is pushing productivity to a tipping point. A business only grows with increased demand and you, as the manager, care very little about taxes or uncertainty, once that demand is there you jump on the opportunity, after all, that’s why you started the business!
of couarse demand!! but if my overhead go up, there wont be new employees, new demand. obama has done a good job creating jobs! the destroyer, the foodstamp king, master of diaster etc.
WakeUp

Campbellsville, KY

#43636 Jul 12, 2012
Simpleminds wrote:
Funny no one ever heard Sam Walton bitch about taxes when he started making his first million and then billions. He was at his start in the 75% Tax Bracket. Funny how so many Billionaires were made in the 50s and 60s when taxes were MORE than double the rate they are now..
As for today I never heard one of the richest person in America, Bill Gates, bitch about taxes. Never heard him say he wasn't going to make another million per day because taxes are too high.
Perhaps because even when the top tier tax bracket was 90% or even 75% it applies to earned income, not invested income? The reality is that the effective tax rate has rarely been over 40% on the Federal level.

Or that the big corporations, along with big money individuals and families (think John Kerry NOT registering his boat in Massachusetts) can afford the pricey lawyers, and the multiple corporations and trusts required to be able to shield their assets and income from taxes?

If you want a more effective comparison, look at taxes as a % of GDP. the U.S usually averages around 19.5% of GDP to taxes. Whether the tax rate is 90% or 35% we rarely collect more than 20%-21% of GDP in taxes.

We're on target for Government spending to hit 23.4% of GDP in 2012.

Average tax revenue: 19.5%(see Hauser's Law.)
Highest tax revenue: 20.6%(2000)

We are unable to pay for what we're spending.
Simpleminds

Russellville, KY

#43638 Jul 13, 2012
WakeUp wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps because even when the top tier tax bracket was 90% or even 75% it applies to earned income, not invested income? The reality is that the effective tax rate has rarely been over 40% on the Federal level.
Or that the big corporations, along with big money individuals and families (think John Kerry NOT registering his boat in Massachusetts) can afford the pricey lawyers, and the multiple corporations and trusts required to be able to shield their assets and income from taxes?
If you want a more effective comparison, look at taxes as a % of GDP. the U.S usually averages around 19.5% of GDP to taxes. Whether the tax rate is 90% or 35% we rarely collect more than 20%-21% of GDP in taxes.
We're on target for Government spending to hit 23.4% of GDP in 2012.
Average tax revenue: 19.5%(see Hauser's Law.)
Highest tax revenue: 20.6%(2000)
We are unable to pay for what we're spending.
All you Repubs need is to convince the 53% of American Obama voters how lower taxes on the rich will create jobs for everyone. Since you have NO historic proof of it, I don't know how you'll be able to however. The major problem is Democrats remember longer than Repubs do. We remember Reagan telling us if we just let the rich have more things will be better when it Trickles Down. Were they? Trickle was the right word for the middle class. Since Reagan middle class earnings have increased 18%. The top has increased 287%. We remember Bush and McConnell telling us we must lower taxes on the rich to create jobs. What happened with that? In the decade of Bush the US saw the worst job growth in the past 50 years.
So unless there is someway you Repubs can show you have a valid point about give to the rich and we'll all be better for it prepare for Obama's next 4 years.
POOP SHOOT

Canton, OH

#43639 Jul 13, 2012
Simpleminds wrote:
<quoted text>All you Repubs need is to convince the 53% of American Obama voters how lower taxes on the rich will create jobs for everyone. Since you have NO historic proof of it, I don't know how you'll be able to however. The major problem is Democrats remember longer than Repubs do. We remember Reagan telling us if we just let the rich have more things will be better when it Trickles Down. Were they? Trickle was the right word for the middle class. Since Reagan middle class earnings have increased 18%. The top has increased 287%. We remember Bush and McConnell telling us we must lower taxes on the rich to create jobs. What happened with that? In the decade of Bush the US saw the worst job growth in the past 50 years.
So unless there is someway you Repubs can show you have a valid point about give to the rich and we'll all be better for it prepare for Obama's next 4 years.
I heard john kerry like to smell his own FARTS?
Gosch Foundation

Ishpeming, MI

#43640 Jul 13, 2012
POOP SHOOT wrote:
<quoted text>
I heard john kerry like to smell his own FARTS?
Great read! The Last Circle - Table of Contents
The LAST CIRCLE, by Cherie Seymour aka Carol Marshall is helpful to everyone
who is trying to get an understanding of where this came from and how the ...

