Lovely Self-Destruction
I meet an awful lot of people via Facebook. One of them is a gifted artist from Media, Pennsylvania named Donna Cusano (photo on the left). Late last night she posted on her page the following eye-opener:"The homeless go without eating. The elderly go without medicine. The mentally ill go without treatment. Troops go without proper equipment. Veterans go without benefits that were promised to them. Yet we give billions in tax breaks to the wealthiest 2% of Americans -- those who need it least. Only 1% of Facebook users will re-post this message. I am in that 1% — what about you?"
Count me in as a one percenter, Donna!
I've never been one for electronic chain letters (and neither, for that matter, has Donna Cusano) but this was a message that needed to be spread. She inspired me to write the little ditty you are now reading. Read on.
The pistol finally went off yesterday in the game of Russian roulette that the Republican party has been playing for the last decade. I knew it would happen sooner or later. It was only a matter of time. In an act of political suicide, the House Republicans effectively voted to end Medicare as we know it. It was a move that made no sense whatsoever - unless they plan on forcing through a constitutional amendment between now and November 2012 that limits the voting age to sixty-five and under - You just never know with these jackasses. But other than that....
What the hell were these nutty people thinking? Did they get the silly notion in their clueless heads that every senior citizen in the United States is going to die between now and Election Day 2012? True, a lot of them will shuffle off to eternity between now and then - no question about it. The logistical problem is the fact that there are a whole lot more on deck waiting to replace them. You see, old people - like the poor - will always be with us.
If you're elderly and middle class (or lower), the Republican party wants you to die. You see, there will be less of a strain on the system if more of them just keel over. This isn't terribly difficult to figure out.
One can understand why the handmaidens for the plutocracy might seem a little more sure of themselves this year than in years past. After all, they now have that atrocious Citizens United vs, FEC ruling behind them. This was the Supreme Court decision (the worst since 1896's Plessy vs. Ferguson) that gave corporations - domestic and foreign - the right to pervert the American electoral process by means of unlimited amounts of cash. The five justices who voted in favor of this judicial atrocity were all Republican appointees. You're not surprised by that, are you? I didn't think you would be. By now it is almost a law of nature:
The moon will rise in the east.
The sun will set in the west.
Conservative justices will behave like assholes.
In a
n opinion piece in this morning's New York Times, the columnist Charles Blow summed things up quite nicely in the following paragraph:
"Under the guise of deficit reduction, the Republicans are proposing to not only make the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy permanent, but to reduce their taxes even more — cutting the top individual rate from 35 percent to 25 percent to “promote growth and job creation.” And they plan to pay for this by taking a buzz saw to programs that benefit the poor, elderly and otherwise vulnerable."
Mr. Blow goes on to point out the fact that cutting taxes on a class of people who have more money than they'll possibly spend in a lifetime will not "promote growth and job creation". It hasn't thus far. In fact, as Blow also points out, there's no documentation in history of such a scheme ever producing very much economic growth - and fewer jobs. Why would anyone in his or her right mind believe that things will be any different this time around? How on earth do they think they're going to be able to pull this off? They must think the American people are mighty stupid....oh, wait a minute....That's how they plan on pulling this off. Never mind.
Just when you think these silly bastards and bitches have gone as low as anyone - or anything - can possibly go, they cheerfully break precedents that were thought to be unbreakable. Twenty years ago I thought Pat Buchanan to be the epitome of right wing craziness. Today he is a model of reason compared to the rest of them (Truth be told, old Pat has grown on me in a weird and convoluted sort of way). As they continue to lower the bar of decency, the further they alienate the people who describe themselves as "moderate" - which is most Americans I think.
Like rabid little myna birds on an LSD binge, they continue to chirp away about how Barack Obama is going to be a one-term president. They had better think again. Just take a good look at the pathetic GOP contenders for the job! Whom do you think is their front-runner at this stage of the game? If your answer is "Mitt Romney" you're fired. That's right, boys and girls, the leader of the pack at this moment is none other than Donald Trump! Is that a hoot or what? Watch with glee as they devour themselves during the primaries. This is gonna be beautiful!
