John Cornyn (R TX) among others has been complaining that fifty one percent of our country does not pay any taxes According to the Tax Policy Institute it's actually about about forty six percent, but for everyones sake let's just say it is fifty percent. Fox News seems to have had everyone of their on air personalities screaming the talking point. What Fox News does not tell you is that out of the fifty percent, almost half are retired people who do not make enough money to pay taxes. If you have retired parents who are on social security and maybe some savings dividends, would you want them to start paying? They're retired it's time for them to enjoy life, not worry about it. But that's ok because the same Republicans that wan't to tax Social Security want to get rid of it all together anyway. Warren Buffett one of the wealthiest people in the world, this week said the rich need to step up and pay a higher tax rate. To which one idiot on Fox News called him a Socialist. One of the greatest capitolists in history is called a socialist? And that's why I do not take what Fox News says too seriously. Getting back to point, the other half of the fifty percent don't pay taxes because they are poor. They don't make enough to pay income tax, but the ones that work, do pay other taxes such as Social Security, Medicare, Sales Taxes, Gasoline and other user based taxes. The ones that don't work still pay user based taxes. The amount they pay is actually disproportionately higher than many well off people pay. How you ask, someone who makes four hundred grand a year stops paying into Social Security at roughly one hundred, seven thousand dollars a year. With that in mind he roughly pays Social Security on about twenty five percent of his income, where as a person who makes twenty five thousand a year pays Social Security taxes on one hundred percent of his income. I have explained this so even a chimpanzee could understand it.
To fix the problem with our budget shortfall the Democrats want to raise the tax on the four hundred richest Americans another three percent by rolling back the Bush tax cuts, in addition to cutting spending. Republicans are saying no way. Spending cuts only. Republicans say that it would only generate around seven hundred billion over ten years. How out of touch are they? Seven hundred billion is major money. Instead as I said they want everyone to pay their fair share. I am all for it, so let's take someone who earns the national average for a family of four which is around forty thousand a year, find out the total taxes they pay (everything I mentioned above) and that percentage would be applied to everyone making over four hundred thousand a year. This country would be out of debt in no time considering the four hundred richest Americans have over fifty percent of the money and they make well over four hundred thousand a year.
Friday, August 19, 2011
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Fox News, The Good and The Bad
First the good. In the Ames Iowa debate Fox News Chris Wallace, along with the rest of the panel, for the questions they asked the candidates. Those were hard questions and that was a conservative panel, as three of them were from a Washington D.C. based conservative newspaper. Thank you. At first I was wondering if I was watching Fox, or was MSNBC putting on this debate. Once again, thank you. Now the bad. Fox News.
All week Fox News has been talking about S+P downgrading our countries credit rating, and that it was Obama's fault. They have all been calling it the Obama downgrade. It has been talked about all week by not just Fox, but by several of the Republican candidates for President. The problem with that though, is S+P has said since the downgrade was given, that the reason they did it is because forces in our government have turned the debt ceiling and the threat of default into political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy. How does the right wing interpret that into Obama's downgrade? When did Obama ever say he would use it as a bargaining chip. He was for raising it on its own the way it was always done. He was stupid to not do it during the lame duck Congress, before the Tea Partiers got in. But Fox News kept hammering that it was Obama's downgrade. When the rhetoric started on Fox, the next day, an S+P Senior official gave an interview to the Wall Street Journal, coincidentally owned by the same parent company as Fox News and said "The conclusion was pretty much motivated by all of the debate about raising the debt ceiling". The "Conclusion" was the downgrade, the "Debate" was in Congress, specifically in the Republican Caucus in the House. The debate was with the Tea Party Caucus and the rest of the Republicans. The fact is the Tea Party members of the House wanted the U.S. to default. Skip ahead to the debate Thursday night and you'll see. Michele Bachman, a Tea Party Congresswoman said "We just heard from S+P, when they dropped our credit rating, what they said was we don't have the ability to repay our debt. I was proved right in my position and we should not have raised the debt ceiling". After hearing that, the next day a Senior Director of S+P in an interview with Politico said "Several lawmakers have expressed skepticism about the serious consequences of a credit default. That a country even has such voices, albeit a minority, is something notable. This kind of rhetoric is not common among AAA rated nations". You can't spell it out more clear than that.
S+P downgraded our rating due to the actions of the Tea Party members of the House.
I would say John Boehners days are numbered as Speaker, he has no control over his Caucus. I don't agree with the downgrade as the U.S. has never nor will they ever default. In the days after the downgrade the stock market crashed but U.S. Bonds couldn't be bought fast enough. That shows the world that we are still the safest bet out there.
All week Fox News has been talking about S+P downgrading our countries credit rating, and that it was Obama's fault. They have all been calling it the Obama downgrade. It has been talked about all week by not just Fox, but by several of the Republican candidates for President. The problem with that though, is S+P has said since the downgrade was given, that the reason they did it is because forces in our government have turned the debt ceiling and the threat of default into political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy. How does the right wing interpret that into Obama's downgrade? When did Obama ever say he would use it as a bargaining chip. He was for raising it on its own the way it was always done. He was stupid to not do it during the lame duck Congress, before the Tea Partiers got in. But Fox News kept hammering that it was Obama's downgrade. When the rhetoric started on Fox, the next day, an S+P Senior official gave an interview to the Wall Street Journal, coincidentally owned by the same parent company as Fox News and said "The conclusion was pretty much motivated by all of the debate about raising the debt ceiling". The "Conclusion" was the downgrade, the "Debate" was in Congress, specifically in the Republican Caucus in the House. The debate was with the Tea Party Caucus and the rest of the Republicans. The fact is the Tea Party members of the House wanted the U.S. to default. Skip ahead to the debate Thursday night and you'll see. Michele Bachman, a Tea Party Congresswoman said "We just heard from S+P, when they dropped our credit rating, what they said was we don't have the ability to repay our debt. I was proved right in my position and we should not have raised the debt ceiling". After hearing that, the next day a Senior Director of S+P in an interview with Politico said "Several lawmakers have expressed skepticism about the serious consequences of a credit default. That a country even has such voices, albeit a minority, is something notable. This kind of rhetoric is not common among AAA rated nations". You can't spell it out more clear than that.
S+P downgraded our rating due to the actions of the Tea Party members of the House.
I would say John Boehners days are numbered as Speaker, he has no control over his Caucus. I don't agree with the downgrade as the U.S. has never nor will they ever default. In the days after the downgrade the stock market crashed but U.S. Bonds couldn't be bought fast enough. That shows the world that we are still the safest bet out there.
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Introducing Rick Perry from Texas
Yes Texas has created more jobs than any other state during the recession under his watch but then again most of those jobs are minimum wage jobs, as Texas has the highest average amount of people making minimum wage in the country. In fact for someone who shuns the federal government, he sure asks a lot from them. His 2010 budget was only balanced because the federal government plugged 97% of his deficit. This was higher than any other state. Instead of blasting Obama he should be thanking him. Let's dig a little deeper, ok with you? Just like all the Tea Partiers in office he is full of shit. He is the typical Tea Party person talking about less government/less regulation/less intrusiveness. His record shows opposite of his rhetoric.
Such as the fact that after Merck donated 5,000 dollars to his campaign. He signed an executive order requiring 12 year old girls to get the vaccination Gardasil, which is made by Merck. To top that off his abstinence only sex education laws have resulted in Texas having the highest teen pregnancy rate in the country. He actually has an immigration policy more liberal that Obama's as he signed an executive order giving "In State Tuition Rates" to illegal aliens. As liberal as some people call me, even I don't agree with that.
But the real scary thing is what he did last weekend. He initiated a religious gathering called "The Response". He tried to fill a stadium in Houston while religious fanatic's got up and spoke to anyone who showed up. Some of the ministers are so far out there that one of the endorsers of the event called The Statue of Liberty a "Demonic Idol right there in the heart of New York Harbor".
