Founding Fathers would be horrified at today’s Senate

Be afraid, be very afraid…

• Link
• Report this comment

I think “The Founding fathers”, had they known, would have never left Britain…I could see Sarah Palin as a Royal Wench, though…

• Link
• Report this comment

DeMint and millions of low-born, ill-bred Repugs like him, is a victory for ignorant people everywehere. Masters of deceit & betrayal. Picking at the skeletal remains of post-BushDrunk Murcuh. They all wallow in the same filthy level. A fact that reverberates from sea to shining sea. Scum de terra.

• Link
• Report this comment

Brett,

“DeMint and millions of low-born, ill-bred Repugs like him, is a victory for ignorant people everywehere.”

Low born…perhaps still born would be more apt of a description.

• Link
• Report this comment

Well,I have a dumb question to ask.(as usual)

What’s wrong with wanting to block votes on something that you do not approve of?

Anyone ,please and thank you!

• Link
• Report this comment

This shows that certain Republican senators care only about themselves and their personal power and could not possibly care less about the people they are supposed to represent. If the founding fathers could see this this I’m sure they would say this is not the America they ever wanted to see happen.

• Link
• Report this comment

“The right to extend a debate is never more important than when one party controls both Congress and the White House. The filibuster serves as a check, on power, preserve our limited government.”

Harry Reid 2005

“You know, the Founders designed this system, as frustrating it is, to make sure that there’s a broad consensus before the country moves forward”

Barack Obama 2005

“I remember what it was like the first several years that I was in the minority,” he said. “You couldn’t attach an amendment. You could not get a thing done. If you were in the minority, you might as well not have even showed up. And then there was redistricting, and a few years later, the Democrats are in charge, and now the Republicans cannot get a thing done. And the Democrats don’t have to pay them any attention whatsoever.

“And what I worry about would be you essentially have still two chambers — the House and the Senate — but you have simply majoritarian absolute power on either side, and that’s just not what the founders intended,”

Barack Obama

So what’s new now???? It is the misfits doing what the misfits do – ALL of them.

• Link
• Report this comment

ty,

As far as “Obamacare” (which I find to be a really stupid phrase) – I think they would have approved of it considering they used the whole “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” phrase thingy in the Declaration of Independence — actually I think they would have preferred the single payer system, but that’s just my analysis.

• Link
• Report this comment

And dang, I step out for a while and the blog gets fun downstairs!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

“Nice portraits Jay..they class the place up.”

And I second that.

• Link
• Report this comment

Even if it is from Wikipedia, I like it:

The first and second article of the Virginia Declaration of Rights adopted unanimously by the Virginia Convention of Delegates on June 12, 1776 and written by George Mason, is:

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

So suck it wingnuts…..the founding fathers wanted us to be happy and getting sick and not being able to afford a doctor makes you rather unhappy I’d say.

• Link
• Report this comment

The GOP duckheads will try to shut down the gov’t again, they are not Americans, just spoiled puppets.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay B,

Then change the rules of the Senate. All I said was that there’s no consistency in the argument from the left and that also is what I read into md’s comments.

• Link
• Report this comment

jewcowboy,

If you are around, how bout this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYK7bEo1Z4M

• Link
• Report this comment

I think that the Founding Father would be horrified at the 17th amendment…. unfortunately, there’s probably not too many people on here who know what the 17th amendment is or it’s ramifications for states’ representation in Congress…

• Link
• Report this comment

“and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.”

Wonder why they didn’t use words such as “be given”, “guaranteed”, “will have” instead of “pursuing”.

Seems they used that word for a reason………

• Link
• Report this comment

RW,

No, I explained that (lottery tickets). But I do like ponies — but if we all got a free pony, we wouldn’t have to have lawnmowers and that would put alot of people out of work that work in the lawnmower industry, so no, if I were in charge….no ponies.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch,

They wouldn’t be out of work, they’d just have to become lawn scoopers and scooper builders.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch wins! Every time!

• Link
• Report this comment

RW,

Make that leave me alone – not along.

• Link
• Report this comment

RW,

But couldn’t the same thing be said about all the poor folks who’d lose their jobs in the insurance industry if we went to the single payer system? Couldn’t they just adapt to another industry like working for nursing homes or something? I mean all the other industries who’ve had to adapt in the past decade (recording industry, etc.) have had to and it worked out okay.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch,

It could be a cover story. Jimmy might be stopping by to see if Betty White is still up there in Cleveland, but just in case that’s not it I’ll send along my thoughts and prayers as well.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch @ 1.27,

Good one! That may have done the trick.

• Link
• Report this comment

md – your 1:18 was unfortunately dead on accurate

• Link
• Report this comment

For the record, I don’t support abuse of minority power. But Jay has the facts all messed up on this one. The Founding Fathers wouldn’t have been pleased about the abuse of power, but they would be absolutely horrified by the extent and growth of government.

Jaaaaaaaaaaaaay. I await your response to the 1:35 Jefferson quotes.

• Link
• Report this comment

(not that I’m the arbiter) just trying to give credit where credit is due

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch re: Founding Fathers and single payer sytem …I agree…how else will we really progress towards a society that is consistent with that ” phrase thingy” ?

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay,
Okay, I’ll just take it as things you agree with are okay to upset our founding fathers(I like to imagine them spinning in their graves), and things you don’t agree with…well… spin away there Jefferson.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay@1:10pm Brilliant riposte! When confronted with a question you don’t like, reply ad ridiculum. Just say that you approve of those things and you don’t care what the founding fathers think.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay and others, there are several issues here:

1. The FF’s were educated men, something that is lacking today. The level of intelligence of today’s politicians is many, many, many notches below that of Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson, et. al.
2. Many of the FF’s put their personal wealth on the line for the republic. Today, the politicians don’t want to pay any more in taxes because they feel privileged. They have built in raises without even having to publicly vote for them. Think of the benefits of being a Congressman or Senator today. If you asked them to pledge their personal wealth for the republic you would more than likely just get a blank stare.
3. The FF’s used debate as the main tool of argument. When the dust settled compromise was very much a piece of the resolution (how do you think the Constitution came into being? It didn’t just materialize out of thin air). Today compromise is considered treason by the uneducated politicos in office and the more radical liberals and conservatives who claim they speak for Americans. Today “my” principle, a la DeMint’s statement, is the rule and you better adhere to it.

Mr. DeMint represents what is wrong with today’s politicians. They are elected because they subscribe to a particular ideology or agenda regardless of the needs of the country as a whole. So what do you get? What we have, a broken and sad political system that benefits the few over the welfare of the many (think wealthy political contributors, special interest groups, PAC’s and their high paid executives, the politicians themselves with their perks and benefits, the mysterious corporate donors, etc.)

Well, have a nice day everyone. I hope your politician is doing everything in his or her power to meet your needs.

• Link
• Report this comment

jm – no, I think that the senators should be selected by the state legislatures as it was done before the 17th amendment. If the senators didn’t have to pander to the general voters like the member of the House have to do, then maybe we wouldn’t see all these antics in the Senate… and maybe a lot of these bills that require all these unfunded mandates to the states wouldn’t pass or would be toned down since the senators would have to answer to the legislature and governor of the state they represent.

• Link
• Report this comment

“md, the amended bill DID have the votes to pass and indeed WAS passed by a majority in both chambers, just as the Constitution required and the Founders envisioned.”

OK Jay, whatever you want to believe. But, when Bosch’s Senate goddess Ms. Snowe, who’s vote got it out of committee, feels betrayed, that tells me the process failed………

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, I might of knowed a librul like Bookman would take out after the godly Sen. DeMint. He’s about the only one in the Senate I like. Because he’s a redneck like the rest of us. You can tell, Just take a look at his picture. He ain’t got hardly any forehead. There’s hair and a little bit of space below it and then you get right to the eyebrows.

Have a good p.m. everybody.

• Link
• Report this comment

mm – Glad to hear you’ve joined the conservatives.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay
If they were so against this 2/3 or super majority, why did they make it so hard to amend the contstitution should a simple majority vote by the people be okay. Why did they say we need 2/3 to over ride the president veto of a bill that the majority voted for. I guess it only bad some of the time.