The message the Republicans sent to the American people the other day is the same one they've been sending since the administration of Ulysses S Grant nearly a century-and-a-half ago. Unlike times past however, this time the message was not cloaked in subtlety. It was as clear as can be:
"Fuck you people. You don't matter. You never have. You never will. We own you. Die for all we care."
There was nothing subliminal about it. We just aren't on their radar. And to make matters merrier, they are now concocting legislation in many swing/purple states that will make it difficult - in some cases impossible - for certain people to vote: the poor, minorities, the young - You know! The people more likely to vote for a left-leaning candidate. Look at what these animals have done to our country....No offense to animals.
No doubt about it: Obama has been a huge disappointment. But considering all of the crap he has had to contend with, it's a miracle he's been able to perform the job at all. Maybe with a Democratically controlled House and Senate behind him he might be able to rev up his progressive mojo we saw three years ago during the campaign. Maybe not. We shall see.
Tom Degan
tomdegan@frontiernet.net
SUGGESTED VIEWING:
To see for yourself the beautiful work of Donna Cusano, Please go to the following link:
The art and soul of Donna Cusano
The gal plays a pretty mean brush.
AFTERTHOUGHT:
Smile tho
ugh your heart is aching
Smile even though it's breaking
When there are clouds in the sky
You'll get by
The singer is the late Michael Jackson. The composer is the never-to-be-forgotten Charlie Chaplin, who was born in London, England on April 16, 1889 - one-hundred and twenty-two years ago today. In the final scene from his 1940 film The Great Dictator, he sends us this message from across the decades:
"You the people have the power....The power to create happiness! The power to make this life free and beautiful - to make this life a wonderful adventure. Then in the name of democracy, let us use that power....Let us fight for a new world - a decent world - that will give men a chance to work; that will give youth a future and old age a security. By the promise of these things, brutes have risen to power. But they lie! They do not fulfill that promise. They never will! Dictators free themselves and they enslave the people. Now let us fight to free the world - to do away with national barriers - to do away with greed, hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to the happiness of us all....Look up...."
What the heck. Let's have a go at it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iu-rLA4POkI
Smile....and remember.
Count me in as a one percenter, Donna!
I've never been one for electronic chain letters (and neither, for that matter, has Donna Cusano) but this was a message that needed to be spread. She inspired me to write the little ditty you are now reading. Read on.
The pistol finally went off yesterday in the game of Russian roulette that the Republican party has been playing for the last decade. I knew it would happen sooner or later. It was only a matter of time. In an act of political suicide, the House Republicans effectively voted to end Medicare as we know it. It was a move that made no sense whatsoever - unless they plan on forcing through a constitutional amendment between now and November 2012 that limits the voting age to sixty-five and under - You just never know with these jackasses. But other than that....
What the hell were these nutty people thinking? Did they get the silly notion in their clueless heads that every senior citizen in the United States is going to die between now and Election Day 2012? True, a lot of them will shuffle off to eternity between now and then - no question about it. The logistical problem is the fact that there are a whole lot more on deck waiting to replace them. You see, old people - like the poor - will always be with us.
If you're elderly and middle class (or lower), the Republican party wants you to die. You see, there will be less of a strain on the system if more of them just keel over. This isn't terribly difficult to figure out.
One can understand why the handmaidens for the plutocracy might seem a little more sure of themselves this year than in years past. After all, they now have that atrocious Citizens United vs, FEC ruling behind them. This was the Supreme Court decision (the worst since 1896's Plessy vs. Ferguson) that gave corporations - domestic and foreign - the right to pervert the American electoral process by means of unlimited amounts of cash. The five justices who voted in favor of this judicial atrocity were all Republican appointees. You're not surprised by that, are you? I didn't think you would be. By now it is almost a law of nature:
The moon will rise in the east.
The sun will set in the west.
Conservative justices will behave like assholes.