Below is a sample of Rick Perry's work ethic:
As the state faces a budget hole of $18 billion, Part-Time Perry continues to charge Texas taxpayers over $9,000 a month in rent and $428.57 an hour for work.
Perry's extravagant rental mansion is worth $1.85 million, 10 times more than the average price for a home in Texas, which is $183,800.
"Texas taxpayers are stuck with the bills for Rick Perry's fancy mansion, his Food & Wine magazine and his one and a half chefs, while Perry charges $428.57 an hour for work," Bill White said. "He's been a career politician for so long he's forgotten who he serves. Texans deserve a governor who's working for them, not himself, and a governor who works as hard as they do."
State schedules released last week showed Perry averages just seven hours of work per week.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average work week for Texans is 40 hours.
The question now is this. To you righteous patriotic Republicans would you vote for someone running for President of the United States who accepts money from a minister who calls one of our countries greatest symbols of freedom a demonic idol? If you answer yes then you'll also be voting for a man who a little over two years ago threatened to have Texas succeed from the United States. Now there is a man all of us can trust.
Friday, July 29, 2011
Taxes and Job Creation
I need for someone to explain to me how less taxes equals more job creation. I don't want the Fox News talking points, I want the facts.
Joe Walsh my wonderful congressman who preaches fiscal responsibility, and moral wholesomeness is looking more and more like just another in a long line of used car salesman sent to Washington. For someone who blames the people who have defaulted on their mortgages it seems really backward that he has had his own house foreclosed on. The story doesn't end there as his campaign staff is suing him for over $20,000.00 owed to them.
The icing on the cake is the alleged $117,000.00 Joe Walsh is behind in child support payments. He claims its much less. So let's say it's in fact much less, say around 35 thousand dollars. That is the amount he loaned his campaign for his house seat. The moral person that he says he is should have paid what is owed to his own children. What I can't figure out is that he is against abortion yet he helps create kids and then decides he is going to let them fend for themselves. I guess that's the personal responsibility he preaches about in Washington.
Joe Walsh is for not raising taxes on the wealthiest two percent in the country and he calls them as most Republicans do, job killing tax increases. Let's take one example. Hedge fund manager John Paulson had an income of 4.9 BILLION dollars last year. I think that's great. As a matter of fact, that same amount at a salary of almost 27 thousand a year would employ 184,000 people.
Now I'm no fool, but the people that make $27,000 a year are putting every penny they earn back into the economy just to get by. Where as Mr. Paulson can not possibly spend that amount of money reasonably. So you come back and tell me that someone making $27,000.00 a year with two kids pay no taxes at all and Mr. Paulson pays a ton of money in taxes. At face value that is true. When you look closer though, Mr. Paulson, if his salary is structured the way most people in the top two percent of income earners pays around 17.2%. He pays very little if any into Social Security, because after you reach $107,000.00 in income you don't pay Social Security on anything made above that amount. Same with Medicare. On the other hand the person making around $27,000.00 with two kids pays no federal income tax, but still pays their share of Social Security and Medicare.
This is the problem. My congressman wants to eliminate those two programs as we know them. What I want to know is if Mr. Paulsons taxes were raised just three percent, he would still have 3.8 billion left to create jobs. I also want to know if the theory that less taxes equals more jobs, then why have the tax cuts that have been in place for the last ten years left us with a 9.2 percent unemployment and a huge national debt? On the other hand when Clinton and Gingrich compromised in 1994 on a tax hike of three percent while cutting most welfare programs, our country had a surplus of over 230 million a year and unemployment at around five percent by the time they left office.
I am not someone who wants taxes raised just to spend more. I want the tax hike used to pay down the bills our congress has accumulated over the years and the tax increase must be tied to that. Why should the money I have paid into Social Security since I was 16 be used to pay down the debt. That money I will need for retirement where as Mr. Paulson will have no worries about his financial health when he retires. Once again can anyone show me some facts that lower taxes equal more jobs.
Joe Walsh my wonderful congressman who preaches fiscal responsibility, and moral wholesomeness is looking more and more like just another in a long line of used car salesman sent to Washington. For someone who blames the people who have defaulted on their mortgages it seems really backward that he has had his own house foreclosed on. The story doesn't end there as his campaign staff is suing him for over $20,000.00 owed to them.
The icing on the cake is the alleged $117,000.00 Joe Walsh is behind in child support payments. He claims its much less. So let's say it's in fact much less, say around 35 thousand dollars. That is the amount he loaned his campaign for his house seat. The moral person that he says he is should have paid what is owed to his own children. What I can't figure out is that he is against abortion yet he helps create kids and then decides he is going to let them fend for themselves. I guess that's the personal responsibility he preaches about in Washington.
Joe Walsh is for not raising taxes on the wealthiest two percent in the country and he calls them as most Republicans do, job killing tax increases. Let's take one example. Hedge fund manager John Paulson had an income of 4.9 BILLION dollars last year. I think that's great. As a matter of fact, that same amount at a salary of almost 27 thousand a year would employ 184,000 people.
Now I'm no fool, but the people that make $27,000 a year are putting every penny they earn back into the economy just to get by. Where as Mr. Paulson can not possibly spend that amount of money reasonably. So you come back and tell me that someone making $27,000.00 a year with two kids pay no taxes at all and Mr. Paulson pays a ton of money in taxes. At face value that is true. When you look closer though, Mr. Paulson, if his salary is structured the way most people in the top two percent of income earners pays around 17.2%. He pays very little if any into Social Security, because after you reach $107,000.00 in income you don't pay Social Security on anything made above that amount. Same with Medicare. On the other hand the person making around $27,000.00 with two kids pays no federal income tax, but still pays their share of Social Security and Medicare.
This is the problem. My congressman wants to eliminate those two programs as we know them. What I want to know is if Mr. Paulsons taxes were raised just three percent, he would still have 3.8 billion left to create jobs. I also want to know if the theory that less taxes equals more jobs, then why have the tax cuts that have been in place for the last ten years left us with a 9.2 percent unemployment and a huge national debt? On the other hand when Clinton and Gingrich compromised in 1994 on a tax hike of three percent while cutting most welfare programs, our country had a surplus of over 230 million a year and unemployment at around five percent by the time they left office.
I am not someone who wants taxes raised just to spend more. I want the tax hike used to pay down the bills our congress has accumulated over the years and the tax increase must be tied to that. Why should the money I have paid into Social Security since I was 16 be used to pay down the debt. That money I will need for retirement where as Mr. Paulson will have no worries about his financial health when he retires. Once again can anyone show me some facts that lower taxes equal more jobs.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
The Debt Ceiling
Ok, so I have not wrote in the blog for a while and things are starting to get interesting. Just like any business or household the government needs to borrow money to keep operating. Other than our mortgage, my wife and I have no debt. Yes, we still charge items on our credit card, but at the end of the month it is paid off. It took several years to pay off our cars as we did not have the capitol to purchase them outright. Our government does this also, but most politicians have followed the Dick Cheney school of thought that deficits don't matter. With that in mind they have driven up the debt to numbers that most of us can not even comprehend. So let's start with the facts:
In 1994 a Republican Congress worked out a deal with a Democratic President to cut most welfare programs, while at the same time raising taxes on the wealthiest two percent of income earners in this country. By 2000 when said President left office, the country had a surplus of 230 billion dollars a year and rising, and that was after making payments to pay down the national debt. If things stayed the same our national debt would almost be completely gone. These are the facts and are not disputable. That information came from the new Republican Presidents Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'neill. What happened since then?