• Link
• Report this comment

I’m glad to see Jay referring to the Federalist – I hope he actually reads it as well. I enjoy it so much that I’ve carried a copy with me for a few months to read and re-read during down-time. If only more would do so…we all would be better off and have a greater understanding of why our government is structured the way that it is.

I do think that the Framers would be upset with the limitations that the minority is placing on the minority as it relates to action in the Senate.

That being said, I think the Framers would have far greater issues with the size, scope and power of today’s Federal government.

And I too, would support repeal of the 17th amendment. IMO, senate elections nowadays have become miniature national elections, with special interest from outside the states having an undue influence on senate election results. Election of senators by state legislators would also make senators more beholden to the interests of their particular states (and the states in general), and I think it would be a good move to balance the scales of power between the federal and the states.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Well, the state comptroller’s office now has final tax return data for 2008, the first year that the higher tax rates applied. The number of millionaire tax returns fell sharply to 5,529 from 7,898 in 2007, a 30% tumble. The taxes paid by rich filers fell by 22%, and instead of their payments increasing by $106 million, they fell by some $257 million.”

It doesn’t work – people do have a choice, and the rich aren’t rich because they give their money away. “Spread the wealth” is the disease, not the cure.

• Link
• Report this comment

I thought the Jews were the only minority that should have rights.

• Link
• Report this comment

jm – Nah, I think that the people have plenty of representation in the form of the House of Representatives. I’d rather have 1 house representing the people (proportionately by population) and 1 house evenly representing the states…. and have those 2 houses “duking it out” instead of just half the senate “duking it out”

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay – I wish the Democrats were willing to trade (accept) some faith in the ability of everyone from the middle class up to take care of themselves entirely in return for Republicans creating a strong and good safety net for the least fortunate.

Shrink and focus the activities of the government on the poorest among us only.

• Link
• Report this comment

Good grief, Jay. In 6 months the same thing will be happening in reverse and you will be applauding those senators who are standing up to the Republican majority. You put on your Constitution hat when it suits your needs.

Are they following the rules or not? The answer is yes. The Democrats have had a majority for 4 years and haven’t lifted a finger to change the rules.

• Link
• Report this comment

I wonder how James and Alexander would react to the idea of the federal government forcing citizens to buy a particular good or service?

• Link
• Report this comment

Hence, it clearly appears, that the same advantage which a republic has over a democracy, in controlling the effects of faction, is enjoyed by a large over a small republic, — is enjoyed by the Union over the States composing it. Does the advantage consist in the substitution of representatives whose enlightened views and virtuous sentiments render them superior to local prejudices and schemes of injustice? It will not be denied that the representation of the Union will be most likely to possess these requisite endowments. Does it consist in the greater security afforded by a greater variety of parties, against the event of any one party being able to outnumber and oppress the rest? In an equal degree does the increased variety of parties comprised within the Union, increase this security. Does it, in fine, consist in the greater obstacles opposed to the concert and accomplishment of the secret wishes of an unjust and interested majority? Here, again, the extent of the Union gives it the most palpable advantage Jaames Madison from Federalist 10.

• Link
• Report this comment

jay, you put words into the mouth of founding fathers. They wanted SMALL GOVERNMENT!
Something you leftist will NEVER EVER admit.
the founding fathers had principles and promoted citizens providing for and taking care of
themselves.
Welfare state, the goal of you and obama sheep everywhere is not something to be promoted by anyone that believes in or follows the principles of our founding fathers.
DeMint and others that hopefully do want to decrease this federal monstrosity we now have, should do all that they can to derail the leftist like you and your fellow demorats.
I look forward to the day that they shut down the federal government again. The madness stops
soon!

• Link
• Report this comment

Gordon
September 28th, 2010
2:12 pm

Harumph, harumph!!

• Link
• Report this comment

“md, 2008 loss of income was due to the sorry shape of the economy the GOP drove the country into and the stock market dive.”

Thanks for playing, but wrong. Read it again, the number of filers dropped, which means they moved – just like they did in NY. The 2 states made a bad assumption – that folks would just fork over their money. They won’t, they will just buy another residence in another State with better tax rates. And the corps will do it too.

Think about it – even rich liberals hang on to their money. If they truly believed in their ideology of spreading the wealth, how much do they really need??

They want to share, but prefer to do it with other people’s money, not theirs.

• Link
• Report this comment

As neither a rep-ugant nor dim-wit but rather a darwinist that believes in the surival of the fittest (a maker not a taker) I can think of nothing better for the country than shutting down congress.

My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) Third president of the United States

• Link
• Report this comment

Atlas – you mean Stan Druckenmiller Shrugging? From today….

http://www.pimco.com/Pages/StanDruckenmillerisLeaving.aspx

• Link
• Report this comment

BOO-HOO You will love the rules when your demoRATS are in the minority next year!

• Link
• Report this comment

“Brett,

“DeMint and millions of low-born, ill-bred Repugs like him, is a victory for ignorant people everywehere.”

Low born…perhaps still born would be more apt of a description.”

And Republican’s and Conservative’s are the hateful ones? Liberals never stop amazing me in their backwards and hypocritical ways of thinking. Had a conservative member of this board even remotely used the above rhetoric, you guys would have been calling for his or her head. This is just shameful, but yet I am not surprised.

• Link
• Report this comment

“In 6 months the same thing will be happening in reverse and you will be applauding those senators who are standing up to the Republican majority.’

That is not likely at this point. 538.com, probably the most accurate of the election predictors, still shows a Democratic-led Senate, 53-47.

• Link
• Report this comment

jm –

yes, I meant legislature. Just had a brain fart. Anyways, I think there could be things that could be done to try to get rid of some of the corruption (although I don’t think it would be as bad as it was around the turn of the century…I mean, we have laws for that now). But I’m not sure how that’s any different or worse than all the special interests (especially from out of state) that are involved in senate elections today. As for the legislatures being derelict and not electing a senator(s), well then that state loses out on any representation for that term. You snooze, you lose. And I don’t think that happened all that often in the past.

• Link
• Report this comment

Atlas – one and the same… but the old workaholic is gone, thanks to the new normal thingy. part of which is courtesy of Obama.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Latest poll: Nathan Deal widens lead over Roy Barnes”

Only goes to show what hypocrites GOPers are — they call for less corruption, talk smack about Obama not being fit for the job, but they are willing to vote for a guy who is ethically compromised and facing bankruptcy.

Yeah….. Deal could sign a blood pack with the Devil himself and he’d still get elected Governor in this state. Wake up people. Please.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch

September 28th, 2010
2:42 pm

Two words: Charlie Rangel

• Link
• Report this comment

Leg lamp,

Rangel’s a crook, I’ve heard, and your point? I’m talking about people here, in this state — on this blog — what hypocrites they are for saying they want better politicians, and then voting for Deal.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch
September 28th, 2010
2:49 pm

Stupid voting patterns is not cornered by any particular party. Your post assumes ALL republicans voted for Deal while complaining about bad candidates. Remember, he barely beat Handel in the runoff. I’ve openly commiserated on this blog about the pathetic choices of BOTH parties. I mean, come on, Barnes and Deal? It makes the libertarian Monds worth looking in to.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay,

“If you do not recognize that as something new and dangerous, even though technically it is within the rules as they have long existed, then I cannot help you.”

I recognize as dangerous many things that are technically within the rules not being used as they are originally intended. 2 points:

1) Many examples exist on both “sides.” For example, the ridiculous use of the commerce clause to circumvent the enumerated powers clause is one that bothers me a lot more than you.

2) Instead of expecting people to ignore rules, why don’t we change the ones that have become arcane or are seen as being misused? Rules and laws should be followed. Fortunately there are ways to change them if that becomes necessary. When people aren’t strong enough to do that, we live with the consequences. The real problem here is that no one is strong enough in either political party to stand up and say this is a bad rule that should be changed (other than in a time when it is directly harming their interests – like now for Democrats and other times for Republicans).

• Link
• Report this comment

md,

Ever live in Florida? Have at it, buddy! Need to borrow a truck? Not only does every freaked out, broke, jobless, pervo serial killer societal reject make his or her way to Florida eventually (for the taxes? Really? I thought it was for the weather), but they blend RIGHT in! If you’re not crazy, you will be after the sun boils your brain for a few years. Fortunately, the AC in the churches packs ‘em in. Best of luck! Don’t forget to write!