In a
n opinion piece in this morning's New York Times, the columnist Charles Blow summed things up quite nicely in the following paragraph:"Under the guise of deficit reduction, the Republicans are proposing to not only make the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy permanent, but to reduce their taxes even more — cutting the top individual rate from 35 percent to 25 percent to “promote growth and job creation.” And they plan to pay for this by taking a buzz saw to programs that benefit the poor, elderly and otherwise vulnerable."
Mr. Blow goes on to point out the fact that cutting taxes on a class of people who have more money than they'll possibly spend in a lifetime will not "promote growth and job creation". It hasn't thus far. In fact, as Blow also points out, there's no documentation in history of such a scheme ever producing very much economic growth - and fewer jobs. Why would anyone in his or her right mind believe that things will be any different this time around? How on earth do they think they're going to be able to pull this off? They must think the American people are mighty stupid....oh, wait a minute....That's how they plan on pulling this off. Never mind.
Just when you think these silly bastards and bitches have gone as low as anyone - or anything - can possibly go, they cheerfully break precedents that were thought to be unbreakable. Twenty years ago I thought Pat Buchanan to be the epitome of right wing craziness. Today he is a model of reason compared to the rest of them (Truth be told, old Pat has grown on me in a weird and convoluted sort of way). As they continue to lower the bar of decency, the further they alienate the people who describe themselves as "moderate" - which is most Americans I think.
Like rabid little myna birds on an LSD binge, they continue to chirp away about how Barack Obama is going to be a one-term president. They had better think again. Just take a good look at the pathetic GOP contenders for the job! Whom do you think is their front-runner at this stage of the game? If your answer is "Mitt Romney" you're fired. That's right, boys and girls, the leader of the pack at this moment is none other than Donald Trump! Is that a hoot or what? Watch with glee as they devour themselves during the primaries. This is gonna be beautiful!
The message the Republicans sent to the American people the other day is the same one they've been sending since the administration of Ulysses S Grant nearly a century-and-a-half ago. Unlike times past however, this time the message was not cloaked in subtlety. It was as clear as can be:
"Fuck you people. You don't matter. You never have. You never will. We own you. Die for all we care."
There was nothing subliminal about it. We just aren't on their radar. And to make matters merrier, they are now concocting legislation in many swing/purple states that will make it difficult - in some cases impossible - for certain people to vote: the poor, minorities, the young - You know! The people more likely to vote for a left-leaning candidate. Look at what these animals have done to our country....No offense to animals.
No doubt about it: Obama has been a huge disappointment. But considering all of the crap he has had to contend with, it's a miracle he's been able to perform the job at all. Maybe with a Democratically controlled House and Senate behind him he might be able to rev up his progressive mojo we saw three years ago during the campaign. Maybe not. We shall see.
Tom Degan
tomdegan@frontiernet.net
SUGGESTED VIEWING:
To see for yourself the beautiful work of Donna Cusano, Please go to the following link:
The art and soul of Donna Cusano
The gal plays a pretty mean brush.
AFTERTHOUGHT:
Smile tho
ugh your heart is achingSmile even though it's breaking
When there are clouds in the sky
You'll get by
The singer is the late Michael Jackson. The composer is the never-to-be-forgotten Charlie Chaplin, who was born in London, England on April 16, 1889 - one-hundred and twenty-two years ago today. In the final scene from his 1940 film The Great Dictator, he sends us this message from across the decades:
"You the people have the power....The power to create happiness! The power to make this life free and beautiful - to make this life a wonderful adventure. Then in the name of democracy, let us use that power....Let us fight for a new world - a decent world - that will give men a chance to work; that will give youth a future and old age a security. By the promise of these things, brutes have risen to power. But they lie! They do not fulfill that promise. They never will! Dictators free themselves and they enslave the people. Now let us fight to free the world - to do away with national barriers - to do away with greed, hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to the happiness of us all....Look up...."