To get a stalled economy going the new President devised a plan to take the surpluses and borrow some money to give tax breaks to everyone, but the largest share going to the top two percent of income earners. Then 9-11 hit and we got into two wars, and many minor conflicts that cost billions. By June 2008 the wars cost was up to 850 billion, plus another 750 billion in veterans costs and other indirect costs such as setting up the T.S.A. and the Department of Homeland Security. Other programs such as Medicare Part D will cost around 730 billion by the year 2018. Ok so we have a spending spree by the government during the Bush years that both Democrats and Republicans supported. The problem is that the tax cuts have left us with the lowest tax rates in sixty years while spending was at its highest in our nations history. How did we pay for all of it? We borrowed to pay for it all. Total tab during the Bush years was over 4 trillion borrowed. So here we are today.
In order to keep the country operating we need to borrow more. I don't like it at all, but we have no choice. The only way to fix the problem is to cut spending across the board while at the same time raising taxes. The Republicans say raising taxes stops job growth, but history proves otherwise. The Clinton administration raised taxes three percent on the wealthiest Americans and we had a net gain of 22 million jobs. Bush cut taxes, Obama cut them even more and we had a net gain of 1 million jobs under Bush, and Obama is sitting on 9.2 percent unemployment. Bush in fact had the slowest job growth of any President since the Great Depression.
One question I have is that why did 130 current Republican Congressman vote to raise the debt ceiling 7 times under Bush yet they wont do it under Obama. What's worse is that almost every single current Republican voted for the Paul Ryan budget which required raising the debt ceiling more than 6 trillion dollars over the next ten years? Almost every economist including economists employed by Republican Think Tanks agree that it must be raised. Even the beloved Ronald Reagan had to raise it 18 times during his 8 years in office. In September 1987 Reagan said that if it is not raised "It would threaten the holders of government bonds, those who rely on Social Security, and Veterans Benefits. Interest rates would skyrocket, instability would occur in financial markets and the federal deficit would soar".
So why are these Republicans who in the past quote Ronald Reagan, who they worship, and voted to raise the debt ceiling under Bush, are now refusing to even compromise? Michele Bachmann who voted to raise it numerous times while Bush was President is a leading candidate for the Republican Presidential race has said that she will not raise the debt ceiling, period. She also has stated that the worse the economy is, the more likely she will get Obama out of office and her chances of getting elected would be higher. The Republicans in 2010 ran on getting more people back to work, yet there has not been a single jobs bill introduced in the House yet.
History shows that when the public prospers the incumbents get re-elected, so there is no reason for the Republican controlled House to introduce anything that would create jobs and help the economy. There you have it, that is what this is all about. It's about making things so bad that Obama will be a one term President. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said the day after the 2010 midterm elections that the number one goal is to get Obama out of office. So they are going to sink the economy even worse than it is, just to get Obama out of office? How patriotic is that? One other thing, both Democrats and Republicans have to stop calling Social Security an entitlement program. I have put money into it since I was 15 years old. It is a savings account for when I retire and you the government has borrowed from it since the 1980s. If you want to reform it, give me back everything I have put into it with interest and I will do just fine when I retire. Also, the Republicans tell us as Americans that we are responsible for saving for our own retirements, well what is going to happen to my wifes 401K when these assholes send the nation over the cliff and default on our debt? I'll tell you, her 401K that she has put money into for 20 years will be worth less then the paper her statement is printed on!
In 1994 a Republican Congress worked out a deal with a Democratic President to cut most welfare programs, while at the same time raising taxes on the wealthiest two percent of income earners in this country. By 2000 when said President left office, the country had a surplus of 230 billion dollars a year and rising, and that was after making payments to pay down the national debt. If things stayed the same our national debt would almost be completely gone. These are the facts and are not disputable. That information came from the new Republican Presidents Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'neill. What happened since then?
To get a stalled economy going the new President devised a plan to take the surpluses and borrow some money to give tax breaks to everyone, but the largest share going to the top two percent of income earners. Then 9-11 hit and we got into two wars, and many minor conflicts that cost billions. By June 2008 the wars cost was up to 850 billion, plus another 750 billion in veterans costs and other indirect costs such as setting up the T.S.A. and the Department of Homeland Security. Other programs such as Medicare Part D will cost around 730 billion by the year 2018. Ok so we have a spending spree by the government during the Bush years that both Democrats and Republicans supported. The problem is that the tax cuts have left us with the lowest tax rates in sixty years while spending was at its highest in our nations history. How did we pay for all of it? We borrowed to pay for it all. Total tab during the Bush years was over 4 trillion borrowed. So here we are today.
In order to keep the country operating we need to borrow more. I don't like it at all, but we have no choice. The only way to fix the problem is to cut spending across the board while at the same time raising taxes. The Republicans say raising taxes stops job growth, but history proves otherwise. The Clinton administration raised taxes three percent on the wealthiest Americans and we had a net gain of 22 million jobs. Bush cut taxes, Obama cut them even more and we had a net gain of 1 million jobs under Bush, and Obama is sitting on 9.2 percent unemployment. Bush in fact had the slowest job growth of any President since the Great Depression.
One question I have is that why did 130 current Republican Congressman vote to raise the debt ceiling 7 times under Bush yet they wont do it under Obama. What's worse is that almost every single current Republican voted for the Paul Ryan budget which required raising the debt ceiling more than 6 trillion dollars over the next ten years? Almost every economist including economists employed by Republican Think Tanks agree that it must be raised. Even the beloved Ronald Reagan had to raise it 18 times during his 8 years in office. In September 1987 Reagan said that if it is not raised "It would threaten the holders of government bonds, those who rely on Social Security, and Veterans Benefits. Interest rates would skyrocket, instability would occur in financial markets and the federal deficit would soar".
So why are these Republicans who in the past quote Ronald Reagan, who they worship, and voted to raise the debt ceiling under Bush, are now refusing to even compromise? Michele Bachmann who voted to raise it numerous times while Bush was President is a leading candidate for the Republican Presidential race has said that she will not raise the debt ceiling, period. She also has stated that the worse the economy is, the more likely she will get Obama out of office and her chances of getting elected would be higher. The Republicans in 2010 ran on getting more people back to work, yet there has not been a single jobs bill introduced in the House yet.
History shows that when the public prospers the incumbents get re-elected, so there is no reason for the Republican controlled House to introduce anything that would create jobs and help the economy. There you have it, that is what this is all about. It's about making things so bad that Obama will be a one term President. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said the day after the 2010 midterm elections that the number one goal is to get Obama out of office. So they are going to sink the economy even worse than it is, just to get Obama out of office? How patriotic is that? One other thing, both Democrats and Republicans have to stop calling Social Security an entitlement program. I have put money into it since I was 15 years old. It is a savings account for when I retire and you the government has borrowed from it since the 1980s. If you want to reform it, give me back everything I have put into it with interest and I will do just fine when I retire. Also, the Republicans tell us as Americans that we are responsible for saving for our own retirements, well what is going to happen to my wifes 401K when these assholes send the nation over the cliff and default on our debt? I'll tell you, her 401K that she has put money into for 20 years will be worth less then the paper her statement is printed on!
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
The Decline of the Tea Party
So yesterday was the official tax day this year. Usually on April 15th, the day taxes are due the tea Party over the last few years have held rallies across the United States. This year the difference is in the declining numbers of their members showing up at the rallies. Is the Tea Party movement dead or is it that the sane members have seen just how insane some of their Tea Party leaders are. Can you say Bachmann? Or is it they are starting to see that it wasn't a grass roots movement at all, but a heavily funded by big business distraction to the real problems this country faces.
Let's look at the numbers who showed up. In Orange county less than fifty people, in Chicago it was several hundred. In Concord New Hampshire four Republican Presidential hopefuls were headlining that gathering including Tim Pawlenty and Rick Santorum and the crowd estimate was around three hundred people. In Columbia South Carolina, a heavy Republican state, their new Governor Nikki Hailey along with Michele Bachmann were the headliners and had a showing of around three hundred people. Significant because the tax day Tea Party gathering there two years ago drew around three thousand people. So what has happened that their members have lost interest?