• Link
• Report this comment

The FF were smart men but no more civil than we are today with each other. Madison was a Federalist and favored a strong central gov’t; like the Dems today. The opposing party were the Republicans who favored strong States rights and were loath to relinquish control over matters with a mere majority. Here we are over 200 years later and the matter is still unresolved. We fought a civil war over the exact same thing but still have not resolved it.

It makes you wonder if the two theories are compatible at all.

That said. I favor the call of a new continental congress to hammer out all these issues you raise. We obviously cannot trust the Senate or House to regulate their own rules so we need to new redefine them and make them stick to them. While we are at it, maybe we can readdress this lifetime appointments for federal judges non-sense.

• Link
• Report this comment

Interesting read…

http://www.ajc.com/news/survey-atheists-agnostics-know-642125.html

• Link
• Report this comment

Leg lamp,

“What did Barnes do that was so bad?”

Yes, as with jm, I’d like to know as well.

• Link
• Report this comment

Leg Lamp – I really am curious. Ok, so maybe he’s arrogant. But I can’t think of anything he did that was awful. Or even bad. Name them for me.

WHAT DID HE DO THAT WAS SO BAD?

• Link
• Report this comment

Leg lamp,

Who gives a damn if Barnes is arrogant — all politicians are arrogant, what did he do specifically that was so bad? I tend to remember the state running pretty smoothly during his time and if he hadn’t made the teachers pissed, he wouldn’t have gotten tossed out.

• Link
• Report this comment

mm – get a life. and a factbook

• Link
• Report this comment

Leg Lamp,

I never spent any time in CA, so (unlike many people) I won’t claim to have an opinion on the state, let alone one that matters. I did spend a number of years in Florida, however, and stand by my statements. Thank you so much.

• Link
• Report this comment

The country prospered with the previous tax rates on the high earners, no reason to think it will hurt anyone.

• Link
• Report this comment

mystified,

You should be careful in your characterizations of Madison. For ratification of the Constitution, he was indeed a federalist. To say that he favored a strong central government in the same vein as, say, Hamilton, would be inaccurate.

When it came to the political parties that emerged in the late 1790’s, Madison was aligned with Jefferson as a Republican and opposed the policies of the Federalist party.

• Link
• Report this comment

“If you’re not crazy, you will be after the sun boils your brain for a few years. ”

Due to the wonderful ocean breeze, there are many places in FL that have a lower average summer temperature than the ATL. And please, you trying to say middle and south GA don’t get hot??

• Link
• Report this comment

sfd – new flag stunk. in today’s world, I’d say there are more important issues.

I’m not a fan of the Northern Arc, we have enough sprawl. But it would have helped congestion.

• Link
• Report this comment

Thanks Wahoo. I wasn’t using federalist as a bad word and it wasn’t an accusation. He was federalist at the time and as I understand it was making a federalist argument in a federalist paper. All were good men; except for maybe Hamilton. My point is we are fighting nearly the same battles today and we need to put the house in order because both parties are misusing certain rules for gain.

• Link
• Report this comment

retiredds… Thanks for neatly laying out the issues!

Here’s an addition: the founding fathers didn’t extort (solicit campaign contributions) from the rich, big business, and big unions, and they didn’t take bribes (accept campaign contributions) from special interests.

• Link
• Report this comment

Well if the democrats would stop putting forth idiotic, expensive, do nothing freedom trumping legislation, then such measures would not be necessary.
Further, democrats have vast majority. If they can’t get crap done with that, they are to stupid to hold the positions they have. That’s the postion I have, they are too stupid to lead. Everything democrats have done has failed.
I don’t see where you whined about senate rules and procedures when republicans controled the house and senate. And I seriously doubt, if control shifts, that you’ll whine about it in the future.

• Link
• Report this comment

in today’s world, I’d say there are more important issues.

well yeah. In fact, I was sorely tempted (just as a joke) to buy a front license-plate thingie for my car of the ugly new (now old) flag. Just to annoy people.

I’m not a fan of the Northern Arc, we have enough sprawl. But it would have helped congestion.

For a few years, until the inevitable rush-to-feeder-roads development along the Arc would’ve clogged it up every day just like every other artery in this metro area.

My primary reason for opposing was rooted in the naïve hope that perhaps after being denied this project, Barnes would spearhead serious mass transit development; expand MARTA, add more bus lines, etc. (I know, hilarious stuff, right?)

• Link
• Report this comment

“He had that danged D after his name.”

Seriously, Barnes should have run as a Republican, then he’d have won. Damn sheep in this state. Baaaaaa.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hey Bosch

Blue Lions—-2
Marseille——0

42nd minute.

• Link
• Report this comment

Drive by post as I’m about to leave for home: Which party was responsible for approving the rules that exist now, and which allow this to take place?

• Link
• Report this comment

Kamchak,

Sweet!

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch and paleo-neo-Carlinist–Thanks for your interesting input earlier regarding your spiritual outlook. It’s always refreshing to hear some original thought on the matter, in contrast to the Biblical regurgitation that most people are only able to offer.

P.S. Was I the only one wondering if the Virgin Marie is hot or not?? I’m guessing 40+ extra pounds.

• Link
• Report this comment

To the tune of Ted Kennedy and John McCain (I think) no less.

and Cynthia McKinney.

• Link
• Report this comment

DeMint, one of the “new rising stars” in the neo-con fringe, is a petulant brat along the lines of Newt.

The fake conservative considers homosexuality “immoral” and cringes at the notion of there being a gay or lesbian president.

He opposes abortion, including in cases of rape and incest, and approves of abortion only when the mother’s life is endangered.

He has been a consistent supporter of school prayer.

In other words, like many of his flat-earth colleagues, he is happy living in the 1950s.

No wonder the US Congress has such a low approval rating. (Cue up the faux outrage and innumerable red herrings.)

The worst government dirty money can buy…

• Link
• Report this comment

mystified,

I didn’t take your comment as an accusation and I, for one, don’t see federalist as a bad word. I just think the context is important. For ratification of the constitution, he was undoubtedly a federalist, as opposed to an anti-federalist. When it came time to govern, he was a member of the republican party with Jefferson as opposed to the federalist party with Adams.

He indeed wrote the Federalist with Jay and Hamilton, but Hamilton, for sure, was far more interested in a strong federal government than Madison ever was. Hamilton knew that his own personal desires for a powerful new federal government under the new constitution would never be realized because the rest of the delegates to the constitutional convention, while desiring something with more power than the Articles, preferred a far more limited new federal. Hamilton certainly could read the tea leaves of the time and knew that Madsion’s views of the new federal, while not as powerful as Hamilton wanted, was a vast improvement over the Articles of Confederation.

I would agree to an extent that we are fighting some of the same battles today, but the battle lines have shifted, IMO. Again, IMO today we are no longer talking about federalist versus anti-federalist principles in government, but instead are talking about federalist versus nationalist principles in government. Instead of there being the balance between the federal and the states that emerged from the compromise of federalist and anti-federalist positions in the constitution, today I believe we really have crony-federalism where the federal buys off state complicity by funding the states with federal dollars.

• Link
• Report this comment

Don’t forget: But I’m not sure how you can say that “self organization” is a miracle since it obeys the laws of science. You’ve also really lost me since you seem to be implying intelligent design but no intelligent designer. Maybe I’ve misinterpreted your statement.

Df: You might be putting the cart before the horse here. Nature precedes and supercedes the “Laws of Nature”, because the first one is the real deal, the second only a human approximation using mathematics. Even when we can find a scientific model which agrees with experimental results, that still doesn’t take away from the miracle. Quantum Physics well-predicts the behavior of atomic particles, but the built-in paradoxes that the theory entails reveal a mystery and magic that likely will never be solved (e.g. the two slit experiment).

Per the second part of your post, I do believe in Intelligent Design, but not an independent, external Designer, if that makes any sense. Immanuel = God Within. We don’t have to go looking any further than our immediate surroundings.

• Link
• Report this comment

Senate Republicans beat back an effort by Democrats Tuesday to end tax breaks for companies who send jobs offshore only to import products back into the United States.