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopoliti ...- 10k -
WOO

Belton, KY

#43641 Jul 13, 2012
YOU ALL MAKE ME SICK GET A LIFE.
meth or math

Lexington, KY

#43642 Jul 13, 2012
both bad
WakeUp

Campbellsville, KY

#43643 Jul 13, 2012
Simpleminds wrote:
<quoted text>All you Repubs need is to convince the 53% of American Obama voters how lower taxes on the rich will create jobs for everyone. Since you have NO historic proof of it, I don't know how you'll be able to however.
Um...let's see: Kennedy's tax rate cuts were adopted in 1964, cutting the top tax rate from 91% to 70%, as well as reducing the lower rates. Over the next year, economic growth soared by 50%, and income tax revenues increased by 41%! By 1966, unemployment had fallen to its lowest peacetime level in almost 40 years.

Coolidge cut taxes: the U.S. economy to grow rapidly during the mid- and late-1920s. Between 1922 and 1929, real gross national product grew at an annual average rate of 4.7 percent and the unemployment rate fell from 6.7 percent to 3.2 percent. The tax cuts restored incentives to work, save, and invest, and discouraged the use of tax shelters.

Reagan:
1)when JimmyCarter's economic policies were in effect, family incomes plummeted by 9 percent, but that after Reagan's economic policies took effect (1982-89), family incomes rose by 11 percent.

2)The average annual growth rate of real gross domestic product (GDP) from 1981 to 1989 was3.2 percent per year, compared with 2.8 percent from 1974 to 1981 and 2.1 percent from 1989 to 1995. The 3.2percent growth rate for the Reagan years includes the recession of the early 1980s, which was a side effect of reversing Carter's high-inflation policies, and the seven expansion years, 1983-89. During the economicexpansion alone, the economy grew by a robust annual rate of 3.8 percent. By the end of the Reagan years, theAmerican economy was almost one-third larger than it was when they began.

3) employment rate went from 7.6% to the high of almost 10% when aggressively combating inflation, but dropped to 5.5% by the time he left office. Not to mention the record breaking numbers of new small business starts under Reagan thanks to his pro-business taxes, regulations and overall environment.
Simpleminds wrote:
<quoted text>
The major problem is Democrats remember longer than Repubs do. We remember Reagan telling us if we just let the rich have more things will be better when it Trickles Down. Were they? Trickle was the right word for the middle class. Since Reagan middle class earnings have increased 18%. The top has increased 287%.
You mean that since NAFTA was signed, and giving China "favored trade status" our middle class has been declining? How do you expect to grow wealth and the middle class when you have corporate cronyism and allowing our markets to be inundated with non-free market goods from China and other countries? We don't produce hardly anything in this country b/c the government makes it too damn expensive and the government doesn't call China out on their money manipulation b/c we owe them a trillion bucks...and we're manipulating our money even worse.
Simpleminds wrote:
<quoted text>
We remember Bush and McConnell telling us we must lower taxes on the rich to create jobs. What happened with that? In the decade of Bush the US saw the worst job growth in the past 50 years.
GDP grew at an annual rate of just 1.7% in the six quarters before the 2003 tax cuts. In the six quarters following the tax cuts, the growth rate was 4.1%.

The S&P 500 dropped 18% in the six quarters before the 2003 tax cuts but increased by 32% over the next six quarters.

The economy lost 267,000 jobs in the six quarters before the 2003 tax cuts. In the next six quarters, it added 307,000 jobs, followed by 5 million jobs in the next seven quarters.
Simpleminds wrote:
<quoted text>
So unless there is someway you Repubs can show you have a valid point about give to the rich and we'll all be better for it prepare for Obama's next 4 years.
Have you noticed how Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, have become tax cuts for the Middle Class as referred to by Obama? lol As for the rest, see above
frank