One thing I can say is that Wisconsin Governor Walker has energized the Democratic base the way I have never seen. In fact when I marched up in Madison in early March the crowd was estimated at just over a hundred thousand. As someone who was there I would say that figure is pretty close to reality. Speaking of Madison, it had one of the largest turnouts for a Tea Party rally yesterday. Most likely because their headliner was Sarah Palin. The crowd was estimated at around six thousand people. The catch to that was that many people had signs against Palin and the Tea Party. In fact the local ABC affiliate said a solid core of Tea Party people were flanked on all sides by counter protesters. The other interesting thing was who paid for Palin to be there.
I have said all along that the Tea Party was not a grass roots movement but heavily funded by big business including the Koch brothers. If you look at the picture you see Palin speaking from a podium that has a banner "I am AFP". AFP is short for Americans for Prosperity and their Chairman is David Koch. AFP does not disclose how much money individual doners give them but a conservative estimate is that the Koch brothers have given over twenty million dollars to AFP and its predecessor Citizens for a Sound Economy. Through loopholes in campaign finance laws it is estimated that the Koch brothers funneled almost five million dollars into Scott Walkers campaign.
Two things I wonder about are why would average Americans with everyday problems relate themselves to one of the richest families in the world (Koch). While these guys are flying around in their private jets they are conning average Americans into believing we should all be working more hours for less money and benefits so the Governor can give tax breaks back to them (The Kochs). And finally why is it that the Republicans in congress are so afraid of their base (Tea Party) no matter how small it gets, yet the Democrats in congress loath their base, no matter how big it gets?
Let's look at the numbers who showed up. In Orange county less than fifty people, in Chicago it was several hundred. In Concord New Hampshire four Republican Presidential hopefuls were headlining that gathering including Tim Pawlenty and Rick Santorum and the crowd estimate was around three hundred people. In Columbia South Carolina, a heavy Republican state, their new Governor Nikki Hailey along with Michele Bachmann were the headliners and had a showing of around three hundred people. Significant because the tax day Tea Party gathering there two years ago drew around three thousand people. So what has happened that their members have lost interest?
One thing I can say is that Wisconsin Governor Walker has energized the Democratic base the way I have never seen. In fact when I marched up in Madison in early March the crowd was estimated at just over a hundred thousand. As someone who was there I would say that figure is pretty close to reality. Speaking of Madison, it had one of the largest turnouts for a Tea Party rally yesterday. Most likely because their headliner was Sarah Palin. The crowd was estimated at around six thousand people. The catch to that was that many people had signs against Palin and the Tea Party. In fact the local ABC affiliate said a solid core of Tea Party people were flanked on all sides by counter protesters. The other interesting thing was who paid for Palin to be there.
I have said all along that the Tea Party was not a grass roots movement but heavily funded by big business including the Koch brothers. If you look at the picture you see Palin speaking from a podium that has a banner "I am AFP". AFP is short for Americans for Prosperity and their Chairman is David Koch. AFP does not disclose how much money individual doners give them but a conservative estimate is that the Koch brothers have given over twenty million dollars to AFP and its predecessor Citizens for a Sound Economy. Through loopholes in campaign finance laws it is estimated that the Koch brothers funneled almost five million dollars into Scott Walkers campaign.
Two things I wonder about are why would average Americans with everyday problems relate themselves to one of the richest families in the world (Koch). While these guys are flying around in their private jets they are conning average Americans into believing we should all be working more hours for less money and benefits so the Governor can give tax breaks back to them (The Kochs). And finally why is it that the Republicans in congress are so afraid of their base (Tea Party) no matter how small it gets, yet the Democrats in congress loath their base, no matter how big it gets?
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
W.T.F.
So the tea baggers who got elected on a smaller government, less spending platform, are some of the most hypocritical bunch of assholes I have ever came across. By the way they are the ones who want to shut down government by not funding it. They are trying to blame it on the Democrats in the house but they are holding Speaker Boehner hostage.
In Fact the Tea baggers have told Speaker Boehner that unless they get 242 Republican votes for a budget, that they would shut government down. In other words if Speaker Boehner brought the current budget with all the cuts he originally asked for to the floor he would have enough Democratic votes to pass it. But he will not as he must hold his Republicans together. Tell me again who doesn't have the balls to be a leader.
If government shuts down will congress still get their paychecks? Yep. Will you get your income tax refund? Nope. Will people get their unemployment? Nope. You see, all non essential government services will be shut down. Right now the economy is starting to rebound, and if the economy is good come election time, Obama is a shoe in for re-election.
A government shutdown will snag the flow of money that fuels the economy and if the economy is bad, it's goodbye Obama. That is the goal of the Teabaggers. All of these Republican Senators or Congressman have flat out said they want to shut down government. Mike Lee Utah, Louie Gohmert TX, Mike Kelly PA, Tom Price GA, and from my own Illinois 8th District, Joe Walsh. He goes so far as to say this country needs some shock therapy. Which by the way is the subject covered in Naomi Kleins excellent book "The Shock Doctrine" which talks about how shock therapy has destroyed many countries around the world. Anyways if you don't believe me go to YouTube and look up "Caught on tape, Republicans that support a government shutdown"
The only thing they desire is for Obama to be voted out of office. That is playing politics with peoples lives. Every single member of Congress is a millionaire, it's no wonder that they do not represent "We the People". As for the more government side of things let's look at some of the more crazy bills they have tried to pass that add government not decrease it.
Last week GA State Congressman Bobby Franklin introduced a bill requiring mothers who miscarry to prove that the miscarriage was natural. How much more intrusive can government get. How is it extreme groups like the Michigan Militia who would like total freedom from government not denounce this? Because they're on the same side.
Also included in the Republicans budget cuts is an amendment stopping Washington D.C. from using local, not federal tax dollars funding abortions for low income women. I thought the Teabaggers were all about minimal federal government and letting state and local governments run things the way they want.
By the way if the Republicans are so against government intervention on all levels, who are they to tell a woman what she can or can't do with their body? And don't give me that shit line "The fetus does not have a say" and that's who they're fighting for, because does a four or five year old have a say when his parents bring them across the border illegally into this country? No the Republicans treat them like shit and want them back where they came from.
In Fact the Tea baggers have told Speaker Boehner that unless they get 242 Republican votes for a budget, that they would shut government down. In other words if Speaker Boehner brought the current budget with all the cuts he originally asked for to the floor he would have enough Democratic votes to pass it. But he will not as he must hold his Republicans together. Tell me again who doesn't have the balls to be a leader.
If government shuts down will congress still get their paychecks? Yep. Will you get your income tax refund? Nope. Will people get their unemployment? Nope. You see, all non essential government services will be shut down. Right now the economy is starting to rebound, and if the economy is good come election time, Obama is a shoe in for re-election.
A government shutdown will snag the flow of money that fuels the economy and if the economy is bad, it's goodbye Obama. That is the goal of the Teabaggers. All of these Republican Senators or Congressman have flat out said they want to shut down government. Mike Lee Utah, Louie Gohmert TX, Mike Kelly PA, Tom Price GA, and from my own Illinois 8th District, Joe Walsh. He goes so far as to say this country needs some shock therapy. Which by the way is the subject covered in Naomi Kleins excellent book "The Shock Doctrine" which talks about how shock therapy has destroyed many countries around the world. Anyways if you don't believe me go to YouTube and look up "Caught on tape, Republicans that support a government shutdown"
The only thing they desire is for Obama to be voted out of office. That is playing politics with peoples lives. Every single member of Congress is a millionaire, it's no wonder that they do not represent "We the People". As for the more government side of things let's look at some of the more crazy bills they have tried to pass that add government not decrease it.