The bill included a payroll tax holiday for companies that bring jobs back from overseas, ended tax breaks for plants that shut down to go elsewhere, and blocked companies from deferring their tax bill year to year by keeping money out of the U.S.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/28/gop-chamber-of-commerce_n_741970.html

• Link
• Report this comment

Heard this song earlier, and it brought back some good memories:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tf79lOZ7inw

• Link
• Report this comment

Hey Matti, hope you’re doing well. I’m back in Atlanta finishing up packing. I’m down to just a computer now……

• Link
• Report this comment

md,

I also have a history of being a regular chuch-goer and witness of the Baptist persuasion. So? I support your right to whatever religious beliefs you have, and only take issue when people try to insert their beliefs into the rights of others’ pursuit of happiness. Having been both an embracer of religion, and one who now personally rejects religion and religious hypocrites just as much as I reject atheists’ claims that they KNOW there is “no God,” I feel okay expressing my observations and opinions on the subject. I could be right, they could be wrong? Who knows? Nobody, really. So?

• Link
• Report this comment

Bruno,

Small-town life is an adjustment! Find any bunnies yet?

• Link
• Report this comment

Bruno,

You’re welcome and hope all goes well — don’t be a stranger.

And Matti — you do know how some people have the whole “criticism equates to bashing” syndrome. I so do wish there were a cure for that.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay that is why BOTH parties make me sick……. Neither cares about American’s period….just themselves and what they can do for themselves.

The two party system is a JOKE at this point, and lawyers are never to be trusted…..that about says it all for me !

• Link
• Report this comment

What did Flag Boy do that was so bad? Repeat after me….NCLB, NCLB, NCLB and now Aspen Insitute, Aspen Institute, Aspen Institute…

As for the thread, I think it’s kind of funny when we take to talking about what the Founding Fathers had in mind…pretty much they were winging in. They did a pretty good job, mind you, but what would they think? “This is another fine mess you’ve got us into, Ollie” is my bet.

BTW, did anybody catch that PBS special that reran last p.m. on Dolley Madison? It did a pretty good job of bringing out just how “civilized” those folks back in time and place really were…history, I fear, does indeed lead to enchantment!

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay

Well, seeing as how the Senate leadership pretty much shut out his social agenda, I can understand why he’s a bit irked. Hopefully the rank and file have the same opinion of him as the leadership.

Question: Those aren’t Constitutional requirements, they were added by the Senate. So…. why don’t Democrats introduce legislation to do away with those provisions? Play it up as a way to return to effective governance? They’re going to lose control of the Senate anyway. It’d be to their advantage.

Brett 12:52

“DeMint and millions of low-born, ill-bred Repugs like him”

Spoken as a true adherent of Progressive thought. Ah, Progressives. High born, well-bred, so much evidenced by their language.

Hey Bosch

Blogging at Luko’s? Why bother? We all came here!

TaxPayer

“Ya’ll lost me when you started talking about DeMint being born.”

Reason enough for a law to ban cloning?

• Link
• Report this comment

Bruno,

Re: moving in with strippers. That’s what Brett Michaels, Tommy Lee and Axel Rose and them did back in the 80’s. They always had cash to feed the starving musicians, washed their nasty clothes, (lent them some of theirs) and put makeup on their faces and fixed their hair. A whole GENRE was born! A decade of hair-band ballads and rock-the-house hard riffs were born from being alone, hungry, and crashing at a stripper’s pad. Could be great for you!

• Link
• Report this comment

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrJ1EUrJhOQ

A carved oak table
Tells a tail
Of times when kings and queens sipped wine from goblets gold
And the brave would lead their ladies from out the room to arbours cool

A time of valour, and legends born
A time when honour meant much more to a man than life
And the days knew only strife to tell right from wrong
Through lance and sword

• Link
• Report this comment

Bruno – that is why I like the penny stocks – infinite upside, but can only go down to zero……..

• Link
• Report this comment

Matti – as I said – just curious. And maybe I’m reading more into it than there is……..blogs don’t come with much insight.

• Link
• Report this comment

Dangit, B.

Now I’ve got *orange* songs on my mind!

For Hillbilly…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXNwVnOZ6BU&feature=related

• Link
• Report this comment

That’s what Brett Michaels, Tommy Lee and Axel Rose and them did back in the 80’s.

I guess I was always more of a 70s stoner than an 80s rocker, but here’s for you, Matti. Love always, ok?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6SDIpETcgE

• Link
• Report this comment

Sturm und Drang? Ach! Hmmmmm…..

• Link
• Report this comment

The Senate operates under the theory that it is one continuous body stretching back to 1792 or thereabouts.

“The ship wherein Theseus and the youth of Athens returned [from Crete] had thirty oars, and was preserved by the Athenians down even to the time of Demetrius Phalereus, for they took away the old planks as they decayed, putting in new and stronger timber in their place, insomuch that this ship became a standing example among the philosophers, for the logical question of things that grow; one side holding that the ship remained the same, and the other contending that it was not the same.”—Plutarch, Theseus

• Link
• Report this comment

“However going the second route would engender sturm und drang like we haven’t seen in a long time.”

And some of us would argue that is all we’ve been seeing.

• Link
• Report this comment

Didn’t Senator Brooks beat Senator Sumner with a cane back in the 1850’s? Haven’t seen any of that happening lately.

• Link
• Report this comment

md

And I would be on the side of that argument…

• Link
• Report this comment

Bruno – just think, leaving Atl one gains 1-3 hours of their life back per day just by getting out of the traffic. That alone made my move worth it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay 4:11

I was afraid of that.

Thank you.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bruno,

You’ll still visit us here, right? It’s not like you’re moving to the other side of the world.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul,

Here’s a thread where we went through that rule change stuff. I haven’t gone through the comments to see if we ever actually accomplished anything.</a.

No quotes from the founders about how horrible those historic precedents were though.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bruno,

21st-Century 70’s band:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUKvfKzHYTg
In each song (first album) you can identify a different 70’s influence. Pretty cool, IMO.

• Link
• Report this comment

md @ 4:21– 1.5 hours per day savings for me, plus working 1/2 day less. Unfortunately, too much free time gets me in trouble. I’d rather be working.

Matti @ 4:25– I hope my new life doesn’t involve too much time on the computer. I won’t have internet for a few months anyway. I’m sure that I’ve already said all that I can say, likely twice or more.

Phone canceled, now have to deal with Comcast……

• Link
• Report this comment

Hillbilly

My Freudian slip’s been dragging the ground lately!

• Link
• Report this comment

In our founding father’s time, Senators were appointed by the states to represent state’s interests and protect states rights. Yeah, they would be horrified that Senators are now elected by popular vote in each state.

• Link
• Report this comment

Kind of like Chavez wants to do down South, right Chris D?

• Link
• Report this comment

“In our founding father’s time, Senators were appointed by the states to represent state’s interests and protect states rights.”

Maybe we need to quit calling them US Senators – looks as if it went to their head and they think they work for the Feds. Call them State Representatives and maybe they can remember why they are there.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Life without internet? That just ain’t right….”

Not too sure it isn’t better. Kind of miss the days when folks weren’t connected 24/7 and people actually drove the car as option number one.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hey NetBanker!! If only Mara and JokesOn were here, we would have a true W2W reunion. Hope all is well with you, friend.

• Link
• Report this comment

md
And there’s just something about turning the pages of a book…not to mention they can be read by candlelight when the power goes off…

Hillbilly
That’s a good one!

• Link
• Report this comment

Don’t mess with Elmo.

http://news.mydaily.com/2010/09/28/elmo-strikes-back/?ncid=webmail

• Link
• Report this comment

In the end, the Octomom always knew she could depend upon the US government to take care of her stupidity and mistakes in judgement, no matter how absurd. This is the case with way too many people in this country now. She is a shining example of how people will abuse the system if they know that they have a safety net provided by the government. That is the system that the Democrats have laid out for us and that is why we are headed for a third world country economic status.

• Link
• Report this comment

Pogo,

Octomom? Really? The Democrats forced that quack doctor to load her crazy azz up with embryos? How does “octomom” even happen in the first place? (How about because states across the country have had to cut programs for the mentally ill! Georgia is one of the worst.) If your solution to undesirables is simply to starve them out of existence, they why don’t you say so? Children should know better than to be born to irresponsible parents, right? If they didn’t when they got here, they sure WILL after you’re in charge? I’m sure given even more corporate welf— I mean, “tax incentives,” WalMart will hire those kids when they’re seven or eight.

• Link
• Report this comment

See what you stirred up with that Octomom?

