Hi, This is Shawn. As all are making comments on one another and are telling what ever they want to say on their opponents. So I suggest people not to believe all these things. Trust on your own.
_____
Shawn
<a href="http://www.addictionlink.org/drug-rehab-center/georgia">georgia drug rehab</a>
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next Page »
Peach State Piffle
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
Martin:
I'm Jim Martin and I approve this message.
Not to Be Outdone ...
Martin misrepresents the facts in a recent ad that claims Chambliss "opposes a middle class tax cut." He doesn't.
Martin's ad refers to a 2005 Senate vote on an amendment that would have extended tax breaks to victims of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma, as well as those hoping to still claim a college tuition deduction or to avoid higher payments under the alternative minimum tax, among other provisions. But it also would have increased some corporate and individual taxes, along with taxes on oil and gas companies. The amendment was killed, and the vote was largely along party lines. The final bill, however, which Chambliss voted for, included many of these same "middle-class" tax cuts, but not many of the increases that Democrats supported.
The campaign also cites Chambliss' support for President Bush's tax cuts, claiming that they "favored wealthy Wall Street investors and taxpayers with large incomes like Wall Street CEOs and executives." Perhaps so, but Bush's tax cuts also benefited low- and middle-income taxpayers. The tax bills reduced the lowest tax bracket to 10 percent from 15 percent, provided tax relief for married couples and increased the tax credit for dependent children, all cuts that Obama and other Democrats support. Regardless of how the affluent made out, Chambliss' votes for the Bush tax bills are in no way votes against "a middle-class tax cut," as the ad claims. The ad could just as easily have said Chambliss "supports" a middle-class tax cut, citing these same votes.
Martin's ad also says that for six years, Chambliss "voted to get us into this mess." To support that opinion, the Martin campaign lists numerous Chambliss votes, including those for the Bush tax cuts, for a 2005 bankruptcy bill and for raising the federal debt limit. He also voted against higher taxes on hedge fund managers, against regulations for online trading of energy derivatives, and against pay-as-you-go rules in the Senate. He supported Republican-backed budgets and voted against Democratic alternatives.
But did such a voting record lead to financial calamity? The Martin camp cites just one source as evidence that Chambliss' votes had an impact on our economic woes: Business Week reported that the 2005 bankruptcy bill had exacerbated the housing crisis, with "[m]ore people being forced to walk away from their homes, leaving lenders holding the bag." But the magazine chalked this up to "the law of unintended consequences" and said the bill was supposed to "help the financial industry." Martin, and other Democrats, may well believe Chambliss' various votes led to financial crisis, but Republicans have been just as quick to tick off Democratic actions that they feel are the culprits. As we've said before, there are no easily determined winners and losers in this blame game.
DSCC Ad: "He Said No"
Announcer: Congress tried to pass better health care for children. But he voted "no." Lower drug prices for seniors? He said "no." Tax cuts for middle-class Georgia families. He said "no." For six years Saxby Chambliss has been part of the gridlock that's hurt the middle class.
But now Georgia can have a Senator who will fight for the change we need. Only Jim Martin will stand up for us. He's for us. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is responsible for the content of this ad.
Yet More Tax Trickery
The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has also launched attack ads against Chambliss, claiming in one that he "said no" to "tax cuts for middle-class Georgia families."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next Page »











Discuss