Last week GA State Congressman Bobby Franklin introduced a bill requiring mothers who miscarry to prove that the miscarriage was natural. How much more intrusive can government get. How is it extreme groups like the Michigan Militia who would like total freedom from government not denounce this? Because they're on the same side.
Also included in the Republicans budget cuts is an amendment stopping Washington D.C. from using local, not federal tax dollars funding abortions for low income women. I thought the Teabaggers were all about minimal federal government and letting state and local governments run things the way they want.
By the way if the Republicans are so against government intervention on all levels, who are they to tell a woman what she can or can't do with their body? And don't give me that shit line "The fetus does not have a say" and that's who they're fighting for, because does a four or five year old have a say when his parents bring them across the border illegally into this country? No the Republicans treat them like shit and want them back where they came from.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Debunking yet another bull shit right wing e-mail
Tim Spent alot of time on this last night so I wanted to share it on his behalf. He reseached and told the truth on yet another bull shit right wing e-mail. All of Tim's responses are in green ~ Christine Marting
CLICK ON THE LINK TO "SNOPES" AT THE END. GIVES CREDIBILITY TO THESE COMMENTS, also on factcheck.com and truthorfiction.com Why is this guy still in office????? Obama's roommate speaks out. 2-16-11 This needs to be emailed to everyone in the USA . OBAMA'S COLLEGE ROOMMATE SPEAKS OUT By Wayne Allyn Root , June 6th, 2010 Barack Hussien Obama is no fool. He is not incompetent. To the contrary, he is brilliant. He knows exactly what he's doing. He is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos -- thereby destroying capitalism and our country from within.
The first thing the email says is “Obama’s roommate speaks out, click on link to “Snopes” at the end. Gives credibility to these comments”. So I go to the link and on the homepage it says “Snopes.com Rumor Has It” ….Snopes is just that, a site of rumors and does not claim to be anything else. In fact Normally I and any other intelligent person who was so passionate about politics enough to pass this to everyone they know would stop reading or believing anything from it from that point on. What’s really fucked up is that Snopes takes urban legends and tries to prove them true or false. The one rumor referenced by Snopes about Obama getting money during college from questionable sources, Snopes actually says is false.
Barack Hussien Obama was my college classmate ( Columbia University , class of '83). He is a devout Muslim do not be fooled. Look at his Czars...anti-business..anti- american. As Glenn Beck correctly predicted from day one, Barack Hussien Obama is following the plan of Cloward & Piven, two professors at Columbi University . They outlined a plan to socialize America by overwhelming the system with government spending and entitlement demands. Add up the clues below. Taken individually they're alarming. Taken as a whole, it is a brilliant, Machiavellian game plan to turn the United States into a socialist/Marxist state with a permanent majority that desperately needs government for survival ... and can be counted on to always vote for bigger government. Why not? They have no responsibility to pay for it. Universal health care . The health care bill had very little to do with health care. It had everything to do with unionizing millions of hospital and health care workers, as well as adding 15,000 to 20,000 new IRS agents (who will join government employee unions). Obama doesn't care that giving free health care to 30 million Americans will add trillions to the national debt. What he does care about is that it cements the dependence of those 30 million voters to Democrats and big government. Who but a socialist revolutionary would pass this reckless spending bill in the middle of a depression?
It’s funny for someone (Obama) who this letter accuses of turning the U.S.A. into a Socialist Marxist state; he has Bill Daly, former head of JP Morgan Chase Midwest Division, and Jeffrey Immelt General Electric’s CEO in his inner circle. I would call these two capitalists. I would also call them pieces of shit and for Obama to hire them is inexcusable. Another example is, Obama is not giving free health care to 30 million people. He is making thirty million people enroll (Purchase) in publicly owned (Stockholder) health insurance plans. Why do you think companies like United Health Care and Blue Cross, Blue Shield stocks have gone through the roof?
Cap and trade. Like health care legislation having nothing to do with health care, cap and trade has nothing to do with global warming. It has everything to do with redistribution of income, government control of the economy and a criminal payoff to Obama's biggest contributors. Those powerful and wealthy unions and contributors (like GE, which owns NBC, MSNBC and CNBC) can then be counted on to support everything Obama wants. They will kick-back hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions to Obama and the Democratic Party to keep them in power. The bonus is that all the new taxes on Americans with bigger cars, bigger homes and businesses helps Obama "spread the wealth around."
Cap and trade. Do we want clean energy? I do. We need to get off of foreign oil. Much of the debt this country has is because we have borrowed the money to support a military that is the world’s police force, guarding the oil rich Middle East. How much do you think three wars cost.
Make Puerto Rico a state. Why? Who's asking for a 51st state? Who's asking for millions of new welfare recipients and government entitlement addicts in the middle of a depression? Certainly not American taxpayers. But this has been Barack Hussien Obama's plan all along. His goal is to add two new Democrat senators, five Democrat congressman and a million loyal Democratic voters who are dependent on big government.
The people of Puerto Rico have to vote whether they want to become a state, before Obama can just make them one. Then there are U.S. Laws that would apply also. Obama does not have the authority to just make P.R. a state.
Legalize 12 million illegal Mexican immigrants. Just giving these 12 million potential new citizens free health care alone could overwhelm the system and bankrupt America . But it adds 12 million reliable new Democrat voters who can be counted on to support big government. Add another few trillion dollars in welfare, aid to dependent children, food stamps, free medical, education, tax credits for the poor, and eventually Social Security .
Obama wants to legalize 12 million immigrants. Really? Wasn’t it Ronald Reagan who gave 6 million Mexican immigrants amnesty in the 1980s? Many of whom are now citizens or have children who were born here, that are now citizens. The immigration problem is because business’s want low cost workers so they keep flooding over the border. Lock up enough business owners who hire them and they would be spilling back over the border because no one would hire them anymore.
Stimulus and bailouts. Where did all that money go? It went to Democrat contributors, organizations (ACORN), and unions -- including billions of dollars to save or create jobs of government employees across the country. It went to save GM and Chrysler so that their employees could keep paying union dues. It went to AIG so that Goldman Sachs could be bailed out (after giving Obama almost $1 million in contributions). A staggering $125 billion went to teachers (thereby protecting their union dues).
The bailouts started long before Obama took office. TARP was devised by Treasury Secretary and former Goldman Sachs CEO Hank Paulson, working under G.W. Bush. Obama has carried on the bailout programs something I totally disagree with. One thing’s for sure though, when the auto industry was bailed out, their executives were removed. The bank executives remained in place, in fact collecting the largest bonuses ever. The stock holders of the auto companies were wiped out. The banks kept their stock. The workers of the auto industry got pay and benefit cuts, while the bank workers got bonuses. But by bailing out the auto industry Obama saved over two hundred thousand jobs, while the banks stopped loaning to small businesses (Part of the bailouts intention) which in turn led to more layoffs. Chris is a good example of this kind of layoff. I am heavily involved in my union and we did not receive a penny of the bailout money, and if ACORN received any why are they out of business?
All those public employees will vote loyally Democrat to protect their bloated salaries and pensions that are bankrupting America . The country goes broke, future generations face a bleak future, but Obama, the Democrat Party, government, and the unions grow more powerful. The ends justify the means. Raise taxes on small business owners, high-income earners, and job creators. Put the entire burden on only the top 20 percent of taxpayers, redistribute the income, punish success, and reward those who did nothing to deserve it (except vote for Obama). Reagan wanted to dramatically cut taxes in order to starve the government. Barack Obama wants to dramatically raise taxes to starve his political opposition. With the acts outlined above, Barack Hussien Obama and his regime have created a vast and rapidly expanding constituency of voters dependent on big government; a vast privileged class of public employees who work for big government; and a government dedicated to destroying capitalism and installing themselves as socialist rulers by overwhelming the system. Add it up and you've got the perfect Marxist scheme -- all devised by my Columbia University college classmate Barack Hussien Obama using the Cloward and Piven Plan .