I do what I can.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hey Bru-dog! So where are you moving? You think you’ll miss your house, but likely not as much as you expect. We did some serious downsizing by unexpectedly selling our big house in Avondale and moving into a condo 1/3 the size in Midtown. The unexpected part is that it wasn’t on the market and our former agent showed the house because we were out of town to do some skiing. About the only thing I miss is coming home on a hot day and being able to strip nekkid to jump in the pool…which I could still do, but it might freak out some of the people in the building.

“You don’t need a $300 coffee maker to make great coffee, or a $400 pair of shoes to rock an outfit, but some people just don’t see that.” Too true, Matti! Of course if you’re smart you can still have the designer duds or expensive coffee maker at a steep discount by shopping at the outlets when there is a killer sale or hitting consignment shops. But that partly goes back to the instant gratification we’ve come to expect…it takes time and patience to find the great bargain.

• Link
• Report this comment

Quit whining, Jay, your moron Democrat party had sixty votes in the Senate for quite a while. I suppose you won’t be happy until the Idiot Messiah has 100 little Democrat fascists in the Senate.

• Link
• Report this comment

CorpVet

I’ll argue with you on that. I think that they’d be quite happy to see we have a man of color as President. I think they’d be relieved to know that the problem they grappled with and couldn’t solve has turned out as well as it has in what is really a very short time…

• Link
• Report this comment

I don’t know, josef. What was it, a black person represented 3/5 of a person? So if Obama’s 1/2 black, finding the common denominator he’d be 5/10 black yet a black person is only 6/10 of a person……..someone do the math.

• Link
• Report this comment

“…they would be horrified at having a black President as well.” Good thing that hasn’t happened yet?

• Link
• Report this comment

Back to my 5:50, if Obama’s 5/10 black yet the Founding Fathers considered black people only 6/10 of a person, then that would leave Obama being 3/10 of a person. I disagree with that. He’s a whole person, but a 3/10 President would be just about right.

• Link
• Report this comment

Pogo: “This is the case with way too many people in this country now. She is a shining example of how people will abuse the system if they know that they have a safety net provided by the government. That is the system that the Democrats have laid out for us and that is why we are headed for a third world country economic status”

See this folks? This is what you get when you have a national discourse that is taken over by a runaway right wing.

So you think that a ‘government safety net’ is what’s responsible for the abuse of the system?

Meanwhile I notice a deafening silence from you on the REAL system abuses, the ones that will land us in banana republic territory faster that you can bounce up and down on your pogo stick, the fact that CEOs of financial firms line their pockets on taxpayer money – OUR money – used to bail them out. Why the silence there Pogo?

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, count me in with the other Conservatives on this blog. If people want happiness they need to clap and cry out because they got a scrap of bread and a few beans on the table. Just don’t take money from us. The easiest way to be happy is to wake up every day glad you’re alive and can move around and beg for your dinner if you have to. We got ours and we aim to keep it. That’s what this election is about. I say to all the poor people and cripples out there, get out and work and get your own. I ain’t your Daddy. Stop trying to get the guvmint to pick my pocket.

Some Conservatives won’t come out and tell the truth. I just did. If you don’t like it, lump it.

• Link
• Report this comment

NetB–Moving to Columbus, GA. Two weeks onto the new job, just have to finish packing up all my crap. I live pretty simply, but it’s amazing how much stuff you can accumulate in 12 years in 1 house. I’ll eventually have to give half my stuff away to Goodwill unless I want to pay storage fees for the rest of my life.

About the only thing I miss is coming home on a hot day and being able to strip nekkid to jump in the pool…which I could still do, but it might freak out some of the people in the building.

Still looking buff???

• Link
• Report this comment

Hillbilly

I’m not at all trying to be sanctimonious here, but that commandment is the one which has caused me the least difficulty…the other nine? Well, there’s where I have a problem…

Florence King said you can always tell a Southerner…there’s always ONE commandment they won’t break and it’s generally the one that appeals to them the least!

• Link
• Report this comment

If conservatives believe “we’ve got ours and we aim to keep it”, what do liberals believe?

You’ve got yours and we aim to take it?

• Link
• Report this comment

Appears that Elvis may have purloined his wardrobe from the Founding Fathers and Madison in particular. With a little lip snarl, I believe the ‘Father of the Consitution’ would be a dead ringer for ‘The King’.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hillbilly and joseph nix,

Know what I covet more than wealth? (Although I’d love the freedom to see more of the world…) (Okay, okay, so the really good Scotch takes serious coin, but really..) Faith. People seem to find comfort in the belief that “everything is going to be fine” if they just believe hard enough. Things will be GREAT and totally work out if we just ask the right way and trust. (Things not working out? You’re not trusting hard enough!) The truth is, many things are just NOT going to be fine and will never be fine, and there is no “meaning” or “purpose” to horrible tragedy. Some nights when I can’t sleep, I wish I could be “as a child” again, to know that some unseen giant was there to protect me, that somehow in the whole grand universe, lil’ ol’ me actually mattered. I see why people cling to it. Sleeping pills are too scary, and late night cable sux.

• Link
• Report this comment

Matti
September 28th, 2010
6:10 pm

Not meaning to horn in because your comment wasn’t directed to me, but I have a different view of faith. Faith is not the panacea for everything that goes wrong. Instead, I find faith to be the thing that helps me cope with and endure the hard times. Not always easy but it has helped me in the past.

• Link
• Report this comment

matti
Look, I’m not trying to pick an argument, okay? If I wanted to dwell on it, I could be a miserable wreck and I could tell you stories to make your hair stand on end, but I am a happy and content person because I dwell on that which is good. Faith is just that. If I have a choice between a faith that it will turn out for the best and faith that it will not, why shouldn’t I be an optimist?

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay, you must be “All Shook Up”.

• Link
• Report this comment

Oh, you wrote it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay

September 28th, 2010
5:59 pm

Johns Adams quote was exactly for that purpose, it was a defense of the U.S. Constitution

It was written for that exact purpose, hell even said it in the title.

A Defense of the Constitution of Government of the United States of America”, Vol. III, p. 217, from ‘The Right Constitution of a Commonwealth Examined’, Letter VI, (Philadelphia: William Young, 1797)

Or are we only allowed to use the Federalist Papers?

Or are you honestly telling me that you don’t think “A Defense of the Constitution of Government of the United States of America” is dealing with the Constitution?

• Link
• Report this comment

AmVet

September 28th, 2010
6:17 pm

oh I wish my speakers worked….

Don’t be surprised…. way more of a 70s 80s music guy than most who meet me would assume.

That appears to be around the same genre and time span as much of the music i like….

We don’t have to agree we just have to respect each other….. a very wise man in my life told me that once and it applies to everything everyday.

• Link
• Report this comment

AmVet
September 28th, 2010
6:17 pm

Classic indeed! One of Steely Dan’s best.

• Link
• Report this comment

DAVE R…

Jay? Cherry pick? Hush yo mouth!

• Link
• Report this comment

“Because it soothes the savage breast…”

Haven’t had the luck to run across any of those…..

• Link
• Report this comment

Of course Mr. Bookman the founding fathers also thought that highest office that a citizen should vote for was that of Congressman. Senators were chosen by the state legislatures, and presidents by the electoral college. In addition the foundig fathers also were against the imposition of an income tax. It is so interesting that Mr. Bookman cites the founding fathers when it is convenient. Is he proposing the repeal of the 16th and 17th amendments.
Furthermore, the general welfare and commerce clauses have been stretched beyond any resemblance of their original intent.

• Link
• Report this comment

Speaking of sweet old school music, I just got a call from one of my dear friends, and guess who’s going to see Rush tomorrow night?!

Hell to the yeah! I’ve always wanted to see them!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diUNDsP3Hns

• Link
• Report this comment

I wasn’t trying to open a can of worms, I was just intending to say, that “Thou shalt not covet”, is probably broken by more people than most of the other commandments. “Covet” can be any number of things besides wealth. Those who do keep that under control are ahead of the game, in my opinion.

• Link
• Report this comment

Let’s see a raise of hands among you lefties here about who’s going to DC to march with the Marxists, communists, socialists, union thugs, etc., in DC this Saturday?

What a group of loons. I hope it the event gets a lot of MSM coverage.

