House GOP sacrifices progress for purity

This is all about the cameras and popularity. DC has become the new reality tv show.

If all the media left and went to focus on something else misfit toyland would majically come up with a plan.

• Link
• Report this comment

Purity Like Ronald Reagan?

They not only sacrificed progress, they sacrificed their credibility.

The GOP really blew it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Re: David Brooks, gentle-souled moderates always view radicals with a mixture of disdain and horror.

• Link
• Report this comment

The GOP tax policies is one of their biggest mistakes, they appear to let the lust for money drive their world. They remind me of skinflint tippers.

• Link
• Report this comment

Maybe because the $4 trillion in cuts was a just full of reductions in increases and cuts ten year from now that almost certainly will be overturned. None of it was real, solid, immediate cuts that will make a difference.

• Link
• Report this comment

What I’m truly amazed by is that to my mind not a single observer anywhere has yet pointed out the main fact sharing us in the face with the Tea Party radicals that have now taken over the GOP: they are radically anti-capitalism.

There is no gesture more anti-capitalist in a sense than the utter rejection of the principle of debt.

These Tea Partiers haven’t read their Walter Bagehot. If they had, they’d realize that the economic system they claim to treasure is precisely what they are attacking root and branch by undermining our dependence on debt.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay – It’s because those deficit reductions that Obama was deferring to the future would never come about. That’s the sticking point. We need real reductions in spending now and Obama refuses to budge on that. He wants to tell everyone he’s a reasonable guy but he doesn’t want to stop current spending.

• Link
• Report this comment

Maybe because the $4 trillion in cuts was a just full of reductions in increases and cuts ten year from now that almost certainly will be overturned. None of it was real, solid, immediate cuts that will make a difference.,/i>

Consistency, thy name is honour.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch,

But it does look nice.

• Link
• Report this comment

“We need real reductions in spending now and Obama refuses to budge on that. He wants to tell everyone he’s a reasonable guy but he doesn’t want to stop current spending”

Except, Larry, everything that Obama has done is exactly the opposite of what you just wrote. Your Godheads at Fox and Rush can keep saying that, but it doesn’t make it true. Go outside, read a little.

• Link
• Report this comment

“The wealthiest of Americans”, the top 1% of wage earners in this country, already pay over 40% of all of the tax revenue. The top 5% pays 60%. The top 10% pays 71% and the top 25% pays close to 86%. The bottom 50% pays only 2.3%. How much is enough, libs? If you had to set up these percentages, how much would the “rich” pay? Give me some numbers.

• Link
• Report this comment

Gods of the New Dawn

I must admit, that would make a good band name.

• Link
• Report this comment

Peadawg,

After some of the things I’ve seen you write, I’d save the lectures to Jay.

• Link
• Report this comment

k71 — Isnt a progressive tax system great! I mean did you look at who owns the assets in the country.

• Link
• Report this comment

“After some of the things I’ve seen you write, I’d save the lectures to Jay.”

I agree. Jay says that phrase to me a lot. Kinda hypocritical of him, don’t ya think?

• Link
• Report this comment

This is all about the cameras and popularity. DC has become the new reality tv show.

No truer words have ever been “spoken” on this blog before.

We should start a new reality tv series and call it “Capital Capones”. The premise behind it would be the fact that a lot of our elected officials think like Capone, (”I have built my organization upon fear.”); ignorance (”I don’t even know what street Canada is on.”) and distortion (”When I sell liquor, it’s called bootlegging; when my patrons serve it on Lake Shore Drive, it’s called hospitality.”).

the show would be in th #1 slot for more years than E.R.

• Link
• Report this comment

Keep: ” for one am somewhat glad the GOP has failed by their own utter stupidity. Its not over but I continue to hope that events show the American People that the continued marginalization of the GOP and their extreme base to the likes of Norquist is a disaster for the country. Thankfully Obama has protected the country from their extreme.”

Unfortunately, I have to disagree. The problem is that there is no opposition to GOP extremism anywhere with enough self-confidence to raise its head and actually voice an alternate vision to the American people. All there is, aside from a handful of House members with genuine principle, is the bland technocratic managerialism and incrementalism of a Barack Obama which is ultimately no match for the extremism of a group that is willing to sacrifice all in the name of something as flimsy as a mere principle. Someone with the moderate mentality like Obama cannot see the power in that kind of determination, and thus he is powerless to counter it. The best he can do is just keep bending over backwards to accommodate them while coaxing them to return the favor. Meanwhile the other side simply ignores these gestures. It’s like two people who speak a different language trying to communicate.

• Link
• Report this comment

Most, if not all, of these Tea Party politicians are born-again Christians. They are absolutely convinced their way is God’s way and will not budge no matter how reasonable or logical their opponents are. If this was not so serious, it would be almost funny to see other, more moderate Republicans struggling with how to deal with these fanatics in their Party. I have only a slight hope that the voters who put these people into office will vote them out in the next election. Beware the true believers!!

• Link
• Report this comment

WOW…. cut taxes and start two wars, where does the money to pay for wars come from then ? Republican’s never had an answer, and remember the war was suppose to cost $400 Billion.

Yup those were the made up Republican numbers, and when Bush’s guy disagreed…….he was fired.

Why would Republican’s beleive that is all possible…. well for starters Bush kept the war costs out of the overall budget numbers…Funny Republican Economics.

Why would anyone believe the Republican’s have the answer….they have been the problem, but hey the Rich must survive, and not only survive, they must flourish, even if the rest of the country is getting beaten down.

Yes…..Funny Republican Economics

• Link
• Report this comment

I pledge allegiance to the website
of my savior Grover Norquist
and to the wealthy
for which it stands,
My fraternity
under mammon,
separable,
with privileges
and advantages
for Me

• Link
• Report this comment

The wealthiest of Americans”, the top 1% of wage earners in this country, already pay over 40% of all of the tax revenue

If anyone is playing “Same Ridiculous Lies Talking Points Bingo” Please cover up two spaces on your cards. Thanks!

• Link
• Report this comment

Kayaker 71: ““The wealthiest of Americans”, the top 1% of wage earners in this country, already pay over 40% of all of the tax revenue. The top 5% pays 60%. The top 10% pays 71% and the top 25% pays close to 86%. The bottom 50% pays only 2.3%. How much is enough, libs? If you had to set up these percentages, how much would the “rich” pay? Give me some numbers.”

I love what Bernie Sanders said of this flim flam argument the other day:

Yeah no kidding the bottom half aren’t paying in very much — they’re scraping from hand to mouth to keep a roof over their head and keep a little food in their kids mouths.

In other words, don’t give me numbers about what the wealthy are paying in proportionate terms. Whatever it is, it’s NOT ENOUGH. They need to do more — namely stop their hoarding, get out of the way, and once again acknowledge the less fortunate as being part of one community.

• Link
• Report this comment

Kayaker, maybe the bottom 50% barely make enough to get by! Which is a problem in and of itself! Why should that many people in the United States barely make enough to live on? And then they’re supposed to a larger share of their meager incomes in taxes? Come on.

• Link
• Report this comment

What would you have the evil rich pony up to pay for Bozo’s insane spending?

Just curious K71, but were you this loud and boisterous (also obnoxious) when Dubya was borrowing BILLIONS from China in order to pay for those two wars he kept off the books? Did you ever consider, i don’t know, in the back of your mind, head, thoughts, closet that one day we’d have to pay that back? Just asking…………

• Link
• Report this comment

Neon Frog,

So if someone ventures into our economy and works hard to earn the fruits of his labor, he should be expected to give much of that away to someone who doesn’t take the same risks and refuses to work as hard. We are talking about tax revenues, not wealth distribution. This whole debt ceiling thing is about tax increases, not “revenue enhancements”, the new liberal spin word to hide the obvious. Get a job, take some risks, work a few 18hr days, Frog. Then tell me that you need to give what you earn to someone else who just doesn’t have the same drive and motivation that you have to succeed.

• Link
• Report this comment

Way to deflect kayaker. Why don’t you just pay your fair share (as many others have pointed out above).

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch – Please enlighten me on the specific cuts he has put on the table for next year that will close the 1.3 trillion dollar gap?

• Link
• Report this comment

@Larry

July 19th, 2011
10:32 am
Bosch – Please enlighten me on the specific cuts he has put on the table for next year that will close the 1.3 trillion dollar gap?
++++++++++++++++++++++++

You stand a better chance of enlightenment by staring at a 100-watt incandescent bulb.

• Link
• Report this comment

Debbie,

Bozo has out spent the previous 43 presidents in toto in the last 2 and one half years. Are you not a bit upset? He has amassed more debt in this short time than ALL of our previous presidents COMBINED!!!! And all you libs can do is harp on about Bush. Where is YOUR indignation, Debbie? Are you not just a little perturbed at out glorious leader for his insane spending and accumulation of debt?

• Link
• Report this comment

But Jay! Think of the business opportunities in DC once all the former social security recipients start marching. Just the walker repair service industry is expected to need millions of new employees. And we have our puritanical Republicans to thank for it. Take a bow, Republicans. You earned it.

• Link
• Report this comment

In the last 50 years, federal revenues have tripled
http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/fed-revenue-overall.jpg
In the last 50 years, federal spending has quintupled
http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/fed-revenue-spending.jpg

• Link
• Report this comment

kay,

You ignore he tossed the kitchen sink at the w collapse.

Why kay why?

• Link
• Report this comment

(Note to host: Going forward, David Brooks’ opinion means very little to conservatives.)

I dispute that.

I think David Brooks’ opinion means quite a bit to true conservatives, its the Tea Partypublicans that can’t handle the truth.

Tea Party = RINO

• Link
• Report this comment

Carlos – thank you so much for that 10:35

• Link
• Report this comment

$3 trillion in spending reductions over the next decade. ——- that’s the key phrase(over the next decade). Reagan and Bush 1 were duped into raising taxes for promised future spending cuts. The tax increases went into effect immediately whereas the spending cuts never happened. That same scenario would have played out with the historic “grand bargain” with the added effect of the democrats hammering the republicans during their campaigns for voting to raise taxes after promising that they would not. Been there done that.