Actually taxes have gone down for everyone at the federal level. Businesses, rich people, poor people, and middle class, all those taxes are down. In fact in order to get Republicans to vote for the stimulus, 40 percent of it had to be in tax cuts, resulting in Obama’s taxes being even lower than Bushes tax rates. Notice the scare tactic of using his middle name Hussein every time it is mentioned in this article. That’s just chicken shit. Scare people; sell distortion of the truth and outright lies to people who are too lazy to spend the time looking these things up for themselves. But they sure can find the time to forward something like this to everyone they know. People need to get over it. WE HAVE A BLACK PRESIDENT. It was going to happen sooner or later. Newt Gingrich criticized Obama on March 7th telling Fox News that he would start a no fly zone that evening never mind that not even he could get congresses approval that fast, but on March 23rd after Obama started the no fly zone, he told NBC that he would not have intervened. Obama is in a no win situation when he does exactly what the mighty Newt said to do and then after he does Newt rips him for doing it. It’s no wonder that when Glenn Becks contract is up at the end of this year, Fox will probably not rehire him as he is too far out there even for Fox News. Hope this clears up any confusion. As for the size of government, it was G.W. Bush who expanded the size of government and created more debt than any other President in history. If you want hard numbers I will be happy to post them as I realize I generalized on most of my responses. One number that is fact is that the richest 400 Americans have as much wealth as the bottom 150 million Americans. Why can’t someone give me a good explanation of how that happened and why that is a good thing.
CLICK ON THE LINK TO "SNOPES" AT THE END. GIVES CREDIBILITY TO THESE COMMENTS, also on factcheck.com and truthorfiction.com Why is this guy still in office????? Obama's roommate speaks out. 2-16-11 This needs to be emailed to everyone in the USA . OBAMA'S COLLEGE ROOMMATE SPEAKS OUT By Wayne Allyn Root , June 6th, 2010 Barack Hussien Obama is no fool. He is not incompetent. To the contrary, he is brilliant. He knows exactly what he's doing. He is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos -- thereby destroying capitalism and our country from within.
The first thing the email says is “Obama’s roommate speaks out, click on link to “Snopes” at the end. Gives credibility to these comments”. So I go to the link and on the homepage it says “Snopes.com Rumor Has It” ….Snopes is just that, a site of rumors and does not claim to be anything else. In fact Normally I and any other intelligent person who was so passionate about politics enough to pass this to everyone they know would stop reading or believing anything from it from that point on. What’s really fucked up is that Snopes takes urban legends and tries to prove them true or false. The one rumor referenced by Snopes about Obama getting money during college from questionable sources, Snopes actually says is false.
Barack Hussien Obama was my college classmate ( Columbia University , class of '83). He is a devout Muslim do not be fooled. Look at his Czars...anti-business..anti- american. As Glenn Beck correctly predicted from day one, Barack Hussien Obama is following the plan of Cloward & Piven, two professors at Columbi University . They outlined a plan to socialize America by overwhelming the system with government spending and entitlement demands. Add up the clues below. Taken individually they're alarming. Taken as a whole, it is a brilliant, Machiavellian game plan to turn the United States into a socialist/Marxist state with a permanent majority that desperately needs government for survival ... and can be counted on to always vote for bigger government. Why not? They have no responsibility to pay for it. Universal health care . The health care bill had very little to do with health care. It had everything to do with unionizing millions of hospital and health care workers, as well as adding 15,000 to 20,000 new IRS agents (who will join government employee unions). Obama doesn't care that giving free health care to 30 million Americans will add trillions to the national debt. What he does care about is that it cements the dependence of those 30 million voters to Democrats and big government. Who but a socialist revolutionary would pass this reckless spending bill in the middle of a depression?
It’s funny for someone (Obama) who this letter accuses of turning the U.S.A. into a Socialist Marxist state; he has Bill Daly, former head of JP Morgan Chase Midwest Division, and Jeffrey Immelt General Electric’s CEO in his inner circle. I would call these two capitalists. I would also call them pieces of shit and for Obama to hire them is inexcusable. Another example is, Obama is not giving free health care to 30 million people. He is making thirty million people enroll (Purchase) in publicly owned (Stockholder) health insurance plans. Why do you think companies like United Health Care and Blue Cross, Blue Shield stocks have gone through the roof?
Cap and trade. Like health care legislation having nothing to do with health care, cap and trade has nothing to do with global warming. It has everything to do with redistribution of income, government control of the economy and a criminal payoff to Obama's biggest contributors. Those powerful and wealthy unions and contributors (like GE, which owns NBC, MSNBC and CNBC) can then be counted on to support everything Obama wants. They will kick-back hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions to Obama and the Democratic Party to keep them in power. The bonus is that all the new taxes on Americans with bigger cars, bigger homes and businesses helps Obama "spread the wealth around."
Cap and trade. Do we want clean energy? I do. We need to get off of foreign oil. Much of the debt this country has is because we have borrowed the money to support a military that is the world’s police force, guarding the oil rich Middle East. How much do you think three wars cost.
Make Puerto Rico a state. Why? Who's asking for a 51st state? Who's asking for millions of new welfare recipients and government entitlement addicts in the middle of a depression? Certainly not American taxpayers. But this has been Barack Hussien Obama's plan all along. His goal is to add two new Democrat senators, five Democrat congressman and a million loyal Democratic voters who are dependent on big government.
The people of Puerto Rico have to vote whether they want to become a state, before Obama can just make them one. Then there are U.S. Laws that would apply also. Obama does not have the authority to just make P.R. a state.
Legalize 12 million illegal Mexican immigrants. Just giving these 12 million potential new citizens free health care alone could overwhelm the system and bankrupt America . But it adds 12 million reliable new Democrat voters who can be counted on to support big government. Add another few trillion dollars in welfare, aid to dependent children, food stamps, free medical, education, tax credits for the poor, and eventually Social Security .
Obama wants to legalize 12 million immigrants. Really? Wasn’t it Ronald Reagan who gave 6 million Mexican immigrants amnesty in the 1980s? Many of whom are now citizens or have children who were born here, that are now citizens. The immigration problem is because business’s want low cost workers so they keep flooding over the border. Lock up enough business owners who hire them and they would be spilling back over the border because no one would hire them anymore.
Stimulus and bailouts. Where did all that money go? It went to Democrat contributors, organizations (ACORN), and unions -- including billions of dollars to save or create jobs of government employees across the country. It went to save GM and Chrysler so that their employees could keep paying union dues. It went to AIG so that Goldman Sachs could be bailed out (after giving Obama almost $1 million in contributions). A staggering $125 billion went to teachers (thereby protecting their union dues).
The bailouts started long before Obama took office. TARP was devised by Treasury Secretary and former Goldman Sachs CEO Hank Paulson, working under G.W. Bush. Obama has carried on the bailout programs something I totally disagree with. One thing’s for sure though, when the auto industry was bailed out, their executives were removed. The bank executives remained in place, in fact collecting the largest bonuses ever. The stock holders of the auto companies were wiped out. The banks kept their stock. The workers of the auto industry got pay and benefit cuts, while the bank workers got bonuses. But by bailing out the auto industry Obama saved over two hundred thousand jobs, while the banks stopped loaning to small businesses (Part of the bailouts intention) which in turn led to more layoffs. Chris is a good example of this kind of layoff. I am heavily involved in my union and we did not receive a penny of the bailout money, and if ACORN received any why are they out of business?