• Link
• Report this comment

“any suggestion that the top 2% don’t need a tax cut”

Is it better to bake more pies or fight over the slices of one??

“Make the pie higher.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay 1:28
Do you agree with the way Obamacare was rammed down the throat of the people and promoted with half-truths, lies, and more half-truths?

• Link
• Report this comment

matti

With all due respect, much of this comes from what is one’s traditional view of what G-d is or supposed to be and the dogmatic. It is quite permissible in my faith to be angry with and argue with G-d, that is that over which we have no control and do not understand. Indeed, it is a requirement for it is only through questioning that that we come to a better understanding of self in that great scheme of things. Have you read Elie Wiesel? Rabbi Richard Rubenstein?

• Link
• Report this comment

Hillbilly
That’s why I said I wasn’t trying to be sanctimonious. It’s just that, for whatever reason, to covet is just not that much a part of my nature/character. I am sure that no small part of that comes from the fact that I have pretty much always had whatever it was I wanted…partly from luck of the draw and partly from my own efforts. I agree with the rabbincal teaching that it is coveting which leads us to all our other “sins.” I make no pretense that I am immune to it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone/GA, but, but, the Messiah said unemployment would not rise above 8% if we passed the stimulus…….

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone

Where are those jobs? Sinkiang and Uttar Pradesh?

• Link
• Report this comment

If only we reduce the corporate tax rate to zero for all American businesses we can get out of this mess.

Brought to you by your friends at the Parallel Reality Corporation.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone, the last 2 years of a Democrat CONGRESS got us a 10% unemployment rate. Passing legislation that doesn’t create jobs, while ignoring the issues that got us into a recession got us to a 10% unemployment rate.

GOVERNMENT got us a 10% unemployment rate, Doggone.

• Link
• Report this comment

“If lower taxes on the richest leads to more jobs…then where the HELL ARE ALL THOSE JOBS?”

And the question may very well be “how many more would have been lost”. We can be certain though that only the private sector can “create” the income necessary for jobs, and taking money out of that sector in a time of recession is not wise.

• Link
• Report this comment

WHERE ARE THEY?

In countries with lower wages.

• Link
• Report this comment

Kamchak, what’s sad is you’re probably right. Nation building in the wrong nation.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Then where are the jobs that those lower taxes are creating? WHERE ARE THEY?”

If you are still employed, it may very well be your job.

Think about it – it isn’t how many are currently created, but how many are currently maintained. And if even more money is removed from the private sector, then more jobs may very well be LOST.

• Link
• Report this comment

“And if even more money is removed from the private sector, then more jobs may very well be LOST.”

But like everyone else that spouts that bunch of baloney, you act like “taking the money out” means burning it up. It GETS SPENT. It goes back into the economy. It saves and/or creates jobs. The government won’t sit on it like those poor deprived rich people are doing RIGHT NOW. The government will get it circulating. And the more circulating the better. If I had my way, I’d put the tax rates on EVERYONE back to where they were before those disasterous “Bush” tax cuts and I’d do it right now.

• Link
• Report this comment

I don’t understand what the argument is all about. Just put on another shift at the mint and print some more money.

• Link
• Report this comment

“It GETS SPENT. It goes back into the economy. It saves and/or creates jobs.”

Useless, government, jobs. That don’t produce anything. You’re probably the last person on earth that still believes that the $800 billion stimulus package saved or created anything but government jobs, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

And thank goodness you won’t ever get your way on taxes. Although you’re now qualified to serve in the Obama Treasury Dept. (sarcasm)

• Link
• Report this comment

Mr_B, you go on believing that nonsense all you want. It is government INTERVENTION in the free market that produced this recession, and prolonged it.

• Link
• Report this comment

**A global correction in the job market…**

Only because people like you are willing to accept it……we should declare economic war, adopt more of an isolationist attitude then unleash some home grown infrastructure building and promote buy american with newer, fairer, tariffs.

• Link
• Report this comment

“…accountants only slow things down, figures get in the way…”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ozAc-Vmbu0

• Link
• Report this comment

Fly

• Link
• Report this comment

Ross Perot was twenty years too late.

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=industrial_policy_the_road_not_taken_

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone/GA

It’s amazing how many times you have to pound that home. I remember one time listening to limbaugh saying that the gov’t doesn’t create one job period. Absolute malarkey. Just take one piece of military hardware and literally every nut and bolt has to be made by the private sector. These people are brainwashed, an apt term if ever there was one.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay didn’t seem so concerned with “trodding upon the Constitution” with the filibuster when he wrote:

“So the Republicans were threatening to strip the minority of its historic right to filibuster by ignoring the equally historic requirement of a two-thirds majority to change Senate rules. If carried out, such a revolution would permanently alter the core nature and tradition of the Senate.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Just take one piece of military hardware and literally every nut and bolt has to be made by the private sector.

Mick—that’s not always a good thing.

What’s Long, Hard, and Wrapped in a “Wal-Mart Tarp”?

Of all the complicated gadgets in the Pentagon’s arsenal, a nuclear submarine is one that probably shouldn’t be built on the cheap. Yet according to military analysts, that’s precisely what the Navy and two defense contractors did with a series of $2 billion attack subs, and now they’re literally dropping chunks of their protective skins into the briny deep.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone/GA

It pisses me off too because we are just spinning our wheels with the repubs who actually think doing nothing is a good thing and the something that they do want to do is preserve a 3% tax cut for millionaires and billionaires. I just don’t get it..

• Link
• Report this comment

Mick: It works this way. The millionaire and billionaires run the corporations that can now spend unlimited money to get Mssrs. McConnel and Boehner re-elected. You got to look out for your constituents.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Only because people like you are willing to accept it……we should declare economic war, adopt more of an isolationist attitude then unleash some home grown infrastructure building and promote buy american with newer, fairer, tariffs.”

A trade war is your answer Mick??

Wow……

• Link
• Report this comment

Do you agree with the way Obamacare was rammed down the throat of the people and promoted with half-truths, lies, and more half-truths?

I must say it: you’re an absolute, irretriveably broken moron. Rammed down your throats? Do you remember the lies about death panels? About how the government was going to take control of your healthcare? And it was an absolute majority of the Senate and the House that passed the healthcare law.

Do you have trouble finding the bathroom at night? Perhaps you soil yourself when nobody is around to take care of you. I repeat: you’re a moron and a liar, sir. I have my gorge full, and I’m especially sick of morons like you. You are a racist, sir. You resent extending any help to minorities and to the poor.

• Link
• Report this comment

“If tax cuts would result in more jobs they ALREADY WOULD HAVE. They have not.”

Again, how many have they saved?? We don’t know.

Sorry, can’t agree that taking money out of people’s pockets will result in them spending more – just makes no sense. I can’t spend what I don’t have.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Looks like their karma did run over our dogma…”

I would have said it the other way around.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mick, you know what one of the major problems this nation has is? YOU! And people just like you who are running around saying Republicans want to cut taxes for millionairs and billionairs. It’s a lie, Mick, and YOU are telling it. And it’s intended to sway the opinions of stupid people (ie, Democrats).

The truth is the Democrats plan is to increase taxes on these people which in reality for a small business owner making $500K is $15,000 or more in real dollars. This is not a tax cut by Republicans in any way shape or form. Thats a lie. You dunces act like that $15K is just excess money they’re spending on caviar and Dom Pernion and they can just cut back to cover it. The truth is that’s their mortgage, their car payment, their lawn care company, their house cleaners, etc, etc, etc. Somebody is going to become unemployed when you RAISE their taxes.

Like it or not, that’s the cold hard truth of the lies YOU are selling to the dunces in your party who aren’t smart enough to know the difference between a tax cut and and an increase. Own it, Mick! It’s all you and you lying to the dunces is a major problem.

• Link
• Report this comment

“It’s broke because revenues tanked when people quit spending money, and we decided to give tax breaks to too many interests.”

And revenues are going to pick back up if we take more money away from folks?? Not gonna happen. What you gain in income tax you lose in all the other consumer taxes. Probably a good chance you end up with less revenue.

• Link
• Report this comment

Brunooooo!

Say you’ll be back! LIE to us! (That’s what women want, you know.)

BTW, you were wrong about my legs.
{;->

• Link
• Report this comment

Brother Bruno, this little slice of on-line heaven will be the worse for your absence.