• Link
• Report this comment

Actually, it is the President who has the bomb.

Wait until the last minute and pass a clean debt limit bill or default.

The gop will cave.

That is how it is normally passe.

• Link
• Report this comment

Granny – (Note to host: Going forward, David Brooks’ opinion means very little to conservatives.)

I dispute that.

Bet you $1000 Brooks voted for Obama, and you call him a conservative?

• Link
• Report this comment

Time out for kay until she can tell the truth.

• Link
• Report this comment

As Douglas mentioned…the President has agreed to $3 trillion over the next DECADE, however the government is slated to spend $45.7 trillion during the same time frame
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=12103

• Link
• Report this comment

Dagnabbit!!!!!

Jay

Liked the entire Brooks piece. He’s saying what I saw. The GOP missed their opportunity by not calling Obama’s bluff. People saying that there was no written plan, who gives a crap? The fact that there was recorded evidence of Obama touting $4 Trillion in cuts would have been enough to decimate the Left. Party purity will be the downfall of the GOP. You can’t attract the majority by thinking like a minority. In a society where demographics change faster tabloid tales pop up in the news, you can’t continue to think and act the same way and expect different results.

In the last 50 years, federal revenues have tripled
http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/fed-revenue-overall.jpg
In the last 50 years, federal spending has quintupled
http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/fed-revenue-spending.jpg

But how would revenue have matched spending had people not continually jacked around with the rates? I would love to see proof of one service provider that purposefully cut it’s income, provided the same level of service to an expanding customer base, and didn’t go out of business. That’s exactly what’s happening to the US because of the folly of trying to continue to rise and expand without paying for it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Nice dodge k71 you didn’t answer my question. (thought i didn’t notice huh )

K71: <i?Debbie, Bozo has out spent the previous 43 presidents in toto in the last 2 and one half years. Are you not a bit upset? He has amassed more debt in this short time than ALL of our previous presidents COMBINED!!!!

SIDEBAR: If anyone has this humongous distortion of the truth talking point on their Bingo cards, please cover up 1 space. Also, please cover 3 spots for Bozo — Good luck!

K71 two things – (1) Wall Street / Economic Bailout (pushed through by Bush before Obama took office); (2) Finally putting the costs of both wars on the books.

And all you libs can do is harp on about Bush.

Well DUH! The debt didn’t suddenly start on January 21, 2009!!

Where is YOUR indignation, Debbie? Are you not just a little perturbed at out glorious leader for his insane spending and accumulation of debt?

He accumulated the debt that was already there, and my indignation is mostly on his inability to tell the Repubs to kiss his black/half black behind. I would’ve NEVER extended those Bush Tax Cuts last year – if he would’ve let them lapse, instead of trying to “play nice” with the uncouth unwashed tea masses; a great part of the debt could’ve already been on the way to being paid down.

• Link
• Report this comment

kayaker 71

Not to interrupt the clarification you’re preparing on who should pay what percent of taxes (10:34) but it it safe to assume that for

“Bozo has out spent the previous 43 presidents in toto in the last 2 and one half years”

you have a citation to show the spending by the Obama Administration is more than total federal spending in all the years leading up to when this administration came into office, adjusted for inflation?

And if you’re going to make the comparison really meaningful, shouldn’t you compare only those programs that were in existent in all years? Otherwise, aren’t you saddling Obama with spending for a program that Reagan instituted that John Quincy Adams didn’t have to deal with?

• Link
• Report this comment

Douglas — thank you so much for that 10:43

• Link
• Report this comment

The “wealthiest of Americans”, the evil 1%, who, according to liberals, are responsible for this whole debt ceiling fiasco, pay a tax rate of close to 35% of net income. The1% is defined as those making 379K and change/year, of reported income. How much would you raise it? Numbers please. Oh, and Bozo said, as I recall, that those making 250K or less/year would not see “one thin dime” of tax increases. BTW, those earning 250K/year fall into the 33% bracket. Is that bracket going to be left alone?

• Link
• Report this comment

David Brooks is a self identified “moderate”…
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And Casey Anthony is a self identified “good mom”…

(sorry, the openings are so tempting sometimes)

Now it’s time to leave.

• Link
• Report this comment

Douglas

Could be but guess what?

In this “right leaning” nation a lot of conservatives had to have voted for President Obama.

I call Brooks a conservative because he is, was and ever shall be one.

Not all conservatives hang from the fringe right by their teeth…some remain reasonable.

• Link
• Report this comment

that 10:43 only made the ignorance spouted earlier all the more apparent.

I’d like to thank Douglas too.

• Link
• Report this comment

‘What is the point and what is the purpose? Anybody?’

Entertainment…duh…

• Link
• Report this comment

Didn’t all the GOP guys that were swept into the House run under the premise of no new taxes and cutting spending? Why is anyone surprised?

It’s the same thing as when those monthly unemployment numbers come out – everyone repeatedly acts surprised.

• Link
• Report this comment

K71 — “So if someone ventures into our economy and works hard to earn the fruits of his labor, he should be expected to give much of that away to someone who doesn’t take the same risks and refuses to work as hard.”

My wife had a good friend in college who’s never worked a lick in his life. He inherited his money, and if I told you his name, you’d know who some of his family members are and how they earned their money.

Not everyone who is wealthy *earned* their riches, and not everyone who busts their hump becomes well-to-do. Your Horatio Alger fantasy does not measure up to reality, and I am not moved by it.

• Link
• Report this comment

josef

“What is the point and what is the purpose? Anybody?”

The hope that, in the face of new information, people will reassess their opinions and progress in the quest for more knowledge?

bye, Midori! Have a good one!

• Link
• Report this comment

Good points, Keep.

By the way Kayaker, you’re ignoring my point and doing yourself a disservice.

As Bernie Sanders said — and as Left Wing Management says — no kidding the less fortunate aren’t paying in very much. They’re busy scraping to feed their kids and keep a roof over their head.

Will be interesting to see if you address this or just sail on in your blissful ignorance.

By the way, you wrote: “The “wealthiest of Americans”, the evil 1%, who, according to liberals, are responsible for this whole debt ceiling fiasco, pay a tax rate of close to 35% of net income”

First of all, what does the rich being “evil” have to do with the fact that they need to be paying MORE? It’s got nothing to do with their moral qualities or lack thereof, I say they need to pay more. What’s it got to do with “evil”? Could it be your right wing talking points here is a straw man?

And what does pointing out the indisputable, manifestly demonstrable FACT that the rich paying less is due largely to the Bush tax cuts is responsible for the fiscal problems have to do with being “liberal”? Are you implying that knowledge of simple math is “liberal” ? Huh? Just because your ideological lieutenants — Limbaugh, Hannity and other FOX propagandists — put that linguistic connection into your mouth, that doesn’t mean Left Wing Management is going to fail to cut it to shreds. .

• Link
• Report this comment

Actually…David Brooks calls himself a moderate conservative.

Which I think in TeaPartySpeak means Satan.

• Link
• Report this comment

Debbie,

If you combined all of the wealth that that 1% of those evil rich people have…. total assets….. and took it away from them to fund our government,, you could probably run the government for about 6 mos. It isn’t the evil rich’s fault. It’s SPENDING, Debbie. Once more Debbie, it’s SPENDING. If you don’t get that under control, all of the taxes you collect will not amount to a tinker’s damn. Bozo harped on about corporate jets. If you lumped all of them in a pile their total worth would not amount to more than 0.01% of our debt obligation. One more time Debbie, for emphasis…… SPENDING!!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

“Not everyone who is wealthy *earned* their riches, and not everyone who busts their hump becomes well-to-do. Your Horatio Alger fantasy does not measure up to reality, and I am not moved by it.”

All money was earned at some point……..who are we to decide how the family decides to spend it. You would also need to include kids currently enjoying the fruits of their parents labor………how far do you want to take that argument?

• Link
• Report this comment

ty

would it surprise you to know that I don’t think you are a conservative?

• Link
• Report this comment

Which I think in TeaPartySpeak means Satan.

Bad Granny!! Bad, bad bad!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

“You can’t fault Paul or his response for that.”

His comparison to the stated facts was bogus…..and we all know it.

“Are you saying we should tax the hell out of grandma living day to day as well as lil Johnny who’s working his first job while in high school?”

I’m saying it has already been established that increasing the tax on the rich will not solve the problem………IF we need to raise taxes, it needs to be done on everybody following the same progressive structure we have in place, with a minimum for those oh so pitiful poor (many of which made choices to get them there). Something along the lines of Ga Corp tax…..which is $10 for corps that had no profit or lost money.

• Link
• Report this comment

Management,

OK, give me some numbers. How much more would you take from those really kind, hardworking, considerate, patriotic rich Americans? What’s your new brackets for those making more than 379K/yr?
I wish liberals knew how to add and subtract…. it would make all of this a lot easier. Once again, as I pointed out to Debbie, all of the Bush tax cuts, raising taxes on “wealthy” taxpayers….. it’s all smoke and mirrors. If you don’t control spending, you are lost from the start. How come all of you liberals seem to continually dodge this aspect of our debt crisis?

• Link
• Report this comment

“I’m saying it has already been established that increasing the tax on the rich will not solve the problem………”

Where? When?

• Link
• Report this comment

with a minimum for those oh so pitiful poor (many of which made choices to get them there).

While I don’t subscribe to the idea of kicking the misfortunate, I see merit to your overall idea. I’ve stated all along that everybody should have to pay something. If we’re gonna require income taxes to do so much to so many people, what about the other millions of taxes that are already paid?

Those taxes hit the lower incomes at a much more disproportionate level. When you’re earning less than $30K and you’re having to use your entire income just to exist, you’re paying a much larger percentage of your income in sales taxes and other taxes. There’s probably not much room to siphon income taxes as well.

• Link
• Report this comment

kayaker 71

July 19th, 2011
10:49 am
The “wealthiest of Americans”, the evil 1%, who, according to liberals, are responsible for this whole debt ceiling fiasco, pay a tax rate of close to 35% of net income.