All those public employees will vote loyally Democrat to protect their bloated salaries and pensions that are bankrupting America . The country goes broke, future generations face a bleak future, but Obama, the Democrat Party, government, and the unions grow more powerful. The ends justify the means. Raise taxes on small business owners, high-income earners, and job creators. Put the entire burden on only the top 20 percent of taxpayers, redistribute the income, punish success, and reward those who did nothing to deserve it (except vote for Obama). Reagan wanted to dramatically cut taxes in order to starve the government. Barack Obama wants to dramatically raise taxes to starve his political opposition. With the acts outlined above, Barack Hussien Obama and his regime have created a vast and rapidly expanding constituency of voters dependent on big government; a vast privileged class of public employees who work for big government; and a government dedicated to destroying capitalism and installing themselves as socialist rulers by overwhelming the system. Add it up and you've got the perfect Marxist scheme -- all devised by my Columbia University college classmate Barack Hussien Obama using the Cloward and Piven Plan .
Actually taxes have gone down for everyone at the federal level. Businesses, rich people, poor people, and middle class, all those taxes are down. In fact in order to get Republicans to vote for the stimulus, 40 percent of it had to be in tax cuts, resulting in Obama’s taxes being even lower than Bushes tax rates. Notice the scare tactic of using his middle name Hussein every time it is mentioned in this article. That’s just chicken shit. Scare people; sell distortion of the truth and outright lies to people who are too lazy to spend the time looking these things up for themselves. But they sure can find the time to forward something like this to everyone they know. People need to get over it. WE HAVE A BLACK PRESIDENT. It was going to happen sooner or later. Newt Gingrich criticized Obama on March 7th telling Fox News that he would start a no fly zone that evening never mind that not even he could get congresses approval that fast, but on March 23rd after Obama started the no fly zone, he told NBC that he would not have intervened. Obama is in a no win situation when he does exactly what the mighty Newt said to do and then after he does Newt rips him for doing it. It’s no wonder that when Glenn Becks contract is up at the end of this year, Fox will probably not rehire him as he is too far out there even for Fox News. Hope this clears up any confusion. As for the size of government, it was G.W. Bush who expanded the size of government and created more debt than any other President in history. If you want hard numbers I will be happy to post them as I realize I generalized on most of my responses. One number that is fact is that the richest 400 Americans have as much wealth as the bottom 150 million Americans. Why can’t someone give me a good explanation of how that happened and why that is a good thing.
Monday, March 28, 2011
Rants and Irony's
So I am talking to my friend at work today and he mentions that the only reason that we are in Libya is because of the oil. He says that's what all of us "Liberals were saying during the invasion of Iraq and now he is raising the question of "If that's not the case then why didn't we protect the people of Congo or Sudan", yep it's all about the oil. Lets look at it a different way. We pay a tax to keep oil at around four dollars a gallon as opposed to somewhere like Germany or France who pay huge tax on gasoline. In fact their gasoline price would be the equivalent of around ten dollars a gallon. Oh we pay that ourselves and more. You see they pay that tax directly to the gas pump, their government uses that money to invest in infrastructure such as the Autobahn. Yes the first class highway we have all heard about and I have driven on. We on the other hand finance through our income taxes a military based on keeping peace in the middle east's oil rich nations. We keep douchbag dictators in power (Sadam Hussein, The Shah of Iran, The King of Saudi Arabia)and meanwhile their citizens are some of the poorest people in the world while the ruling elite are some of the richest from the oil dollars that flow from the United States. Obama has proved that he is just like the rest. My friend you are right, its all about the oil.
Obama can't do anything to satisfy certain Republicans. Back in 2004 Newt Gingrich said that you can't be a flip flopper and be Commander in Chief. On March 7 2011 Fox News Greta Van Susteren asked him what he would do about Qaddafi attacking his opponents in Libya. His reply "Exercise a no fly zone this evening, slaughtering your citizens is unacceptable and we are intervening". Can the mighty Newt, if elected President get approval from Congress in hours? Better yet he flip flopped himself on March 23, 2011 telling NBCs Matt Lauer "I would not have intervened" Funny he changed his mind after Obama gave the order to start military intervention. Guess the mighty Newt just ruled himself out of the 2012 Presidential race. By the way this story came from the Christian Science Monitor a right wing publication. Guess they don't like the way he operates either.
And in an ongoing debate I have about Rush Limbaugh, it was his short lived T.V. show on October 5th 1995 he said "Drug use some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs...And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up" I guess it didn't apply to him because in 2006 he was arrested in connection to his addiction to prescription pain pills.
Obama can't do anything to satisfy certain Republicans. Back in 2004 Newt Gingrich said that you can't be a flip flopper and be Commander in Chief. On March 7 2011 Fox News Greta Van Susteren asked him what he would do about Qaddafi attacking his opponents in Libya. His reply "Exercise a no fly zone this evening, slaughtering your citizens is unacceptable and we are intervening". Can the mighty Newt, if elected President get approval from Congress in hours? Better yet he flip flopped himself on March 23, 2011 telling NBCs Matt Lauer "I would not have intervened" Funny he changed his mind after Obama gave the order to start military intervention. Guess the mighty Newt just ruled himself out of the 2012 Presidential race. By the way this story came from the Christian Science Monitor a right wing publication. Guess they don't like the way he operates either.
And in an ongoing debate I have about Rush Limbaugh, it was his short lived T.V. show on October 5th 1995 he said "Drug use some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs...And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up" I guess it didn't apply to him because in 2006 he was arrested in connection to his addiction to prescription pain pills.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Less Taxes Equals More Jobs-----BULLSHIT-----
So all of my right wing friends that told me back in December that in order to create jobs, big business must get further tax breaks. What did that idiot Obama do? Why he listened to the right wingers and gave more tax breaks for the very same people and corporations that don't need them in the first place. On Tuesday the House Democrats put a motion to stop giving tax breaks to the big oil companies. You know the ones who are about to charge us 4.00 dollars a gallon or more for gas. The same big oil companies who have been the most profitable of all businesses over the last 10 years. In fact they have made over a trillion dollars in profit. Not income but profit. But when the Democrats motion got to the floor, every single Republican voted no on ending the tax breaks big oil gets. If we are in such a budget crisis why would they do that? Let's look at one company in particular. Exxon Mobil pays not one dollar in corporate taxes to the U.S. Government. Not only do they not pay anything, but our government then gives them a check to keep doing business here. It's called a subsidy. Those subsidies to big oil will total over forty billion dollars over the next ten years. That money is not there, we have to borrow it. The Republicans screwed the subsidizing of home heating oil for low income families, but for big business such as oil companies, they find a way to fund it. That's why the Republicans are full of shit when they say they are for cutting the deficit. Getting back to the issue of less taxes equals more jobs issue, Exxon Mobil over the last five years has paid no taxes. Every year their profits go up. And every year the amount of people working there has gone down. This company pays no taxes and then gets rid of workers. This is just the opposite of what the Republicans say will happen with less taxes. That is the Republicans opinion but the opinion is wrong because in the case of Exxon Mobil it is fact.
Chart of Exxon Mobil
Year Net Income Number of Employees
2005 36.1 Billion 83,700
2006 39.5 Billion 82,100
2007 40.6 Billion 80,800
2008 45.2 Billion 79,900
The facts do not support the opinion of the house Republicans that say less taxes equals more jobs. Making matters worse is that they want our financially broke government to give what money is left to go to a company that does not pay it share of taxes while at the same time laying off workers. Good thinking.
Bonus A CEO, a Tea Party person, and a Union Worker are sitting at a table where there are a dozen cookies. The CEO grabs 11 of the cookies and asks tells the Tea Party person are you going to let that Union Worker take some of your cookie?
Chart of Exxon Mobil
Year Net Income Number of Employees
2005 36.1 Billion 83,700
2006 39.5 Billion 82,100
2007 40.6 Billion 80,800
2008 45.2 Billion 79,900
The facts do not support the opinion of the house Republicans that say less taxes equals more jobs. Making matters worse is that they want our financially broke government to give what money is left to go to a company that does not pay it share of taxes while at the same time laying off workers. Good thinking.