Don’t forget us and come back when you can, OK?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8Iwmcs1hps

• Link
• Report this comment

Sorry Jay – that employee is an expense on the books like any other expense. Many of these small corps are s-corps, which are taxed through the owner. I can guarantee you that owner will be crunching the numbers and if that expense is the only way to cut back, than bye bye employee. Not to mention the savings associated with benefits.

• Link
• Report this comment

“So how many jobs go bye-bye??”

The question seems to be predicated on the supposition that someone making $500K is already employing all the people he or she possibly can. I’m not seeing it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay @8:44 Well said, sir!!! Job creation derives from the economic interest of the employer. According to md, an employer can fire everybody and keep ALL the money….. oh, wait, I think they’ve figured it out already.

• Link
• Report this comment

“that employee is an expense on the books like any other expense”

sure they are, but they are an expense the company would not have UNLESS they are bringing more in that it costs to keep them. Since business taxes are paid on profit not INCOME, an increase in taxes has no effect on the cost of keeping the employe. As Jay has already said, that you totally ignored.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Sounds like a fairy tale to me – raise taxes AND pay down the deficit.”

Wasn’t this actually DONE not oh so long ago? Hmmm…. thinking… thinking…… Anyone?

• Link
• Report this comment

josef, that is FAR from simple minded.

Many people, even otherwise savvy business owners are totally hung up on cost. And NOT value.

There is a huge difference.

It is why people flock to Walmart and other outlets to buy cheap junk that will break down in three years.

Had they leaned about things like total cost of ownership, they would have bought a superior product that would have lasted ten.

So when I hear people bitch endlessly about the taxes they pay, it is likely that they don’t understand that it is what they get, or don’t get, in return that is the real issue…

• Link
• Report this comment

g’night…

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay B,

Wasn’t it Bruce Benedict they said would come in third in a race with a pregnant woman? I think McCann might have come in 4th. Too bad that ball didn’t bounce over the wall and save them from their own stupidity.

• Link
• Report this comment

If all the employed people in the country were really making a profit for their employer then there wouldn’t be a need to ever lower the workforce.

• Link
• Report this comment

it ate my post, so I apologize if this duplicates:

md,

It’s my understanding that the person making $251K will be taxed on the first $250K at the EXACT same rate as someone making less than $250K, and it is only the extra $1K that is taxed at the higher rate, NOT the whole bucket. Did I hear this right? Or does your understanding differ?

• Link
• Report this comment

How much productivity do you think you can wring out of a single human being. Americans already work longer hours for less pay than any other industrialized nation. And why do you think that employing someone entails debt. I’ve worked for a lot of organizations and I made more money for them than they paid me. I wouldn’t have wanted it any other way.

• Link
• Report this comment

[...] via Founding Fathers would be horrified at today’s Senate | Jay Bookman. [...]

• Link
• Report this comment

and McCann is a great catcher and hitter. He just can’t … run.

In his defense, how many fast catchers have you ever seen, especially after they’ve played a few years.

and fire all the employees and the rich get to keep all that profit

First they’d have to learn what those employees have been doing for years. Most of the ones I’ve worked for, would struggle mightily with that.

• Link
• Report this comment

OK, googling it and getting hits. Heard it on the TV while putting groceries away. The FIRST $250K is taked at the same rate for everybody. If you make $300K, ONLY the last $50K is taxed at the higher rate. Not the whole bucket. It’s not quite the dire punishment for working hard that some people make it out to be.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bravos break through for three in the seventh. (Fingers crossed…)

• Link
• Report this comment

Ah Jay… Nice history lesson; but such a short memory.. The Democrats have spent their fair share of time blocking legislation. Why not as much as the Republicans do today? Simple, they gave in…

Nice try though… If the House and Senate ‘flip’ – we’ll see how much time you spend on this when this situation is reversed. Actually we will not; because anyone who bothers to catch your blog knows that you are about as open minded as Fox and CNBC…

• Link
• Report this comment

Contrary to the moaning on the right, there is NO disincentive to making more by working harder. You just get to keep 2.5% less of the additional income, its not being taxed at 100%. That would be a disincentive.

• Link
• Report this comment

And a “slippery slope” is a well known logical fallacy, along with the ad hominem argument and the appeal to false authority. My ninth graders know that.

• Link
• Report this comment

“if he owes 2 mill, he ain’t doing so great is he??”

If he owes that much he must be doing well enough that a bank thought him a good loan risk…otherwise they wouldn’t have lent that money to begin with.

• Link
• Report this comment

I think we just need to get rid of all taxes and regulations and let that handful of super smart educated folks just go ahead and finish acquiring all the money, because they is just so good at doing that, and then there won’t be anything left to fuss about and we can all get on with our lives. I suggest bartering.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Most debts are an expense against the profit – which means LESS taxes paid. ”

Uhhh…. wrong. Debt is not a deduction – interest on that debt would be, but a company does not get to deduct all their debt.

• Link
• Report this comment

“if he owes 2 mill, he ain’t doing so great is he??”

If he owes that much he must be doing well enough that a bank thought him a good loan risk…otherwise they wouldn’t have lent that money to begin with.

I hear that’s only half a Deal.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay: Give ME the 300k and call the taxes an even grand extra. I can afford to be generous.

• Link
• Report this comment

“would pay an additional $734 in taxes under Obama’s plan.”

and if that’s enough to cause them to fire an employee – talk about SLAVE WAGES!

• Link
• Report this comment

“If he owes that much he must be doing well enough that a bank thought him a good loan risk…otherwise they wouldn’t have lent that money to begin with.”

Yep, every failed bank in the US thought that at one time.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Debt is not a deduction – interest on that debt would be, but a company does not get to deduct all their debt”

Whatever they can deduct REDUCES their taxes.

• Link
• Report this comment

No, ethical considerations are important. It’s just that some of us don’t consider unrestrained self-interest to be especially ethical.

• Link
• Report this comment

“If they are struggling it’s because they don’t have enough customers, not because of taxes. They could, actually, stay afloat even without a profit – as long as they can pay their bills. No profit means no taxes.”

It is pretty obvious you have never owned your own business. No profit doesn’t do much for the debt load. That is why so many are going under. The bank can care less if there is or isn’t profit, they want their money.

• Link
• Report this comment

Many of those failed banks thought that colaterized default swaps were a good bet. A lot of them around Atlanta thought that there was an unlimited demand for 6,00 square foot houses.

• Link
• Report this comment

Founding Fathers would be horrified at today’s Senate
12:42 pm September 28, 2010, by Jay
——————-

After all of the wasteful, obscene spending and outrageous growth in government, you bet they would.

• Link
• Report this comment

“The bank can care less if there is or isn’t profit, they want their money”

and what part of “as long as they can pay their bills” did you not understand?

• Link
• Report this comment

“It’s just that some of us don’t consider unrestrained self-interest to be especially ethical.”

I certainly hope you are including the won’ts in your defintion of self-interest…….

• Link
• Report this comment

@md: Sure am. Don’t know many, though.

• Link
• Report this comment

When I was running a business (for somebody else), we had 3 types of expenses, variable expenses, semi-fixed expenses, and fixed expenses. So not all expenses are equal. Some you can adjust fairly easily and some you’re pretty well stuck with. The trick is to bring in enough to cover them all and to be able to have a pretty good idea, how much you’re going to bring in, in a given period.

• Link
• Report this comment

…the Democrats have a hammerlock on all branches of government.

The Democrats control SCOTUS?

• Link
• Report this comment

Barry: Go back (well, a looong way back) and check out just who has the “hammerlock” in the Senate.

• Link
• Report this comment

“He’s making less money, he’s making less profit, he’s paying LESS TAXES. Under the conditions you state, if he’s letting people go it’s because he doesn’t have ENOUGH BUSINESS to continue paying them. How much he’s paying in taxes has NOTHING to do with that decision.”

Are you really that stupid? Seriously? You do understand these tax bills are paid in real dollars don’t you? Not in Monopoly money. The only reason he’s paying less in taxes is because HE HAS LESS INCOME. From your reply, it would appear you think the business pays this person a salary and that salary has nothing to do with the health or profitability of the business. The business can make less money, but the rich guy still gets his money and should be able to fork over an additional $15K without missing it? Is that right? It doesn’t work that way in the real world, dude.