What the heck. Let's have a go at it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iu-rLA4POkI
Smile....and remember.
posted by Tom Degan @ 5:25 AM
126 comments
126 Comments:
OMG Tom! Love the visuals of Trump being the head of the "rabid little myna birds on an LSD binge"
They certainly are reality challanged. Oh wait, they really really think, brlieve, know that their tuny limited fantasy IS reality and all the rest of are the ones who are insane? Scary. I can hardly wait til one of them comes up wtih the idae of changing the constitution so Murdoch can run! The sound of the tumbrils rumbling towards the guillotine has been getting louder. And as usual the aristos haven't a clue Hops on table sings La Marseillaise loudly
At what point are regular-type folks going to realize that rich people are never going to create jobs for them. They're going to create jobs for people in Bangladesh and China and Mumbai, but they will never again create jobs for Americans. We cost too much. We expect too much. We want a living wage. We want medical and dental. We figure we're entitled. We won't work for pennies an hour. Our bad.
Bill Maher refers to this myth as the idea that the rich are a huge Pinata of Benevolence. "The thing is," says Maher, "pinatas don't open on their own. You have to beat them with a stick."
I like to think of the IRS as a big, big stick. Whack away, Mr. President. Whack away.
Great post, Tom -- glad you're finally comin' around. What took you so long? ;-)
And, Catharine, you hit the nail on the head. It's the omission of a select few words, by the Right, that never gets analyzed or scrutinized by the mainstream media: the creation of jobs is assuredly a given fact, but not here -- not in the United States. Conservatives conveniently leave that part out.
Oh, Tom, one more thing: you said, "Maybe with a Democratically controlled House and Senate behind him he [Obama] might be able to rev up his progressive mojo once again." Again? I must have missed the last time.
TD
Your artist friend should give examples. I know people in all of those categories, except homeless. Her claims lack support.
On the homeless front, I have lived most of my life in major cities. There is no answer to a certain amount of homelessness, in the USA or anywhere else. Many of these people wouldn't go to a soup kitchen or a facility unless forced. Many are strangely homeless by choice or in many cases pretend to be homeless but are scam artists looking for handouts.
If you and your artist friend are so concerned, I offer a suggestion. I assume each of you have an extra 10 discretionary hours per week. Why dont you use that time to make some extra money and give all of it to a good cause, preferably the government. You know, the government knows best. Email that to everyone.
I dont suspect you or 99% of the complainers would consider doing that. It's not your responsibility to do anything for anyone, its some anonymous tax cut beneficiary.
I have much respect for people who put their money and effort where their mouths are. No respect for armchair now-it-alls who no nothing about economics and do nothing for anyone else but complain. BTW, compaining doesn't do anyone any good.
Tom, another terrific Rant and I can only say that I hope you and Catherine are correct that the middle class will eventually wake up and figure out that they are being run over. Yet I have my doubts when I look at my five southern cousins and their spouses, all senior citizens and all devout Republicans. They constantly bitch, moan and complain, yet will not turn off Fox News long enough to think for themselves and can not get past the fact that there is a black man in the White House.
I look at Paul Ryan's budget and wonder if he is really serious about it. Yet when all of the House Republicans vote for it, they obviously do not think it is a joke and I can only hope that it does blow up in their face.
I'm wondering if this new wave of elected Repubs, as well as the incumbents have parents or relatives who are counting on SS & Medicare as they draw near to retirement. What feedback are they hearing from Mom & Pop? Is it "you're doing the right thing" or "WTF are you thinking?" What's going on? There is either a huge disconnect from reality or have the Repubs made other arrangements for the care of their parents in their twilight years? Could they possibly all be well enough off to make this happen?
Boltok, if Donna gave examples, you would still find ways to deny them. And if you are so damned smart, why don't you proofread your postings first? When you say "...armchair now-it-alls who no nothing....", I think the word you are struggling for is "know".
So tell me, if the top 2% earners had every penny the owed taxed away from them, would "The elderly (still) go without medicine. The mentally ill (still) go without treatment. Troops go without proper equipment. Veterans go without benefits that were promised to them."
The answer is and Tom you know this, is YES, they would. Because ALL of the wealth of the top 2% is still not enough to off set the debt and the promises liberals have created and made.