Oakland, CA

#43644 Jul 13, 2012
WakeUp wrote:
<quoted text>
Um...let's see: Kennedy's tax rate cuts were adopted in 1964, cutting the top tax rate from 91% to 70%, as well as reducing the lower rates. Over the next year, economic growth soared by 50%, and income tax revenues increased by 41%! By 1966, unemployment had fallen to its lowest peacetime level in almost 40 years.
Coolidge cut taxes: the U.S. economy to grow rapidly during the mid- and late-1920s. Between 1922 and 1929, real gross national product grew at an annual average rate of 4.7 percent and the unemployment rate fell from 6.7 percent to 3.2 percent. The tax cuts restored incentives to work, save, and invest, and discouraged the use of tax shelters.
Reagan:
1)when JimmyCarter's economic policies were in effect, family incomes plummeted by 9 percent, but that after Reagan's economic policies took effect (1982-89), family incomes rose by 11 percent.
2)The average annual growth rate of real gross domestic product (GDP) from 1981 to 1989 was3.2 percent per year, compared with 2.8 percent from 1974 to 1981 and 2.1 percent from 1989 to 1995. The 3.2percent growth rate for the Reagan years includes the recession of the early 1980s, which was a side effect of reversing Carter's high-inflation policies, and the seven expansion years, 1983-89. During the economicexpansion alone, the economy grew by a robust annual rate of 3.8 percent. By the end of the Reagan years, theAmerican economy was almost one-third larger than it was when they began.
3) employment rate went from 7.6% to the high of almost 10% when aggressively combating inflation, but dropped to 5.5% by the time he left office. Not to mention the record breaking numbers of new small business starts under Reagan thanks to his pro-business taxes, regulations and overall environment.
<quoted text>
You mean that since NAFTA was signed, and giving China "favored trade status" our middle class has been declining? How do you expect to grow wealth and the middle class when you have corporate cronyism and allowing our markets to be inundated with non-free market goods from China and other countries? We don't produce hardly anything in this country b/c the government makes it too damn expensive and the government doesn't call China out on their money manipulation b/c we owe them a trillion bucks...and we're manipulating our money even worse.
<quoted text>
GDP grew at an annual rate of just 1.7% in the six quarters before the 2003 tax cuts. In the six quarters following the tax cuts, the growth rate was 4.1%.
The S&P 500 dropped 18% in the six quarters before the 2003 tax cuts but increased by 32% over the next six quarters.
The economy lost 267,000 jobs in the six quarters before the 2003 tax cuts. In the next six quarters, it added 307,000 jobs, followed by 5 million jobs in the next seven quarters.
<quoted text>
Have you noticed how Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, have become tax cuts for the Middle Class as referred to by Obama? lol As for the rest, see above
Have you notices how the Bush tax cuts have added $3 trillion in red ink, yet the party wants to double down on its failed policy. I don’t suppose you could document your rant of inflated figures and misleading numbers?
I love America

Hazard, KY

#43645 Jul 13, 2012
I can not imagine anyone that is a true 3rd, 4th, or 5th generation American and loves America could vote for Hussein Obama. He has three Muslim names. His father is a Muslim, his grandparents are Muslims as well as his aunt and uncles. He is very proud of his Muslim heritage.

See this; http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup...
frank

Oakland, CA

#43646 Jul 13, 2012
I love America wrote:
I can not imagine anyone that is a true 3rd, 4th, or 5th generation American and loves America could vote for Hussein Obama. He has three Muslim names. His father is a Muslim, his grandparents are Muslims as well as his aunt and uncles. He is very proud of his Muslim heritage.
See this; http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup...
Obama is the Devil incarnate :-)
You are suffering from xenophobia as well as theophobia -- go get help before you totally freak out! Barack Obama is actually a Hebrew name with African origins, meaning “lighting from a high place”. The name Barack Obama is also found in the Hebrew Bible.

Since: Jul 12

Los Angeles, CA

#43647 Jul 13, 2012
hey you u want info on ur iphone like how long ur warranty covers ur fone just click this link right here http://www.iphoneadmin.com its really easy to do just follow the instructions
lol

Glasgow, KY

#43648 Jul 13, 2012
Just when you think Obama can't do anything more arrogant than the many arrogant things he has already done in the last 4 years...surprise! Is he trying to help Romney get elected? lol

His biggest regret is his "storytelling"? He doesn't regret record numbers of citizens unemployed on his watch and remain unemployed on his watch, he doesn't regret his failed policies that have caused a record number of American citizens living at or below the poverty level on his watch, he doesn't regret a record number of American citizens receiving some type of government assistance on his watch, he doesn't regret his puppet politicians forcing a law onto every man, woman and child in the United States of America and affecting one sixth of Obama's already horrible economy, he doesn't regret that he and his partners in crime never bothered to read what was in the biggest piece of (crap) "not a tax" tax legislation in our history, he doesn't regret the bullying and lying and stealing and cheating and deceiving and shady behind closed door deals it took to pass his legacy into law. He regrets that he couldn't convince more dumb asses to believe his storytelling attempts.