Bonus A CEO, a Tea Party person, and a Union Worker are sitting at a table where there are a dozen cookies. The CEO grabs 11 of the cookies and asks tells the Tea Party person are you going to let that Union Worker take some of your cookie?
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Unions and Pensions
All right its time to write something and that something is what is going on in Madison Wisconsin. I am sure you all have heard the story and have your own opinion so lets just stick to the facts. First of all Wisconsin actually had a budget surplus for the 2011 fiscal year of about 120 million dollars. Governor Walker then gave tax breaks to business owners wiping out said surplus. Governor Walker then demanded the teachers and other public union employees not only give up some pay and benefits such as part of their pension to balance the budget, he demanded that their right to collectively bargain be ended as well. The unions then agreed to help the states deficit by giving up the pay and benefits but would not budge on their right to bargain. For two weeks there has been protesting going on at the capitol in Madison, all of it peaceful. Fox News has shown footage of rowdy protesters, but if you look at the background you catch a glimpse of some palm trees. Didn't know Madison had palm trees. So when we look at the facts, some say why should I pay tax dollars for a pension fund for public employees? Good question. It's part of their pay. Educated public employees make less than their counterparts in the private sector. In fact the average pay for a teacher in Wisconsin is 48 thousand a year. Not a lot of money for someone who has a Masters Degree which is what you need to be a tenured teacher. In return for taking less pay, they negotiate a pension. In 2003 the company I work for came to our union and told us if we did not take pay and benefit cuts they would file bankruptcy, which would destroy our pension fund. One reason our union voted for pay cuts was to keep our pensions. Since then our management has taken millions in bonuses. This is the same thing that's happened in Wisconsin without the threat of bankruptcy. I think it's crazy that Governor Walker would give tax breaks to millionaires and then try to make up the deficit by taking more from someone making less than fifty thousand a year. Communism is redistribution of wealth, but it works both ways, not just from the rich to the poor but from the working class to the rich and its going on all over this country right now. The problem with public pensions is the school administrators (management) who work a few years and then collect a full pension. Or the Governor himself who could be voted out of office after only one term and collect a pension for the rest of his life. Lets take this a step further. In Ohio, Governor John Kasich along with their legislature is trying to do the same thing Wisconsin is doing citing budget shortfalls. It doesn't help that their pension fund is about 480 million dollars short. Why is it short? Governor Kasich used to be a manager at Lehman Brothers, the now defunct investment bank. While at Lehman he convinced the state to invest 480 million dollars from its pension funds in Lehman and their toxic mortgages. Lehman is now gone and Kasich is the Governor. As Governor he wants the workers to make up for that shortfall he created. What a piece of shit. So hear are the facts. A Wall Street Journal poll (Readers who are educated, professional and generally well off) shows that 81% of people polled feel millionaires should be taxed higher. 74% of people polled said that tax subsidies to oil companies should be stopped. 72% of people polled feel that public employees should have the right to be in a union. And 68% of people polled said the Bush tax cuts should be eliminated. The government is not listening to the people any more. They listen to the businesses who give them money to get re elected and that borders on Fascism.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Economics 101
Economics in its most simple form and proven over the last 200 hundred years shows that when the working class has money they will spend it and when rich people have money they save it. There is no denying it, it is fact. Corporations are sitting on the largest amount of money in this countries history and that is fact. They are not spending it nor will they until demand is there and with unemployment as high as it is there will not be the demand. Businesses want smaller government so they can make even greater profits by privatizing former government functions. Example, instead of our military buying soda directly from Coca Cola for less than a dollar a can, our government in Iraq and Afghanistan now buys it from KBR a former Halliburton subsidiary paying them seven dollars for that same can. Oh by the way that's not the governments money that's our tax dollars. Would you pay that price for a soda? Absolutely not, you would shop around, only KBR got a no bid contract under the guise that they were the only company that could handle that large scale of business. To pay for that our taxes go up and that money is handed to the owners of that private business. Illinois has raised the amount of income tax on people and businesses. Shitty deal because at the same time they are not cutting out wasteful spending and there is a lot. But here comes the Governor of New Jersey to lure business back to his home state. They have a lot less corporate tax but they do have one of the highest personal income tax rates at about 11 percent depending on how much you make. In other words states with high personal income tax would rather make their money off the sweat of the working people rather than the corporations based there. If things are so bad for corporations then how is it they are sitting on a record amount of cash and we the people are broke and getting more broke by the minute. Free market right.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
How a Bill Becomes Law
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce spends millions getting Republican hacks like John Boehner elected. Tom Donohue (Head of Chamber)then hears from corporations telling him how they can increase profits if certain regulations to their business be repealed or which loopholes to add. He then reaches out to the relevant committee members funneling anonymous campaign donations to them. Organizations calling themselves think tanks send so called experts to go on television selling the virtues of this new bill with the savvy of the best used car salesman. Lobbyists employed by the business that gains, then go to Capitol Hill to get favors from the committee people in exchange for campaign funds placed into their PAC and the bill gets introduced to the floor of Congress. The bill then goes into markup in which more lobbyists oversee the language of the bill and other Congressmen insert pork for their districts. Dollars flow in the direction of the Congressman and Senators to vote yes on the bill and it then becomes law, after the President signs it. This is what happens in Congress every day. If you don't think so, in 1995 when the House was considering ending subsidies (our taxes paid to the government)to the tobacco industry, John Boehner was on the House Floor handing out checks from the tobacco industry to congressman who would vote to keep the subsidies in place. Why should my income be taxed by our government, so that they could turn around and give it to the tobacco companies? Is this the free market preached by Milton Friedman? Is this capitalism at all? No, it is income redistribution from my middle class ass, so some asshole C.E.O. can fly around in his private jet on my dime. This is the same John Boehner that just became Speaker of the House. Ok you Tea Partiers and conservatives, this is what you say your against. It's time to step up to the plate and stop Boehner from business as usual.
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Obamacare (Business as usual)
In a nutshell as I see it, it was a political deal that had nothing to do with death panels or socialism. What it did was gave subsidies (our tax dollars) to big drug makers by not purchasing Medicare drugs (Medicare Part D) in discounted bulk rates but paying full retail. Then to really screw the American people he mandated to private for profit insurance companies that another 30 to 45 million Americans enroll in their inflated suck ass programs. Then he insults people like me who complain, by calling me a professional left crybaby in so many terms. Way to go. Change I could believe in, what a crock. Actually what he did was seize about 8 percent of Americas taxable income and is sending it directly to "For profit non government companies". You idiots on the right had the golden opportunity to put a stop to this. You had control of congress for many years and could have regulated the same good things that came out of Obamacare (No pre existing conditions for example) without giving the insurance industry millions more customers. Instead you idiots blew it by talking about death panels and socialism. This bill is cronyism at its best and wealth transfer at its worst. Candidate Obama who I believed in, said on the campaign trail "If mandates were the solution, we could try to solve homelessness by mandating that everybody buy a house". What did we get from him? A mandate to buy insurance. Candidate Obama said that the Big Pharm. wrote into the Medicare Prescription drug plan that Medicare could not negotiate prices with drug companies. And the chairman of the committee who pushed the law through went to work for Big Pharm. making over two million dollars a year. Obama said that's an example of the same old game playing in Washington D.C. He says "I don't want to learn how to play the game better, I want to put an end to the game playing". What did we get from Obama, no negotiations with Big Pharm. companies, but this nation did get to grow its debt even larger. This is what happens when you surround yourself with Washington insiders like Rahm Emanuel or Larry Summers. You know Sarah Palin is dumber than a box of rocks but if she got elected, she is against the whole Washington establishment and that's the appeal that she has to a lot of people in this country. What we need is someone smart enough to run the country and smart enough to not surround themselves with the revolving door that is Washington D.C.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