If only those 1% paid 35%, then maybe we could make a dent in the debt. Here is a nice article from that evil liberal rag Forbes:
“WASHINGTON, D.C.–The 400 highest-earning taxpayers in the U.S. reported a record $105 billion in total adjusted gross income in 2006, but they paid just $18 billion in tax, new Internal Revenue Service figures show. That works out to an average federal income tax bite of 17%–the lowest rate paid by the richest 400 during the 15-year period covered by the IRS statistics. The average federal tax bite on the top 400 was 30% in 1995 and 23% in 2002.”

• Link
• Report this comment

“OK then let’s take your statement to its logical conclusion. If all money was earned at some point, then why do the Conserves want to cut Social Secuirty Income, Disability, and SSI Survivor Benefits?”

That’s not earned income, that’s projected income…….unless you want to build in some guarantees, which would not be wise………it’s much like a 401k………the numbers on your statement is what you would get if you cashed out at that instant…..as we all know, that number changes daily…….

• Link
• Report this comment

Oh brother. Pot, meet kettle.

• Link
• Report this comment

md 10:56

“your response to Kayaker was a bit silly for you. We do already have a progressive tax structure, and for a large segment to not pay any income tax is faulty.”

We do have a progressive tax structure, but many seem to discount that with such cites of ‘this percent pays that percent.” My response was based on trying to interpret kayaker 71’s point and a solution. We hear the breakdown over and over so I was just asking “what’s your solution? If you’re making the case that this percent of the population pays this percent in taxes, do you want the revenues to match the population percentage?”

Do you have an idea on how to change it?

“Why should we allow folks that choose to drop out of a taxpayer assistance program the right to not participate in the society they also live in?”

I don’t understand what you mean by ‘drop out of a taxpayer assistance program” or ‘not participate.’

Does that refer to the thousands of people with AGIs over $379k who pay zero tax? The assistance programs that enable them to pay no tax?

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, I don’t know about anybody else, but a country boy will survive. I been laying in cases of PBR and big bags of fried pork skins for that day next month when everything goes bust and we’re all out of work. Other people will starve and whine, but me and mine will be fat and drunk. Don’t have anything in the bank anyway and don’t own no stocks, so everything closing down won’t hurt me. I guess my 401k could take a whupping, but something tells me alot of people will be drowning their sorrows in beer and that means my 401k will be OK.

I’ll pay the cable TV bill first followed by the light bill and the gas bill. Long as I got Fox News and power, I can ride this thing out. And the beer and fried pork skins are just icing on the cake.

And I expect Bookman will see about 5,000 posts per topic, since everybody will be out of work and will have plenty of time to whine and gripe.

Bring it on, you librul wimps! We finally got you by the short hairs and we’ll be pulling hard. If we can’t get what we want, we’ll see that nobody else gets anything either. Let’s see how those lazy codgers and the jobless bums do when the checks don’t come.

Have a good day everybody.

• Link
• Report this comment

“There’s probably not much room to siphon income taxes as well.”

Speaking from experience, when I was dirt poor raising several kids, we had absolutely nothing and at one point lost both jobs……..but we always seemed to find enough money for our vices…..smokes and beer……..and then pay the bills…….wants vs needs…..not always prioritized properly. My rationale was screw them, I want mine too………

• Link
• Report this comment

First of all the president did not present a specific plan detailing how and where those cuts would be implemented. The 3 trillion plus I think was to be over 12 years not 10 and the only specificity offered by Obama was raising taxes on the wealthy which wouldn’t make a dent in the deficit. It sounded like deception coming out of the White House and the Republicans in Congress saw through it. If the debt ceiling isn’t raised and it causes the disaster being thrown out to the public it will be on Obama and the Congressional Democrats. Both sides are playing too much politics but Obama is way beyond the pale.

• Link
• Report this comment

For people to take a large deduction for mortgage interest paid because they have the cash flow to make payments and own a home and then cry about someone who works all day long each weak and don’t have the cash flow to do anything but rent and drive used cars make one wonder where their head and hearts are.

It is not wrong to take a mortage interest deduction, but it is a subsidy in effect.

• Link
• Report this comment

My nomination for QUOTE OF THE DAY

“I do not accept ultimate responsibility. I hold responsible the people that I trusted to run it and they people they trusted,” Murdoch said.

(Translation: the buck stops way the hell over there)

• Link
• Report this comment

md

to quote Granny, “what exactly does you post mean?”

That was the basis of my initial response to kayaker 71 on what group pays how much.

“Lots of people bring me problems, very few people bring me solutions.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Many of the very wealthy in this country pay so little in taxes because their earnings are so small. You only pay federal income tax on earnings, not total assets. With a lot of their money in trusts and non-taxable assets, I wonder what the true increase would be on those whose total assets are, say, 50M and up. Say that 50M earned, at 3%/yr, a total of 1.5M. After juggling the numbers and adding up all of the deductions, the added tax, say from 35 to even 40% wouldn’t amount to much. If Bozo is counting on revenue like this to solve the debt crisis, he is barking up the wrong tree.

• Link
• Report this comment

Kayaker:

MY point is that we should broaden this whole discussion and stop quibbling over a few percentage points here and there. If we had a solid safety net in this country for example, with guaranteed health insurance and ways to obtain affordable training and education to improve one’s status in the labor market, not to mention if we had a stronger trade policy that was based on a sound understanding of the US role in the world economy and manufacturing, then we could talk about tax rates in a

Tax receipts are at all time lows while corporate profits are at all-time highs, with CEO pay spiraling at stratospheric levels. The public must understand what level of “civilization” (functioning roads, places to get medical treatment, actual law enforcement as opposed to mob or gang rule) corresponds to what percentage of revenue receipts to GDP, and then the political process must go from there.

• Link
• Report this comment

An, “compromise” ………………. the language of the devil.

• Link
• Report this comment

Those 1/3 that drop out of school, costs society 300 billion annually……that’s 1/3 of a trillion.

And it isn’t an either or situation……there are some at the top that skirt their obligations as well.

The solution, is for ALL to carry their weight, and no passes for those that choose not to participate….

• Link
• Report this comment

DebbieDoRight

July 19th, 2011
10:46 am

You go girl!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

The Fiscal Commission appointed by President Obama made a number of specific proposals to shrink the deficit and grow the economy. Which of those are the President and House Democrats proposing to implement?

• Link
• Report this comment

kayaker 71

“OK, give me some numbers. How much more would you take from those really kind, hardworking, considerate, patriotic rich Americans? What’s your new brackets for those making more than 379K/yr?”

I believe President Obama has said the rate on income above $379k should go from the current (after the temporary Bush tax cut) rate of 35% to what they were before the Bush tax cuts.

In 2000, before the cuts, the top rate was 39.6% on an AGI over $288,350.

So Pres Obama has proposed raising the percentage by 4.6%, which means every hundred dollars above $379,150 gets taxed an additional $4.60.

And he hasn’t proposed lowering the AGI back down to $288,350, which has the effect of shielding nearly a hundred grand from the higher rate.

So it comes down to $4.60 per hundred on earned income over $379,150.

And that’s what Republicans are fighting so hard to protect?

’scuse, me, I believe that was the President’s initial proposal.

Hasn’t he since modified it so only those earning millions or billions will pay the additional $4.60 per hundred dollars?

Which is what Republicans are really fighting to protect? ’cause they won’t hire more people (all those guys own factories and businesses, don’tcha’ know?) if they have to pay an additional $4.60 per hundred!

• Link
• Report this comment

“Can you tell me how well that’s working out for Georgia? ”

Well Deb……you take the total # of corps that paid that $10 to arrive at a figure that Ga would not have otherwise………

Don’t know about you, but something has always been greater than nothing in my book……….

• Link
• Report this comment

md

again and for those who can’t……?

• Link
• Report this comment

md,

I agree with what you said, but disagree also.

Yes, WE are required to take care of the less fortunate. However, the federal government is not.

The State, the religious organization and secular organization, they are the outlets to care for those that need help.

• Link
• Report this comment

Keep Up 11:32

And he scores!!!!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

Speaking from experience, when I was dirt poor raising several kids, we had absolutely nothing and at one point lost both jobs……..but we always seemed to find enough money for our vices…..smokes and beer……..and then pay the bills

Not that I’m asking you to tell how old you are, but what was the comparative cost of living versus nowadays? the same… a little lower… a lot lower… I can remember working my ass off right after college and not having two nickels to rub together after paying bills. If I wanted those vices that I enjoyed, beer and strip clubs, I had to work even more to have the money for them.

No two people have the same exact life experiences. You can’t judge the situations of others based upon your personal experiences. You can make observations, comments, and/or suggestions, but beyond that it’s all speculation.

• Link
• Report this comment

El Jefe

“To the righties compromise is doing something in the middle.”

Does that mean Republicans don’t really mean “NO” tax increases on the top n percent, but “something more than NONE and something less than what the President proposed?”

• Link
• Report this comment

Sooth……..corp tax is not as cut and dried as you would like to make it. Since tax is nothing but an expense, the tax rate has a direct relationship with the cost of goods…….which happens to effect all of us.

• Link
• Report this comment

Woodstock Mike

As has been noted, it appears Democrats would be satisfied with 39.6% on AGI above $379,150 for millionaires and billionaires.

That in and of itself would not, as you noted, solve the problem. Which is why the President also proposed higher cuts than Republicans were willing to accept.

Seems a two-pronged strategy is the most promising approach.

• Link
• Report this comment

“No two people have the same exact life experiences. You can’t judge the situations of others based upon your personal experiences. You can make observations, comments, and/or suggestions, but beyond that it’s all speculation.”

You are correct, but with enough observations, the law of averages creeps in at some point………and I’ve been around long enough to have lots of observations………

• Link
• Report this comment

The left in this country has this blind allegiance to a false belief that the panacea to our economic problem is to continue extracting more money from wealthy Americans. What they can’t comprehend is that the wealthy are saying “no mas” while sheltering their financial assets and not investing in expansion. This class warfare mantra is just shear ignorance of reality. Time for these idiots in the White House and in Congress to understand that until we begin once again creating a friendly environment for business expansion we’ll continue going in the wrong direction. Cut government spending and remove the regulation impediments that discourage business investment.