IF all income & wealth was taxed at a 51% rate from EVERY American regardless of their income, there still would not be enough to pay off our trillion dollar debt by $700 billion. How about ending this class warfare divisiveness of blaming the person who has more than you? How about waking up to the truth that the liberal social programs have not worked, that they are broke and are by their very expansion, breaking ever American's wallet to the tax rate of OVER 51%, with no exceptions!
I realize I am wasting my breath by pointing this out to a liberal, but by God, when are you going to see that to continue to vote in people who promise more from government by taking more from others, will only end our freedoms to control our own lives when the promise's can not be kept?
Forget it, it is waste of band width to point this out to liberals.
The GOP has just found a campaign sound bite for the Presidential campaign of 2012 and it came from the world’s greatest orator himself: Barack Obama.
Here is what President Obama told ABC News George Stephanopoulos regarding his Senatorial vote in 2006 opposing a debt increase:
I think that it’s important to understand the vantage point of a senator versus the vantage point of a … president. When you’re a senator, traditionally what’s happened is, this is always a lousy vote. Nobody likes to be tagged as having increased the debt limit for the United States by a trillion dollars. … As president, you start realizing: ‘You know what? We — we can’t play around with this stuff. This is the full faith in credit of the United States.’ And so that was just a example of a new senator, you know, making what is a political vote as opposed to doing what was important for the country.
Senator Obama only cared about his own political prospects and not what was important for the future of the country. Is there any clearer and more honest statement regarding Barack Obama’s priorities?
This is yet another example that the narcissism of Barack Obama is what has always motivated him. His excessive use of the personal pronoun “I”; his omnipresence on our television screens, his stream of inaccuracies, his promises that all come with an expiration date, his claims, his position on the Iraq War while a Senator…all geared towards not for the good of the nation but to boost his own political career."
Couldn't have said it better my self if I had to.
"ALL of the wealth of the top 2% is still not enough to off set the debt and the promises liberals have created and made."
We're you asleep during the last decade, luv? Just wondering.
Cheers!
Tom Degan
CM
The only argument that I get from liberal jackasses is something regarding punctuation, syntax, or spelling. What do you do for any of the groups identified by the artist and the author of this blog. Probably nothing at all. Given that, attack my spelling jackass. I think I am going to misspell everything going forward. That will make this village of idiots feel intelligent.
Echoing Catharine's sentiments, over at The Conceptual Guerilla, the Right has been defined as Cheap Labor Conservatives
It makes perfect sense. Once you realize that for Republicans, there is no upside to making the average American comfortable, safe, healthy or prosperous, the whole message becomes clear.
We're screwed.
What's worse, we're letting it happen. We sat, glued to CNN's countdown clock as the prigs strutted around the Capitol, threatening to collapse the government around us. Where is the anger on the left, where is the outrage?
More importantly,where are the pitchforks and torches?
An article on corporate tax rates. Then add the taxes paid by employees, and other stake holders like equity and debt holders (e.g. pensions).
Corporations make no obvious contribution.
http://finance.yahoo.com/taxes/article/112560/what-top-companies-pay-taxes-forbes
Boltok, you said...
"The only argument that I get from liberal jackasses is something regarding punctuation..."
Huh? I think you exaggerate way too much. I've called you out on enough over the last few months to fill a book -- not to mention modusoperandi.
Regardless, your punctuation, syntax, and spelling are atrocious. Are you sure you went to college? (That's why I asked, on a previous thread, whether English was your second language. Is it?)
Tom,
Not asleep, not asleep at all. Just amazed that you seem to feel taking more income by taxes is the solution instead of spending less on social programs, and continuing to promise to spend more is a viable solution.
The only solution I see coming from the left,democrats, progressive (you pick the name) is somebody is not paying enough taxes and if they were our problems would come to an end.
I suggest again that even if ALL (regardless of the total wages, wealth,or form of income) of us were to pay a flat 51% of our income to the federal govt. there would still be short fall in reaching a balanced budget. And what does this garner in the way of response? A question asking "where are the pitchforks and torches"?
That sounds like TEA Party talk if it came from the right but coming from the left is it normal after losing a major election?