Wow. Simply wow!
tel it right

Glasgow, KY

#43649 Jul 13, 2012
frank wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama is the Devil incarnate :-)
You are suffering from xenophobia as well as theophobia -- go get help before you totally freak out! Barack Obama is actually a Hebrew name with African origins, meaning “lighting from a high place”. The name Barack Obama is also found in the Hebrew Bible.
He is also mentioned in my Bible...the mark of the beast.
AmericanMan

Russellville, KY

#43650 Jul 13, 2012
I love America wrote:
I can not imagine anyone that is a true 3rd, 4th, or 5th generation American and loves America could vote for Hussein Obama. He has three Muslim names. His father is a Muslim, his grandparents are Muslims as well as his aunt and uncles. He is very proud of his Muslim heritage.
See this; http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup...
That weird. I was just thinking as a Christian and an American how could anyone vote for a known Cult High Priest like Mitt??
BC resident

Glasgow, KY

#43651 Jul 13, 2012
AmericanMan wrote:
<quoted text>That weird. I was just thinking as a Christian and an American how could anyone vote for a known Cult High Priest like Mitt??
Did you, could you, vote for Obama when it is fact that he sat in his church for 20 years plus listening to his Pastor (and friend and mentor)start out his Sunday sermons starting out each time with the RACIST plea for God to DAMN WHITE AMERICA? I'm not voting for Romney based on his religious beliefs any more than that was the defining reason I voted for Obama. I will be voting for Romney because Obama knows nothing about leading a country and he has damaged my country and hurt my family with his many, many failed policies.

As a decent and intelligent Christian American I can not support Obama ever again. Romney in 2012! He deserves a chance just like Obama had but squandered.
AmericanMan

Russellville, KY

#43652 Jul 13, 2012
BC resident wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you, could you, vote for Obama when it is fact that he sat in his church for 20 years plus listening to his Pastor (and friend and mentor)start out his Sunday sermons starting out each time with the RACIST plea for God to DAMN WHITE AMERICA? I'm not voting for Romney based on his religious beliefs any more than that was the defining reason I voted for Obama. I will be voting for Romney because Obama knows nothing about leading a country and he has damaged my country and hurt my family with his many, many failed policies.
As a decent and intelligent Christian American I can not support Obama ever again. Romney in 2012! He deserves a chance just like Obama had but squandered.
WOW!!!!! damaged your country. What caused the worst damage? Was it ending the war in Iraq that killed 4000 soldiers and wounded over 30,000 looking for WMDs that were never there. Or were you hurt when he sent in Seal Team 6 to place a bullet in Ben Laden? Perhaps you like that Bush gave Billionaires a tax break when America needed the money to pay its bills but Obama wants them taxed the same as 1996. Does your family work on Wall St.? Maybe the new regulations damage their ability to make crazy loans on homes and then turn around and bet the loans will go bad? Maybe when you get a cult leader as President he will bring back some of his hidden money from the Swiss and Cayman Island banks and spur the economy. He should since his OWN new tax plan would give him a $5,000,000.00 tax break. Maybe he could hire some Americans in his Bermuda Companies office.
frank

Oakland, CA

#43653 Jul 13, 2012
tel it right wrote:
<quoted text>
He is also mentioned in my Bible...the mark of the beast.
Your bible? I must assume you're locked up in an institution?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Augusta Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
KY What's mitch McConnell done for coal, when ther... 8 min vermin 1,902
Bracken Football 10 min Disbelief 1
Danielle's back!!!! 11 min BigRick 4
Bonno Craig 1 hr Guest 10
KY Paul vs Conway: The Nastiest Debate Of 2010 | T... (Oct '10) 5 hr Pagan 16,146
boob jobs 6 hr Flat chested 2
Augusta mayor's race 16 hr Whos running 19
•••
•••
•••

Augusta Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Augusta People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Augusta News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Augusta
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••