• Link
• Report this comment

The GOP has become the saddest clown. When you listen to these guy’s all you can do is laugh to keep from crying. Herman Cain “muslims are trying to impose Sharia law in America”. Bachmann believes the Pope is the Anti-Christ, and slavery was better for Black families. Rick Santorum, where do we start?

Someone in that party needs some courage.

• Link
• Report this comment

There is no rational reasoning behind raising taxes at this moment. It will not solve our shortfall revenue situation, nor will it pay for our 24% of GDP federal spending.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bozo is waging a class warfare struggle to get votes. He is plotting the “evil” rich Americans against those of lower incomes to cover up his inability to fix our economy. It seems that when new unemployment numbers stay at 9.2% reported, it’s time to give a speech about corporate jets. Or when the foreclosure rate goes up nationwide despite promises to the contrary, it’s time go demonize the right with yet another excuse. It ain’t working libs. I sometimes wonder if Bozo even wants the economy to improve.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Neither is inherited money — however you cite that as earned, hence my question to you.”

Yes Deb, somewhere down the line, that money was “earned” by someone…….old grandaddy Hilton put his butt on the line for all those after him to squander his fortune…..but that was rightfully his choice to make. Others have left their fortunes to trusts to do philanthropic activities……again, their choice…….why should you get a choice in what they do???

• Link
• Report this comment

Midori

July 19th, 2011
11:55 am
for Willie Lynch

http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoons/ZygliA/2011/ZygliA20110719_low.jpg

What’s a party without a clown ?

• Link
• Report this comment

md — “All money was earned at some point……..who are we to decide how the family decides to spend it.”

If the argument is going to be that wealthy people earned all their money, then I’m going to keep trotting this guy out as evidence that wealthy people DO NOT EARN all their money. My wife’s friend received his significant wealth as a direct result of having popped out of the right birth canal. This guy earned his money in about the same way that a lottery winner does, except that the lottery winner actually had to expend the effort to go over to the Gas-n-Go to *buy* the lottery ticket in the first place.

“You would also need to include kids currently enjoying the fruits of their parents labor………how far do you want to take that argument?”

Irrelevant to the claim that was made, and to which I responded. Wealth does not always result from hard work, and hard work does not inevitably lead to wealth.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Anyone with half a brain knows if you have a couple of hundred grand left to spend after taxes anually, you ain’t hurting for meals and living.”

And??

Is this the “because they have it so I have no morals” argument?

• Link
• Report this comment

kayaker 71

I ask questions about your posts and cite specific numbers in response to your questions.

It seems you, and several other posters, roll right past that and keep responding with bumper sticker generalities.

It does seem the real intent is not to understand or to propose solutions, but to complain and whine about Obama and lefties and such.

• Link
• Report this comment

Midori? Did they wash their hands afterwards?

• Link
• Report this comment

Hey libs:

Headline: “Some federal workers more likely to die than lose jobs”

“Death — rather than poor performance, misconduct or layoffs — is the primary threat to job security at the Environmental Protection Agency, the Small Business Administration, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Office of Management and Budget and a dozen other federal operations.”

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-07-18-fderal-job-security_n.htm?loc=interstitialskip

As a former federal employee I must sadly admit this is true. It’s almost impossible to fire an employee especially for poor job performance.

Heck, you can’t even get rid of them during their probation period.

For example, we once had a “minority” female employee who was up for her one year probationary evaluation. We supervisors met and one of our minority supervisors said right off the bat that she needed to go before she got herself or someone else killed.

We all agreed and took it to the boss. He agreed fully and told us …… that’s what you get paid for.

He notified headquarters who told him, “don’t even go down that road”.

She stayed.

She got herself killed.

I call ‘em like I see ‘em.

• Link
• Report this comment

md @ 11:48,

Yes, and no. The corporate tax rate is fixed for the corporation as a percentage of their profits. Sure, they may well pass that expense on to their customers, but their customers do not necessarily equal “all of us.” I don’t buy boats or boating accessories. If a company is making a nice healthy bottom line selling boats and boating accessories, then I feel they should pay their fair share of taxes on that. (I’m paying my share on what *I* bring home, to be sure!!!) That affects the boat/accessory buying portion of the population, but not “all of us.” People who have money to buy boats and boating accessories are obviously not starving or failing to pay their light bills, or they wouldn’t be buying boats. I’m okay with their costs going up on boats. Sometimes I’m in the mood for expensive Scotch. Those who profit from importing it should pay taxes on that profit. I do my part when I buy the product, but not when I don’t. If you don’t drink Scotch, then it’s not your tax.

This is, IMO, much closer to a “fair” tax that the “fair tax” arguments I’ve heard. Corporations can restructure themselves — most already have — to maximize profits by squeezing labor so that fewer people do more with less. Since they’re clearly NOT using that money to hire more people, then they should contribute to the mother of their success (the opportunity afforded them by the grace of being American) with some of that profit. Wanna keep the tax break? HIRE, already!!! Fair’s fair.

• Link
• Report this comment

F. Sinkwich:

Our economy is going to stay in the tank until Obama and his minions are gone.

The lib., prog., lock-nuts will never admit this.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joe Mama

July 19th, 2011
11:59 am

You use quite a broad brush there pal. Some people actually did earn their wealth and started with nothing. What would you say if I said all poor people on welfare are just lazy?

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay
July 19th, 2011
12:01 pm

But if he supported obama’s policies you’d be okay with him, right?

• Link
• Report this comment

Woodstock Mike: “First off, if someone is making that kind of money they are doing something very well and must be near the best at their profession”

Astounding naivete there Mike. In two ways. One, in thinking that high pay is a failsafe indicator of skill at what one does. And two, the idea that such an indicator would work across all professions and even that all professions are alike.

Take someone who’s hands down the best site foreman at a construction site in the whole state of Georgia and then compare him to Lloyd Blankfein or John Paulsen, hedge fund managers who probably make 5-10 times as much in one day as the best paid site foreman will make in his entire lifetime of work.

Are you really going to tell me this is an ‘accurate’ and ‘just’ reflection of the relative importance of what these two people do?

Did you remember to get down on your knees last night and say a few words to propitiate your gods, who are the Wall St barons?

• Link
• Report this comment

Mrs. murdoch retaliates after a prank on her husband.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mega kudos to Murdoch’s wife…she was on the guy before security…awesome.

• Link
• Report this comment

1811/1801 – 0311/0317

July 19th, 2011
12:00 pm

Suprise! Suprise! It was a minority employee. Too predictable.

• Link
• Report this comment

You are correct, but with enough observations, the law of averages creeps in at some point………and I’ve been around long enough to have lots of observations………

In your calculations, is there also variable that account for changing times and costs??? Averages change depending on the number and value of things being averaged. Averages do not always remain constant.

As a former federal employee I must sadly admit this is true. It’s almost impossible to fire an employee especially for poor job performance.

Heck, you can’t even get rid of them during their probation period.

And as a current federal employee that has seen numerous firings of both veteran and probationary officers, I disagree. Many are likely to die than lose jobs because of stress on the jobs too. Ask the families and co-workers of TSA workers who have died WHILE at work screening people. Ask the families and co-workers o CBP officers who have died WHILE defending the country.

For someone who made their living off of the federal teat, you do an awful amount of employee bashing while still collecting your pension. Seems like somebody who’s retirement income comes from the taxpayer would be just a bit more appreciative and understanding of those who choose to do the same thing you did.

• Link
• Report this comment

Libertarian

July 19th, 2011
12:00 pm
Jefferson

July 19th, 2011
11:53 am

So why should anyone work at all? Why go to college? Why start a business? Perhaps the government should just assign us a job after high school and, in turn, give us our basic needs (food, shelter, etc.) Then everyone is equal. Does that sound good to you?

I don’t know what you are thinking about, everyone is not equal and I would not think you can make everybody equal, financialy that is.

Why do those things – many reasons and for some it is to make more salary, pay more taxes and have more security.

You can live like you want.

• Link
• Report this comment

Murdoch says he was humble to testify but ultimately not responsible for the scandal and blamed it on the people he “trusted”.

Ahhh… the buck stops below me. That is why CEOs earn the big bucks….to be clueless. Taking credit but not responsibility.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mega kudos to Murdoch’s wife…she was on the guy before security…awesome

She has to protect her “investment”.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Take someone who’s hands down the best site foreman at a construction site in the whole state of Georgia and then compare him to Lloyd Blankfein or John Paulsen, hedge fund managers who probably make 5-10 times as much in one day as the best paid site foreman will make in his entire lifetime of work.”

All I can say to the above statement is wow. Are you comparing a construction site foreman to Lloyd Blankfein or John Paulsen? That’s hilarious. Call me naive, call me anything you want. If it was so simple to run a hedge fund why don’t you? Let me tell you, running a hedge fund is extremely difficult and most fail. So with your logic, the best construction worker should make the same as say the best athlete or entertainer, because they are both the best at what they do, right? Talk about naive…

• Link
• Report this comment

“I call ‘em like I see ‘em.”

although, I’m sure the hood obstructs your view.

just sayin

• Link
• Report this comment

Has anyone seen a link for the video where Murdoch got a pie in the face today? I have only seen a picture.

• Link
• Report this comment

Actually, I don’t think that was Murdoch’s wife. Whoever she is, she looks like Lucy Liu, and acted like her (Lucy) in Kill Bill lol. She MAY be a body guard………….

• Link
• Report this comment

“One, in thinking that high pay is a failsafe indicator of skill at what one does.”

Question, how many people do you know that make enough money to be considered rich that aren’t highly skilled at their profession? And let me know what line of work they are in please…

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred/Getalife – some background on Mrs. Murdock. After reading this, you won’t be surprised by her actions today:

Born in Jinan, Shandong, she was originally named Wenge Deng. She is the third of four children born to engineers. While Deng was in high school, her father relocated to Hangzhou, where he was employed at the People’s Machinery Works; she and her family remained behind for a short while. In 1985, when she was 16 years old, Deng enrolled in Guangzhou Medical College.