Again, what does it benefit anyone to have 51% of their income taxed away and to still have a national debt problem?
If raising taxes on ALL Americans to 51% will not provide for a balanced budget, then how can taxing more of the top 2% American earners?
Catharine, I've got to ask you this,
have you ever held a job that paid you a middle class wage that was created by someone who earned less that $115,000 a year?
Reagan cut the tax rate for the top 1% by 39%. Since then, net job creation, adjusted for population growth, has nearly flatlined. Corporations are outsourcing more jobs than ever, especially since NAFTA.
Where's the fucking job creation? Why have I been out of work for 2 years after putting 31 years into the job market?
Anyway, potential good news and bad news. Good news: I may have a book deal from Simon and Schuster. The bad news: By May 1st, I could become the Lincoln Author, writing books in my car.
JG
I accessed my database and ran a report of your complaints related to my grammar/syntax/spelling as opposed to substantive economic arguments. The ratio of your grammar complaints to substantive arguments is approximately 9:1. And your better than the rest. That is something you can take pride in, if only relatively so.
MO is a fool. I don't track the quality of his remarks. Actually, I stopped reading them. I apologize if it is you moonlighting as MO.
RE: The 51% income tax on all Americans still leaves a 700 Billion Debt claim.
Over what time frame, one year?
1000 Billion = 1 Trillion
Boltok, you keep evading my question: Is English a second language for you?
I wonder why right brainers are left wingers? But I thought I'd post a link (which I have posted before) to help you understand what a trillions are. 1 trillion is 1X10 to the 12th power.
http://vimeo.com/819138
Not enough top two percenters and corporate profits to confiscate in the universe.
Ending class warfare is a great idea. Warren Buffett admits to the class warfare his side is winning. Too bad the ones who started it, you know the Right Wingers who called FDR a “traitor to his class”, and now blame liberals for the debt that George W. Bush left us are not interested. Since all those liberal social programs have not worked, I’m sure Medicare recipients would be happy to give money to insurance companies, and Social Security recipients would all love to let Wall Street run their money into the ground after skimming all they can into their pockets.
Stupid liberals, anyway. Why don’t they admit that wealthy people are smarter and know what’s best for the rest of us. After all, whose government is it anyway?
Stupid conservatives, anyway. Why don't they see all the money and political power is with them, and soon we'll be living in their Randist neo-fuedalism where the the economic elite lords rule over the serfs that 99% of us are doomed to become. Divine Right of Wealth shall determine the Golden Rule where those with the gold make the rules.
We're almost there. But you know what? When that all goes to hell, the liberals will be blamed for it.
Tom, nice rant about the Republicans. They want old people to die, autistic kids thrown in the streets, elimination of redundant government programs, and cutting back on money spent on the US school system.
I say if we have duplicate government programs, why not make triplicate government programs? Luckily, there is no skin off our asses in government if our programs are a failure! The taxpayers, which are only half of the people, get the bill! Most of the people who don't pay taxes will continue to vote Democratic so they won't have to pay taxes. How Sweet it is!
Most US companies go bankrupt if they can't be accountable in how they run their operations and control their costs.
We need to keep sending more money into that big sinkhole of taxpayer money which is your employer, the US school system. The kids get the needed big brother indoctrination which gets us Democrats more votes. Of course, with age most people realize what a joke our bloated government becomes.
your friend,
Crock-O-bama
Dave Dubya,
Buffet puts all his personal money in munis, never sell anything he has a profit in, and runs most of his expenses through corporations. Buffet has been directly asked why he does not give to charity. He has essentially said he is in the business of investing not charity. He giving money to Bill and Melinda when he drops, but while alive he couldnt give a sheet.
He is ok with you paying taxes though. I like Buffet for being a capitalist. To listen to him sell his own book to his own economic benefit to the tax detriment of others is nonsensical.
In a nutshell, Buffet doesnt want a dime of his own money going to government. Your money is ok though.
Find a better example.
Boltok, you said: He giving money to Bill and Melinda when he drops, but while alive he couldnt give a sheet.