It’s quite clear most of you liberals have never owned a business or been in any position where you’ve been responsible for budgets and P&L’s, cause you’re clueless…….and dangerous. OMG!!

• Link
• Report this comment

“the Democrats have a hammerlock on all branches of government. ”

didn’t actually READ Jay’s piece I see.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone/GA
September 28th, 2010
————–

I’m sure you know all about Jay’s piece.

• Link
• Report this comment

Okay. So, taxes is the roots of all conservative’s evils, I guess, and the Republicans, while they controlled all three houses, passed legislation that gave out temporary tax cuts with the bulk of those tax cuts going to folks that were making millions and billions and they funded those tax cuts by skimming all the excess from the payroll taxes and by borrowing money from China and others and then in order to pay for the cuts, they set up the cuts to expire and then everyone that got cuts would start paying for them again. Have I got it right so far. I mean, I just want to get a good understanding of this most serious tax problem we got brewing here in these United States.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mick, your argument is that dry cleaners don’t make $350K in Georgia? Really? If you can’t form a more relevant arguement for a tax increase than that, stay out of the discussion. You’re not qualified to be here. Go share your opinion at the Simpson’s blog or something.

Just so you get the point, it doesn’t make any difference if the person owns a dry cleaner, a sub shop, an oil change place or a dentist office, the facts I presented to you don’t change. If you want to debate the facts of the impact of your tax increase on these people, feel free, but debating how much dry cleaners make is STUPID. Man up or move on.

• Link
• Report this comment

Gee:RB, the small business guys I worked for did exactly that: paid themselves and the relative employees a salary out of the profit on the business. If times got hard, they might decide to pay themselves less or to lay somebody off. I don’t remember any of them taking home over 250K in income: the business might well have that much or more in sales, but sales aren’t profit. To incur an additional 15K in annual taxes, he’d have to be making way more that 250K a year, and he’d be able to hire a fancy accountant and a tax attourney to make sure he didn’t pay a dime.

• Link
• Report this comment

md; I currently make (pause for laughter) a living trying to teach those kids who drop out. A few of them “won’t”, many of them “can’t” in the environment we provide for them, and some of them are never really given a chance. But they are emphatically NOT the intentional parasites you suggest.

• Link
• Report this comment

rb

Its pretty hard to debate a dumb head ding a ling such as yourself…I was using dry cleaners as an EXAMPLE….still you never were quite able to answer the question, show me a small business on main street anywhere in georgia that is making over 250k in profit? I’m sure thee are a few but the other 98% are no where near. How is a 3% tax increase going to impact them? The simple answer is – it won’t….you are spinning your wheels for nothing….

• Link
• Report this comment

BTW RB, it works like this. If he can make an additional 32K from the guy he hires, and pays an additional 8k in taxes, he pockets 24K. Not that hard when you think about it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone: many of them already have.

• Link
• Report this comment

Wags gets 3 Ks in the 9th.

Still hanging and hoping for October baseball…

• Link
• Report this comment

“and he’d be able to hire a fancy accountant and a tax attourney to make sure he didn’t pay a dime.”

Another LIE told for the benefit of the dunces.

Unless he’s an idiot, his accountant was already doing everything he could to reduce the man’s taxes. There is nothing the accountant can do to make 36% into 33% unless he chooses to act like a cabinet level Democrat and simply doesn’t pay his taxes.

Again, you are either the LIAR trying to fool the dunces or you are the dunce being fooled by the LIE. Take your pick.

• Link
• Report this comment

Dog: My point was the very rich don’t pay taxes, at least if they’re smart.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hedge fund managers would have to pay 15% on their billion dollar earnings if they did not have loopholes that allow them to pay no taxes. Perhaps they have good reason to be upset with the expiration of those temporary tax cuts. They might actually get stuck with a one-time bill from their accountants to reconfigure their portfolios back to zero tax liability. Must be tough to be a billionaire.

• Link
• Report this comment

“RB; How many of that 47% don’t have an income? How many make a living from capitol gains that are not taxed as income. How many are under 18? Your number is meaningless.”

Why don’t you tell us what those percentages are so we can have a meaningful discussion about the issue? Hurry back with some actual numbers and not your bleeding heart opinions.

• Link
• Report this comment

“and who can better afford to pay it”

Nothing more than weath envy. You have no knowledge of the finances of these people. You don’t know that they’re struggling to pay their mortgage because their business is suffering. The only thing you know is they make more money than you and you’re entitled to some of it.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Is that the scenario you are trying to craft?”

Nah, not really…he just waits for a chance to throw that “wealth envy” bit because he thinks it actually means something. I don’t know what he thinks it means…but it MUST mean SOMETHING.

• Link
• Report this comment

Gotta go, gang. Its been fun.

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, from looking at the link Doggone supplied, it appears that everybody has their own definition of a small business. Mr_B’s SBA definition is one, while the SEC has a quite different one. For SEC purposes, small businesses are defined as domestic companies with revenues of under $25 million, and not investment companies. Subsidiaries of larger companies do not qualify as small businesses.

So, I guess it’s all in the eye of the beholder. Thanks for the info.

• Link
• Report this comment

Is that Joe Wilson fella moonlighting or something. Maybe teaching a class on his use of the words, “You Lie!”, and how you can use these two simple words in everyday conversation too.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay, what was the couple’s income before the economy tanked and what level of income are their expenses based on? When you return with that answer, we’ll discuss whether or not they can afford another $800. You don’t have a right to only look at their income and not consider the other real factors in their life. That’s not your right and it’s not your right to take their money because it’s your opinion they can afford to pay it.

You simpletons just don’t get it do you? You might do yourself a favor by thinking for a change.

• Link
• Report this comment

If I started making less money and couldn’t live in the lifestyle I was used to, I give serious consideration to scaling back my lifestyle. That’s just me talking, though.

• Link
• Report this comment

**Puhleaseee……… Go sell that crap somewhere else**

Simpleton.

• Link
• Report this comment

“If I didn’t know better, I’d suspect that RB was Nathan Deal’s accountant.”

Jay, do you have a point you’d like to debate or are you going to take the liberal line of “can’t debate so belittle and call names”? Is that something you learned in “Journalism” school?

• Link
• Report this comment

I do find it interesting that so many find it except able that those with more should pay more “just because they can”.

Isn’t that the very definition of class warfare?

Sounds like a war where one side is losing and will eventually never win.

• Link
• Report this comment

You simpletons just don’t get it do you? You might do yourself a favor by thinking for a change.

Shorter RB: I can’t walk this back.

• Link
• Report this comment

“If I started making less money and couldn’t live in the lifestyle I was used to, I give serious consideration to scaling back my lifestyle”

Give us some examples of what you think a $500K earner should cut from their budget. Please be careful not to include things that will put others out of work in the process.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mick, all I’ve done is point out many of the lies being told by the liberals for the purpose of fooling the masses. I’m sorry if that hits a little close to home for you.

Do us a favor. Why would democrats call a reduction in the INCREASE of spending on education a “cut in education spending”? It’s still being INCREASED over current year, isn’t it? If not to scare their minions, what would be the purpose of spreading that lie?

Do you even realize you’re being lied to?

• Link
• Report this comment

“Maybe I’m inferring to much here, but this is offensive.”

Yes, you are inferring too much here. If you go back a few months, you will notice that I think societies priorities are upside down. Those that put their life on the line such as police, firemen, soldiers, etc should be making the big bucks, and the movie stars, athletes, and the rest of us should be on the lower end of the scale.

But that isn’t reality.

And since we choose everything we do, it’s nothing more than an excuse for the most part.

• Link
• Report this comment

Give us some examples of what you think a $500K earner should cut from their budget. Please be careful not to include things that will put others out of work in the process.

High end cars could go, boats could go, could move in to a smaller house and rent out the current one, if I couldn’t sell it. No more eating out, no more vacations, no more new clothes, other than a few off the rack essentials, jewelry could go (although in reality I don’t own any, always thought it was a waste) if you had stocks or bonds, etc, those could be sold. That’s just what popped into my head. I’m sure if I saw their budget I could come up with some more.

• Link
• Report this comment

HD,

I do believe that is his point – when you cut back on all those things, someone may very well be out of a job.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mick, most of these uber-angry cons would rather talk about Lenin, than listen to Lennon…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYLdmi_U99w

• Link
• Report this comment