In 1987 Deng met an American businessman and his wife, Jake and Joyce Cherry, who had temporarily relocated to China to help build a refrigerator factory. Deng asked the couple for tutoring lessons in English, which Joyce eventually provided. In 1988, she abandoned her medical studies and travelled to the United States to study, with the Cherrys sponsoring Deng’s student visa. Deng enrolled at California State University, Northridge, where she studied economics.

After entering the United States, Deng lived with the Cherry family for a while when attending university. Mrs. Cherry suspected her husband was having an affair with Deng (30 years his junior) and demanded she leave the house. Mr. Cherry soon followed and moved in with her. The two married in 1990. Deng and Cherry’s marriage lasted 2 years and 7 months before they were legally divorced, but he would later explain they only stayed together for 4 or 5 months, after which he learned of the extramarital relationship Deng had with David Wolf. Nonetheless, she had been able to secure a green card through being legally married to Cherry.

In 1997, Deng met Rupert Murdoch at a company party in Hong Kong. Deng and Murdoch married in 1999, less than three weeks after his divorce from ex-wife Anna Maria Torv Murdoch Mann was finalized.

• Link
• Report this comment

Leg Lamp – “Data from the Department of Energy and other agencies show that the average poor family, as defined by Census officials:”

are you familiar with the term “average”???

that means that some families have more

and some have less.

AVERAGE. not EVERY

• Link
• Report this comment

josef –

frankly, the idea that the MET is investigating the death tells me that (lo and behold), they probably won’t find anything.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Talk about naivete. News flash, not everyone in the over $200k crowd is an evil wall street hedge fund manager sitting in a penthouse yelling “let them eat cake.””

hrm. I’ve met my fair share of contractors, plumbers and electricians.

not one of them made a QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS.

• Link
• Report this comment

Woodstock : “Are you comparing a construction site foreman to Lloyd Blankfein or John Paulsen? That’s hilarious. Call me naive, call me anything you want”

Perhaps managing a hedge fund is somewhat more complex than running a construction site, or than being a country doctor, and perhaps it’s not. But if it is, one thing that I seriously doubt is that it’s 500,000 times more complicated, or 5,500,000 times, or 5,500,000,000 times as complicated, and so forth.

THAT’s the type of insane p$ssing match with numbers that we get into with the current hyper-runaway earnings era of modern-day financialized capitalism. But it has to be done. That’s the world we live in.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joe Mama

July 19th, 2011
12:17 pm

I believe this is the link that info came from:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/272081/modern-poverty-includes-ac-and-xbox-ken-mcintyre

• Link
• Report this comment

k71: Bozo is waging a class warfare struggle to get votes. He is plotting the “evil” rich Americans against those of lower incomes

If that’s the case then he is sure to be re-electd in 2012 — as your own (made up) numbers states, there aren’t that many “evil” rich in America; as it is “lower incomes”.

md: Yes Deb, somewhere down the line, that money was “earned” by someone…….old grandaddy Hilton put his butt on the line for all those after him to squander his fortune…..

You STILL won’t answer my original question md, if all income is “earned” by someone, then why are republicans wanting to cut SSI, Disability and SS Benefits? People EARN SSI benefits by paying into the system paycheck after paycheck. SSI for Dependent Survivor children is the exact same thing as the example you cited of Grandad Hilton. In essence md – What’s the difference? and why is SSI etc., expendable but inherited income not?

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK
July 19th, 2011
12:16 pm

I’m well aware of the difference between “average” and “every”. Are you endorsing the concept that EVERY “poor” family is entitled to what was listed in my post?

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK

July 19th, 2011
12:19 pm

Funny, because I know plenty who make well over a quarter of a million.

• Link
• Report this comment

With you liberals, it’s always this game of growing government, raising taxes, new entitlements in exchange for something. It’s never ending. And even a complete idiot can see this method dragging us into the same cesspool as most of Europe, yet we continue on as if the result will be differnt for us. I’ve got news for you. It won’t. You’re going to eventually run out of the “billionaires and millionaires” money.

That you keep following this idiot Obama is just bizzare….

• Link
• Report this comment

midori

Green card? Oh, boy, does that mean we left wing liberals can now jpin the “send ‘em back where they came from” crowd…investigate her NOW… put her on a slow boat to China…

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK

July 19th, 2011
12:21 pm

What a surprise…you don’t provide back up on this blog and you get “where’s your proof”….provide proof and its not the RIGHT KIND of proof.

• Link
• Report this comment

@LWM

Using Paulsen or Blankfein are poor examples. They are nearly the richest managers in the world. They are extremely rare and they are the best in the world at what they do. Read up on Blankfein and you will see he came from poverty to get to where he is now, it’s an amazing story. They are in line of work that produces dollars. You can’t fault them for that. When they make those obscene numbers so do their clients. So do you if you are invested. So does everyone with a 401K or pension. If you have an issue with them you must have a huge issue with athletes and movie stars. They play games for a living. Johnny Depp make something like 100 million last year. Chipper is to make almost 20 million this year and isn’t even playing…

• Link
• Report this comment

Libertarian, Woodstock: ” love how left wingers think the only people who will be impacted by a tax increase on the “rich” are “hedge fund managers” and “wall street barons”

The point being that these people, along with their buddy high rolling CEOs and their wannabes — the Mitt Romneys of the world — are the models of success in the current world system.

Hey by the way does your local Baptist minister know you worship the idols of the Wall Street Barons? Oh yeah, you’re right, they probably worship them too.

Like I said, better remember to kneel down tonight before bed, them Wall St. Barons want their burnt offerings, and they want them on time!

• Link
• Report this comment

Midori: Thanks for the info. I agree with you Keep, a gold diggers tutorial lol. Wouldn’t be surprised to find out that she’s really a Chinese intelligence agent. (where is my tinfoil hat………)

• Link
• Report this comment

This is an exercise in futility…and all it does is get my blood pressure up. Back to work…..you know, raking in the money while walking all over the little people…

• Link
• Report this comment

LOL Josef

she’s a real piece of work, isn’t she?

• Link
• Report this comment

enjoy guys – I’ve got to get back to work

• Link
• Report this comment

“Funny, because I know plenty who make well over a quarter of a million”

then it shouldn’t be a problem for them.

• Link
• Report this comment

Libertarian –

yeah. and I’m sure if I provided an article stating hte opposite from Mother Jones, you’d be perfectly sanguine about the source.

please.

• Link
• Report this comment

Somebody has got to stop these “anchor bimbo chasers”. We need a constitutional amendment.

• Link
• Report this comment

md — “Not at all irrelevant Joe”

It’s completely irrelevant to the claim that was made, which was that wealthy people worked for their money. If some wealthy people became such without doing any work, then the original claim is invalid. If the original claim is invalid, your objection is irrelevant.

“…what generation are you drawing the line?”

I’d say the original claimant drew the line when saying that wealthy people all earned their money via hard work. And many of our friends here make that claim over and over.

“It is obvious from your answer that you must think a line must be drawn at some given generation……where is your line? And how did you arrive at it?”

I’m simply pointing out that the original claim doesn’t hold water. Nothing more.

• Link
• Report this comment

Woodstock: “Using Paulsen or Blankfein are poor examples. They are nearly the richest managers in the world. They are extremely rare and they are the best in the world at what they do. Read up on Blankfein and you will see he came from poverty to get to where he is now, it’s an amazing story”

Oh I’m sure it’s great rags to riches stuff. I’m wiping a tear from my eyes with one hand as I type with the other.

I just wish Mr. Blankfein was out there with Mr. Buffett, Mr. Gates Sr. and a few others, making the case that he and his type don’t need the loophole that allows them to pay a tax rate one third what you and I pay. They’re already doing just fine, so KEEP the money, let us pay a standard tax rate, or dare we say, even a little higher rate? We’re doing just fine without an extra few billions.

See what I’m saying?

But in general, these voices are silent. And that’s the problem I have.

Again, I’m sure he is quite good at running hedge fund. Point being, why does he need to earn 25,000 times as much as the average American worker? Is what he does 25,000 times as important and valuable as what the average person does? I say NOT.

And you forgot something in this statement: “They are in line of work that produces dollars”

You forgot to add: “that produces dollars for their elite clients”. How much of that money really comes back into the economy in ways that really benefit other members of the community?

• Link
• Report this comment

Mike — “They are in line of work that produces dollars.”

They don’t produce any more dollars than the Federal Reserve does.

• Link
• Report this comment

good fight

“Anchor bimbo?” I like that one…!

• Link
• Report this comment

During this country’s most prosperous times even before Reagan the top tax rate was much much higher than Clinton’s 39%. Where was the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) party then? One wouuld think that, if you believed the TEA party, that no sooner than Mr. Obama took office taxes skyrocted. Actually, part of the stimulus roughly 25% was dedicated to tax cuts for the average working man and woman. In addition, another reduction of the payroll tax was signed into law by Mr. Obama. Why do people who parrot lies and false impressions in the name of party loyalty because their favored party did not win the White House baffles the hell out of me.

• Link
• Report this comment

“It’s completely irrelevant to the claim that was made, which was that wealthy people worked for their money.”

And I made the claim that all money is “earned”………never said by who……and it was.

So why is your guy any different than a couple of kids whose parents have lots of money? Or the guy with no money living in the house he inherited from his parents?

• Link
• Report this comment

“I am only stating that in my opinion MOST people on welfare aren’t the hardest working people.”

Well, I’ve done some research on the Section 8 renters I spoke of a few weeks back (when all the liberals jumped me for not “reporting” them). First, it does not appear that the recipients of this voucher program have to work at all. The main requirements concern eligibility (low enough income, family size and the like). Second, though the money comes from the federal government, the program is administered by the states, and each state has it’s own additional requirements. The state my friend rents scores of houses to Section 8 renters now requires random drug tests (which is good, since my friend tells me almost all of the use drugs). Third, besides the housing allowance, these renters also are eligible for (and usually get) an allowance for utilities, food stamps and medical benefits. I am told that all of these benefits can total up to 30 thousand a year – all without working. Fourth, my friend told me that more whites are on this kind of welfare than blacks.

Here is what John Stossel had to say about this issue:

http://www.freedompolitics.com/articles/black-2623-people-wage.html

• Link
• Report this comment

josef — made more sense than “anchor treasure prey”

Fred — I dont think so. But I could have missed on.

• Link
• Report this comment

Nevada man sues DMV over rejection of ‘GOPALIN’ license plate

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/jul/18/nevada-man-sues-dmv-over-rejection-gopalin-license/

Ooops…looks like somebody got caught trying to suppress free speech.

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK…. Possibly. And remember to return her to her original upright position before landing

• Link
• Report this comment

“Trash the article source if you will…”

Why would they do that? Have they ever trashed one of the sources Jay uses in his columns?

• Link
• Report this comment

Somebody has got to stop these “anchor bimbo chasers”.

How comes it’s always women? It’s so unfair to us men. I wouldn’t mind being some rich woman’s bimbo. If she was rich enough and had a Daddy that owned a liquor store and looked halfway good. But no, I’m doomed to spend the rest of my life hauling and lugging beer and paying for my own booze at Billy Bob’s. It’s Discrimination, is what it is. And she ain’t even American!

• Link
• Report this comment

SKH — “(when all the liberals jumped me for not “reporting” them)”

To be honest, we jumped on you because your rents-to-them friend was complaining about their alleged illegal habits and supposed welfare fraud, BUT HADN’T TURNED THEM IN, possibly because he was making money by renting to them.

I’m pretty sure that by knowingly renting to people who were engaging in welfare fraud, your friend might be to some degree culpable. Tell us, has he turned any of them in yet?

• Link
• Report this comment

@Joe

I always respect your point of view. With this welfare issue though you seem to have no point of view. Here is my clarification, sorry I don’t have a study done showing the work ethic of someone on welfare, I was merely saying I didn’t THINK that people on welfare would be considered the hardest working Americans. I am grateful there is a program out there that can support these people. That shows how great America is, our welfare program gives more than any nation on the planet and people who have trouble making a living truly need it and it’s a fantastic program.

• Link
• Report this comment

“And how many tvs, cell phones, computers and game systems do the people you know making less than $15K own?”

Well, probably all if they’re living at home…

• Link
• Report this comment

Leg lamp…
It depends on where they put their priorities…of course, I’ve never bothered to count them. Thinking about it for a minute here…those with kids? Most have at least one computer (school work, that kind of thing), usually the parent and the children have cell phones to keep in contact, and the game systems? That I couldn’t say. The ones with kids probably do…you know, birthday, Christmas presents and what have you…Funny, though, thinking about it, one of my over $250,000 friends has yet to enter the computer age at all and still keeps in touch with the land line…

• Link
• Report this comment

OFF TOPIC!! OFF TOPIC!!

With the heat wave that much of the nation is now going through I wonder if/when the flat-earthers/climate change denying crowd will forget about this and crow loudly when it snows this coming winter?

• Link
• Report this comment

Steve Wynn……………doesnt he own a gambling palor in Las Vegas? Is that the same Steve Wynn all of these people are quoting ?

I think i would find someone else to quote from , there is no telling what else he is involved in.

• Link
• Report this comment

1811/1801 – 0311/0317,

You now answer the question posed earlier in this thread as to why do people come here over and over when no real changes seem to take place. You somehow believe that you are better than others and love to toot your own horn. How childish!

• Link
• Report this comment

OMG, a heat wave during the middle of summer? It has to be caused by man!…give me a freakin break

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK
July 19th, 2011
12:47 pm

Wow, just wow. And to think you accused me of “projection”.

• Link
• Report this comment

1656: Rupert Murdoch’s wife Wendi stood up and appeared to strike somebody in defence of her husband.

Dang. I knew the guy was old, but I didn’t know he was THAT old…

• Link
• Report this comment

Income taxes are based on the ability to pay, that said what you pay you can afford to pay, the point if there is one is just because you can afford it don’t mean you want to pay it, but you can still afford it. Progressive Income taxes don’t put people in the poor house, It what you have left that counts, for those with a half of a brain, surly no one here.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mike — “I always respect your point of view. With this welfare issue though you seem to have no point of view.”

I appreciate our conversations and your willingness to present your point of view politely. But on this topic, you seem to be leaping to an unwarranted conclusion, and I’m disturbed that you seem to be trying to put words in my mouth. I’m not saying you’re right and I’m not saying you’re wrong — I’m saying that I need more information in order to be able to make an informed judgment either way, and I don’t think it’s wrong of me to say that. There’s no end of uninformed opinion on these boards day in and day out, so I thought you’d recognize my question for what it was — an honest request for more information on the matter which you posted.

“Here is my clarification, sorry I don’t have a study done showing the work ethic of someone on welfare”

And I didn’t ask for one, either.

It seemed to me that we might be able to draw some conclusions if we knew how many welfare recipients were long-term and were able-bodied, were long-term and were unable to work, and how many were recently unemployed (and would presumably be able and willing to go back to work). We don’t necessarily need to know their motivation level if we can get that kind of information. I’d presume that at least *some* of the long-term, able-bodied welfare recipients were lazy bums, but if only 10-15 pct of welfare recipients fall into that category, I don’t see how we could say “most.” OTOH, if 85-90 pct of recipients were like that, then your claim starts to take on a greater likelihood of being right.

Am I being clearer? Does that make sense?

“I was merely saying I didn’t THINK that people on welfare would be considered the hardest working Americans.”

I try not to judge people who are so unfortunate as to be on welfare. Something about not judging a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes, I think.

“I am grateful there is a program out there that can support these people. That shows how great America is, our welfare program gives more than any nation on the planet”

I’m pretty sure that about a dozen nations in Europe are more generous than we are. And though it is poor, Cuba makes pretty free with the social benefits.

“and people who have trouble making a living truly need it and it’s a fantastic program.”

Agreed on that point, sir.

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred:

I ain’t got time to read EVERYTHING. I jump in when I can.

By the way …………… check out 12:52 above.

• Link
• Report this comment

Leg Lamp –

hey, I’m quoting the Heritage report about how great the poor have it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Obama could solve the NATIONAL DEBT CRISIS by asking former Atlanta Public School Superintendent, Beverly Hall to return her bonuses.

http://www.TopPublicSchoolCorruptionAtlanta.com

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=185554781504131

• Link
• Report this comment

Scout; Scroll back and watch the video. Ms. Murdoch is up and at the guy before the security guard lol, which supports my only half jokingly proposed idea that she is a Chinese spy……….

• Link
• Report this comment

SKH — ” There IS no fraud. There is nothing illegal about sitting around drinking and smoking and collecting up to 30 grand a year.”

As I recall, you posited that your friend was collecting Section 8 funds from tenants while complaining that some of them were engaging in welfare fraud. You objected above to people coming down on you, but my recollection is that we were mostly upset at your friend for collecting welfare funds from people he thought weren’t entitled to them.

It *appeared* that your friend’s objection was silenced, and his hand stayed in reporting them, simply because he was admittedly making money off them. THAT is what people here were ‘coming down on you’ for.

“And drug use (the only thing that I could “report” and that to the police – not agency itself) only disqualifies you in some states. Now, instead of chasing some red herring, why don’t YOU tell all of us if it is okay in your book for possibly millions of people to receive that kind of money without working.”

Please show me where I claimed such a situation was “okay.”

“We are not talking about the elderly, the disabled or infirm here.”

In that case, please substantiate that the elderly, disabled and/or infirm cannot qualify for those benefits.

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwg033Ze3Lk !!!

• Link
• Report this comment

DAMN! 39 years ago the majority of people preferred an indirect tax over a direct tax. 39 YEARS AGO!!??!!

As the level of taxation rises, says Dr. Tanzi, conflicts arise between the kind of taxes prescribed by experts and those taxes taxpayers themselves prefer. In a recent poll asking which tax was the least fair or the worst, 45 percent named the property tax. Answering another poll asking what tax was preferred if the Federal government had to raise taxes, “substantially,” a similar percentage voted for a value added tax; 30 percent for raising the individual income tax. “There is little doubt,” says Tanzi, “that, given the choice, the majority would prefer indirect over direct taxes, regardless of the opinion of the tax experts.”

JUST DO IT already! If not, we’ll continue to be the pawns on their chess board. It’s all about class warfare with them.

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred:

or …………………….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4iE7PuPslA&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cCFn55Zxkc&feature=related

• Link
• Report this comment

Red eye – the progressive tax structure has been deemed more “fair”. The gov’t has to be funded for the bills they incure. They have NEVER not spent money. The way it is.

• Link
• Report this comment

SKH: Now, instead of chasing [that] some red herring, why don’t YOU tell all of us if it is okay in your book for possibly millions of people to receive that kind of money without working

So you want us to chase your red herring without any evidence? You have generalized some undocumented claim made by your “friend” as evidence of “possibly millions”. I seem to remember some rants about how one racist sign at a Tea Party event was not “evidence” that all tea partiers were racists. Seems to be a disconnect in the logic loopy.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Now, instead of chasing some red herring, why don’t YOU tell all of us if it is okay in your book for possibly millions of people to receive that kind of money without working. We are not talking about the elderly, the disabled or infirm here.”

I ask you a simple question and you divert attention from it and then ask more questions. Were did you learn to do that – here on this forum or elsewhere?

• Link
• Report this comment

Funny thing…I was asked about the living conditions, etc. of my under $15,000 friends, not the over $250,000…shouldn’t we be just as interested in them?

So for the record, I’ll tell you about the one who has yet to enter the computer age and still uses a land line. She’s old as Methuseleh and rich enough to buy G-d, never had to work a day in her life for pay. Lives modestly in a place with lots of section 8 folks about. She never was “blessed with children.” And know what? Very quietly and with no fanfare, she’s always buying computers, school clothes, little presents, paying utility bills, maybe a microwave, etc. for those struggling to get by. So, really, who knows where those little extras came from?

She’s not alone…

Does anybody remember the anonymous Buckhead Housewife who once a month would “set up” a homeless family, paying their first and last months rent, deposits, stock a modest kitchen (don’t know if she put microwaves on her list or not), basic furniture, linens, etc…?

I know the first I mentioned wouldn’t mind paying more taxes, she’s said so, I don’t know who the other one was (is), but somehow I don’t think she’d be too bent out of shape…

• Link
• Report this comment

Anyone watch Meet the Press Sunday? It was interesting with Gov. John Kasich (R-OH) and Honeywell CEO David Cote. Kasich was going on, and on about taxes and uncertainty in regulation as being the major obstacle against job growth. David Cote it was uncertainty in demand and lack of investment in infrastructure, education, and energy policy – not just taxes, taxes, taxes. From the transcript:

DAVID COTE:
It’s the sort of thing that scares me is. We’re– I’m– Honeywell’s a global company with $37 billion in sales. Got 130,000 people. Half our sales in people outside the U.S. I’ve traveled the world a lot and the world has changed. We went from a billion participants in the global economy to four billion over the last 20 years. Yet we still act like we did 20 years ago. And we need– an American competitiveness agenda that– gets our finances right, gets our energy policy, math and science education, infrastructure. And we can’t even do something like this. It’s very scary as a businessman.

GOV. JOHN KASICH:
When a business– and I’ve been in business for 10 years– before I got this governor’s job. When a business is uncertain about the future they sit on the sidelines. We have more– we have so much money on the sidelines waiting to be invested, but they’re uncertain about where we’re going to go. The answer, get this god darned deficit under control, do not raise taxes on capital gains risk takings, provide incentives for investment. Real changes in education to connect our kids with real job opportunities. And, you know, if you begin to– and– and lay down some– some– certainty on regulatory reform, he’ll be investing.

MALE VOICE:
But, you know, I hear this uncertainty about regulation. And, frankly, I think a lot of CEOs say it because why not. Why not get some regulatory relief if you can or tax relief? But at the end of the day your first answer, demand– –would seem to me is the case.

DAVID COTE:
It’s uncertainty and demand.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mr Right –

so, now the poor have to live like people whose entire country has been leveled by an earthquake to be considered “poor”???

or, how about the slums of Mumbai!

or maybe the refugees in Africa!

yep. that should be our measure. forget about the standard of living in the country where our poor actually, you know, LIVE.

• Link
• Report this comment

For anyone who would like to know why business is afraid to invest at this time:

http://www.businessinsider.com/wynn-ceo-steve-wynn-conference-call-transcript-obama-2011-7

• Link
• Report this comment

josef – 1:06 –

and, don’t forget, there are a number of charities that take used appliances off people’s hands (for a tax deduction) and give them to the poor.

• Link
• Report this comment

For those obsessed with Murdoch, there’s a thread, three stories down. It’s still open for comments.

schnirt

• Link
• Report this comment

Mighty Righty – the rich are afraid to invest because Steve Wynn had a tanty???

who knew.

• Link
• Report this comment

This is about as laughable as it gets:

Headline: “Ga. execution drug unsafe, attorneys say”

“In an appeal filed in federal court, the lawyers referenced the execution last month of Roy Blankenship and reports that the Savannah murderer moved and appeared to mutter as the drugs were going into his veins.”

• Link
• Report this comment

I ask you a simple question and you divert attention from it and then ask more questions. Were did you learn to do that – here on this forum or elsewhere?”

Modus operandi for that poster, SKH. You’re wasting your time trying to reason with them.

• Link
• Report this comment

“About Michelle Bachmann’s allegedly debilitating migraines,”

Can she be banned from running if she gives ME migraines?

• Link
• Report this comment

I have two words for you, Mr. Speaker. Stop it. That’s right, just stop it. For too long our government has spent beyond its means and in our names, sinking us and generations as yet unborn into deeper and deeper debt. And you, Mr. Speaker, can stop it. The President stands with the big-business, big-banks, big-government complex, and against the American people. He’s even prepared to defy the laws of economics. But the American people are not ignorant as he thinks they are, and you know that.

Mr. Speaker, you have the opportunity to do something that no standard bearer of small government has ever been able to do in our modern era; get the government to live within its means. You can do it by standing firm with your colleagues in the Congress who are leading the call for change. You can stop it. You can force the Federal Government to make the difficult decisions to bring itself within its means and begin to loosen the chains of debt that have been foisted on our country by a centuries worth of progressive big-government architects. End it this summer, Mr. Speaker. Stop it. Tell the President, “not a penny more.” Stand up for the American people, bring government within its means, and begin the restoration of our republic.

If you do this Mr. Speaker, if you restrain the federal beast, you will become one of history’s great champions and heroes of freedom. If you don’t, we’ll all go through this again the next time a president wants to spend beyond the government’s means and chain us all down to more debt.

Mr. Speaker, don’t let us down.

-Judge Andrew P. Napolitano

• Link
• Report this comment

I would like to here you say unequivocally that you do NOT think it is right that hundreds of thousands or possible millions of able bodied people are receiving up to $30,000 a year without having to work

Also, are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?

• Link
• Report this comment

If you want to tax assets, pass a new amendment.

MPercy- it is coming in the next 5-10 years or sooner. Here is the prediction. As you know all employees and employers pay into the beloved social security system. The SS system is under the loving moniker of a paygo system. Over the past decades those with more income pay more and also get less as one can now be taxed on the benefits.

Fast forward 5-10 years. There will be a form to receive benefits called your Balance Sheet or Net Worth Statement. If that person has a net worth over a certain amount they will get a “thanks for paying (playing) you lose.

• Link
• Report this comment

Probably not. This country views diseases that arise in the mind much differently than diseases that arise in the body.

You’re probably right, and it’s a shame that we haven’t really made any progress on that front in, jeez, 39 years.

• Link
• Report this comment

sfd

But hey, Bachmann owns that treatment clinic, doesn’t she? Maybe she should enroll and choose to not have migraines any more? I mean, she really can’t say she was born with this condition, can she? It’s all about choice. So if she has migraines she must have chosen that for herself, right?

• Link
• Report this comment

Dave – 1:17 –

• Link
• Report this comment

btw, simply SHOCKED to see Fox News carrying the Murdoch grillings live right now.

Good thing they’re ignoring / not covering / covering up / minimizing this issue.

Oh, and Lord save me from politicians trying to get some sort of “Perry Mason” moment at a government hearing.

• Link
• Report this comment

Excuse me: 24/7

• Link
• Report this comment

Excuse me:

Bachmann

• Link
• Report this comment

RB from Gwinnett

July 19th, 2011
12:22 pm
With you liberals, it’s always this game of growing government, raising taxes, new entitlements in exchange for something. It’s never ending. And even a complete idiot can see this method dragging us into the same cesspool as most of Europe….

Yeah those European countries like Germany, Switzerland, Norway, Denmark, and Sweden are sure cesspools. Their economies are just awful. Perhaps if you traveled outside of Gwinnett County than you could open your eyes and mind.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay: Thanks, that’s what I thought and pretty much for the reasons you described. I somehow didn’t think Woodward and Bernstein hired Columbo to tie up a few loose ends.

• Link
• Report this comment

josef – well, that makes the recipients RICH!!! RICH, I tell you!!!

Paris Hilton looks on with envy in her heart.

• Link
• Report this comment

But hey, Bachmann owns that treatment clinic, doesn’t she? Maybe she should enroll and choose to not have migraines any more? I mean, she really can’t say she was born with this condition, can she? It’s all about choice. So if she has migraines she must have chosen that for herself, right?

Has Paul been namejacked or joined the pitifully petty?

• Link
• Report this comment

Scout

“or are a man and cry during the campaing ………………. well ………………….. find another job !”

Does that include Speaker of the House? Or any job in Congress?

Are you going to start singing “Macho, macho man, I want to be, a macho man”?

• Link
• Report this comment

Raising taxes by 3-5% on the rich does virtually nothing

How do you know that? It’s never been tried………..

• Link
• Report this comment

PAUL
@ 1:21

Are you intimating that I’m a headache?

• Link
• Report this comment

advocate for economic JUSTICE. How can Warren Buffett pay a SMALLER effective tax rate than his secretary? Even though he “makes” 767 times the annual money she does.

How can 485,000 Americans who “make” between $100,000 and $500,000 per year pay no federal income tax?

How can 18,000 Americans who “make” more than $500,000 per year pay NO federal income tax?

Uh- because it is not true- kind of like me saying how can donkey’s fly?

You may want to tone down the outrage and understand that if I (or you for that matter) go create a company that sells stuff- it may “make” 500k but have employees and other expenses that cost 520k. This happens more than the far left would like to believe. In this very common scenario the taxpayer actually has a net loss for that particular year.

As to our wonderful friend Warren Buffett he may own a gazillion $’s of Berskhire. Berkshire may go up in value 40% and Buffett not sale any shares. Guess what- no tax.

The far left will then love when he and other gazillionaires donate half their net worth to charity. Guess what- billions of estate tax just went poof and the net worth can now grow fully tax free under the auspices of a chairtable trust or a private foundation.

Anyway- why bother with the facts- just be mad.

• Link
• Report this comment

Can someone tell me what the Democrats or Obama has proposed as to resolving the debt ceiling.

• Link
• Report this comment

Those are the facts. And I have posted a plethora of incontrovertible other facts to prove their is a War on the Middle Class.

Facts+Republican Party = The Equivalent of Kryptonite on Superman.

• Link
• Report this comment

@@

Follow this thru.

Some people who like Bachmann also support her belief some facets of their being are by choice.

They deny any organic/genetic/nonchoice component.

Yet when they encounter the reality their candidate has a condition characteristic of a small part of the population, they believe nothing she did or chose caused her to be who she is. It just ‘is.’

They deny she could choose to be migraine-free.

“Pitifully petty” applies to those who do not wish to confront the contradictions in their judgmental attitude, don’t you think?

• Link
• Report this comment

RB, You need to fire all those undocumenteds you just hired to empty your toilet. Seems it didn’t work out too well……

• Link
• Report this comment

MPercy

That may be so, but I hardly think Pres Bush and Congress were thinking “hey, and let’s adjust the AGI level to what it will be in 12 years or so…”

• Link
• Report this comment

josef

“Are you intimating that I’m a headache? ”

For some on this blog, yeah, you are.

For me you’re more like a cure.

• Link
• Report this comment

MiltonMoron, Lock step is for you Gestapo types. We “skip the light fantastic” in our world…..

• Link
• Report this comment

“How do you know that? It’s never been tried………..”

I am speaking from a defecit standpoint which is what the debt ceiling talks are about. If you look at how much money is being brought in by the rich and you increase their tax rates by 5% the amount of increased revenue doesn’t address the deficit issues in any way.

• Link
• Report this comment

You may hate Cantor’s plan but at least he put one on the table. Boehner had a great line the other day where said he wanted a budget from OB, not another speech.

• Link
• Report this comment

Excuse me Mike? More money to pay off the deficit doesn’t address it?

Explain that to me please. And don’t forget that implied in my question is HUGE spending cut, 3-4 trillion dollars worth……… (preferably 10 trillion lol but that would never happen).

• Link
• Report this comment

jj

Do you have a link for Cantor’s plan?

• Link
• Report this comment

Soothsayer @11:40 am, re: corporate rates

Corporations don’t really pay taxes.

The CBO produced a report “THE INCIDENCE OF THE CORPORATE INCOME TAX” in which it states “A corporation may write its check to the Internal Revenue Service for payment of the
corporate income tax, but that money must come from somewhere: from reduced returns to investors in the company, lower wages to its workers, or higher prices that consumers pay for the products the company produces.”

And it goes on to say

“Although economists are far from a consensus about exactly who bears how much of the burden of the corporate income tax, the existing studies highlight the significant types of economic mechanisms as well as the empirical estimates necessary for further quantifying the burdens. CBO’s review of the studies yields the following conclusions:

o The short-term burden of the corporate tax probably falls on stockholders or investors in general, but may fall on some more than on others, because not all investments are taxed at the same rate.

o The long-term burden of corporate or dividend taxation is unlikely to rest fully on corporate equity, because it will remain there only if marginal investment is not affected by those taxes. Most economists believe that the corporate tax system has some effect on investment decisions.

o Most evidence from closed-economy, general-equilibrium models suggests that given reasonable parameters, the long-term incidence of the corporate tax falls on capital in general.

o In the context of international capital mobility, the burden of the corporate tax may be shifted onto immobile factors (such as labor or land), but only to the degree that the capital and outputs of different countries can be substituted.

o In the very long term, the burden is likely to be shifted in part to labor, if the corporate tax dampens capital accumulation.

o Most attempts to distribute the burden of corporate taxation have neglected the possible importance of effects on the relative prices of products.

• Link
• Report this comment

DAVE

oops…
That’s SUPPOSED to be “Why are there no Sons of Black Muslim Confederate Veterans?”

• Link
• Report this comment

josef @1:45,

Because liberals,non-Republicans and progressives are all Islamophobic, Negrophobic racists? (grin)

• Link
• Report this comment

Cain is a liberal?

• Link
• Report this comment

“Excuse me Mike? More money to pay off the deficit doesn’t address it?”

More money certainly addresses the deficit, but, the point is that getting bent out of shape about taxing the rich is pointless because the actual effect of the tax increase is so little. You are right, every dollar counts, but I wanted to make clear that the additional revenue that will be created isn’t exactly a life changer…

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul:

Dancing around that campfire would put me in the “Michelle Bachmann’s husband is a closeted gay” crowd.

Thus far, the left has called Michael Steele an Uncle Tom. Reinse Preibus (sp?) a closeted gay along with Rick Perry who they also suspect is gay. All “news” to me but then I don’t focus on those things.

Racism and homophobia seems to abound on the left.

Feel free to dance around whatever campfire you choose.

• Link
• Report this comment

PAUL

I know where the power lies, and I don’t mess with it lightly!

• Link
• Report this comment

I guess all those conservatives who have a new found love of Bill Clinton would have second thoughts of that love after his recent interview…..

Former President Bill Clinton said if faced with default, he would single-handedly raise the debt ceiling using the 14th Amendment and he’d do it “without hesitation, and force the courts to stop me.”

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/07/19/138511612/bill-clinton-says-hed-raise-the-debt-ceiling-using-14th-amendment

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul

All he would have to do is prod you into doing it. Either that, or he could just lead you into it.

josef

• Link
• Report this comment

@@

“Dancing around that campfire would put me in the “Michelle Bachmann’s husband is a closeted gay” crowd.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Re-posting since we’ve moved back here:

Also from the ajc Gang of Six proposal article: “Federal revenue would be increased $1.1 trillion over 10 years through changes to tax deductions currently granted for home mortgage interest, charitable giving, and health care insurance.”

And who do those tax loopholes affect? The middle class, of course. F U Saxby.

• Link
• Report this comment

Looks like our homeboy Saxby getting some praise in DC and the AJC.

piffle

• Link
• Report this comment

“And it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if it comes down to that, in the end.”

If he has to do that in order to prevent default, by all means…

• Link
• Report this comment

“Looks like our homeboy Saxby getting some praise in DC and the AJC.” – Him and the Gang of Six are a bunch of Grade A d-bags who all need to be kicked in the nuts. And kicked again when they get up.

• Link
• Report this comment

Peadawg? Can we pee on them while they are down? If so, i completely endorse your proposal.

• Link
• Report this comment

Lexicon update from last night’s Jon Stewart.

Stewart ran a number of clips from influential Republicans.

If you’re still referring to “the rich” or “the ultra rich” or “the really, really rich” you haven’t read the memo. You’re behind the times and you’re dating yourselves.

The new term for ‘rich’ is “job creators.” Republican policymakers have spoken.

I’ll bet Soros gets a kick out of that.

• Link
• Report this comment

But it’s true Paul. Look at all the jobs they HAVE created………….. In China………

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, I guess we’ve all learned what posting the words “Sons of Black Muslim Confederate Veterans” in a question does.

Opens up a yawning chasm in the space-time continuum.

• Link
• Report this comment

Woodstock Mike

Whenever I’ve heard discussion on that proposal from those with the power to introduce proposals (not just from bloggers, who’ll recommend nearly anything), it isn’t about eliminating the mortgage deduction. It’s about capping the value of the deduction to the portion that applies to the first $500,000 of a home’s value and eliminating the deduction for second (vacation) homes.

• Link
• Report this comment

DAVE

Well, there IS a reason…

PAUL

Oh, Most Powerful One, you owe us an explanation…

• Link
• Report this comment

“It’s about capping the value of the deduction to the portion that applies to the first $500,000 of a home’s value and eliminating the deduction for second (vacation) homes.”

Either way this is just another blow to housing and in my opinion housing might be the most important piece of this whole puzzle…

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul:

You, on the other hand, took what I wrote as concerning the sexuality of spouses or other political candidates. Care to get back to the real intent of the post?

You must’ve been absent the other day. Getalife and Mrs. Godzilla were laying odds that Bachmann’s husband would be revealed as gay. Somebody else pointed out that his counseling business claimed gays can be transformed. The left having fun at the Bachmann family’s expense.

Your post sounded similar.

You, on the other hand, took what I wrote as concerning the sexuality of spouses or other political candidates. Care to get back to the real intent of the post?

No! My choice.

• Link
• Report this comment

I’m getting dizzy

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul

How come you stay here when the rest of us have to go downstairs? Hunh?

• Link
• Report this comment

good point Josef. I smell a rat lol.

Fess up Paul…….

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul is really a Space Monkey sent down to Earth to mess with us.

• Link
• Report this comment

And, Paul?

Not to offend, but I lost the point of your posts some time ago. The only thing I see is you trying to gain points for your “squishy” side.

LUV that word, “squish”. It was Andy’s oft used…

• Link
• Report this comment

Hey, just heard this:

The mainstream media is like a bunch of palace guard eunuchs in the Obama harem.

Quite amusing and ……………….. accurate.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mike

I’ve never set a dollar amount as a definition of “rich”. Hell, I consider myself rich, and my total household income doesn’t hit 6 figures. It’s all in perspective. I grew up with 26 others under one roof at one time. The fact that I have my own house (which is larger than the one I grew up in), my bills are paid ontime, I have more than I could have ever dreamed of when I was a kid (wife, child, AND an antique car), and I still have money to save afterwards makes me feel rich.

If you want a definition of rich, I’d put those with an income of $1 million plus in a separate bracket from the rest of us. I’d put the $500k-$999k in a different bracket. I’d create one for $300k-$499k, and then put the $100k-$299k in it’s own bracket. At the same time, I’d treat capital gains as regular income.

• Link
• Report this comment

Dave R

The secret’s out –

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y15NnGZIBuM

• Link
• Report this comment

Scout,

Quit your whining. It’s so unmanly.

• Link
• Report this comment

I was just down at Target and saw one of the saddest things around here probably since about 1865 when slavery was at least “technically” done away with ……………. a woman dressed in black peering at me through about a once in slit in her hood.

Do you libs. really think this kind of subservience should really be allowed in America?

I don’t know what the latest court rulings are but ……………………

O.C.G.A. 16-11-38 (2010)
16-11-38. Wearing mask, hood, or device which conceals identity of wearer

(a) A person is guilty of a misdemeanor when he wears a mask, hood, or device by which any portion of the face is so hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer and is upon any public way or public property or upon the private property of another without the written permission of the owner or occupier of the property to do so.

(b) This Code section shall not apply to:

(1) A person wearing a traditional holiday costume on the occasion of the holiday;

(2) A person lawfully engaged in trade and employment or in a sporting activity where a mask is worn for the purpose of ensuring the physical safety of the wearer, or because of the nature of the occupation, trade, or profession, or sporting activity;

(3) A person using a mask in a theatrical production including use in Mardi gras celebrations and masquerade balls; or

(4) A person wearing a gas mask prescribed in emergency management drills and exercises or emergencies.

• Link
• Report this comment

Citizen of the World

July 19th, 2011
10:24 am
“Kayaker, maybe the bottom 50% barely make enough to get by! Which is a problem in and of itself!”

Some of you seem terrified of becoming a Third World ENTITY?????lol

• Link
• Report this comment

Do you libs. really think this kind of subservience should really be allowed in America?

Should a wife not be obedient to her husband in accordance with The Bible?

• Link
• Report this comment