Would you care to put this into English for the rest of us?
If the radical right are so blind that they can't face the fact that the only time we had balanced budgets were under Democratic presidents and that we had the biggest surplus in the history of the U. S. at the end of Clinton's presidency and were well on our way to eliminating the deficit, then there is no way in hell we can convince them that they are wrong.
If they can't see that Clinton created this surplus without harming education, the poor, the sick and the defenseless (not every poor person is a goldbrick; many just had bad breaks and work as hard as anyone else - sometimes harder) then they are so warped by ideology that no fact will get through to them.
If they can't see that it was George Bush that got us in this mess with two unpaid-for wars, the biggest tax break for the fewest people (think Koch brothers) and for an unfunded prescription drug program, then they are totally lacking in critical thinking.
Forget ideology. Facts are stubborn things. It wasn't the poor that created the deficit. The amount spent on social programs is a drop in the bucket compared to the bloated department of defense and the outrageous waste in their budget.
If they can't see that Social Security has paid for itself and will continue to do so for another 40 years without tweaking it, then their ideology is upside down on how to balance the budget. It has never, nor will it ever contribute one dime to the deficit.
If they can't see that jobs are going overseas in droves because the big corporations care nothing for this country or its people and the bottom line is all that they care about, then they are fools.
So if their misplaced hatred of big government is so warped that they can't see what life under a plutocracy would be like, then God help us all. Government programs are best when they do what the corporations will never do for the public.
If they can't see that other industrialized countries are whipping us in all measures of excellence while providing health care to all of their citizens, then they can't (or won't) read statistics.
And before one of you of the radical right tell me to document what I am saying, I tell you it has been documented so often that if you don't know this by now, you are an extremely uneducated person.
Anon
Buffet does not want to pay any taxes, alive or dead. So he obviously doesn't want to his fortune subject to estate taxes. He has made a promise to put a significant portion of his wealth into the Bill and Melinda Gates charitable foundation. Obviously he thinks Bill Gates and Co. will be a far better manager of his money.
I think I have read every article and report he has written as Chariman of Berkshire Hathaway. I can tell you with certitude that he wouldn't have an ounce of respect for politicians to handle his money. He is also very much a wolf in sheeps clothing, while sipping root beer floats.
Darlene,
It is usually a good thing to have some idea of what you are talking about. You have Bush, so lets talk about him. The average budget deficit per year during his presidency was in the $250 billion per year ball park. This spring under Obama the budget deficit has been about $150 billion per month. The budget he proposed has geater than trillion dollar per deficit on optimistic projections into perpetutity. That doesnt take into account that the govt is front loading taxes to pay for health care and a minority of people now pay social security tax to keep that ponzi scheme alive.
Give credit to Clinton, don't care. But the last time we had a balanced budget there was a gov't shutdown, Newt versus Free Willie. The republicans took a stand against spending, lib screemed rape, and the budget passed by miniscule margins because dems were outraged. These lunatic right wing radicals you speak of at least have some concept of the ramifications of national bankruptcy.
"If the radical right are so blind that they can't face the fact that the only time we had balanced budgets were under Democratic presidents"
You forgot the part about the House and Senate being controled by the Republicans when Clinton was Prez and how they forced him to balance the budget, even to the point of "gasp" shuting down the government. Give the GOP the Senate in 2012 and you'll get a balanced budget.
boltok,
Your generalization of the homeless "problem" may have once been true.However, with the mortgage fiasco and recession there are now a good number of families Mom,Dad and kids in homeless shelters.Also, I now make regular donations to the local food pantry because, I CAN afford to donate things food stamps don't pay for!
Anonymous, where was the GOP when Bush was running through the surplus that Clinton left, starting two unfunded wars and creating an unfunded Medicare prescription drug program?
Boltok - You are absolutely right. It pays to have some idea of what you are talking about. Go to Fact Check and you will find that Clinton handed Bush a surplus that he turned into a $1,2 trillion deficit by the time he turned the government over to Obama. He also signed the stimulus bill that Obama inherited that contributed to Obamas deficit figures.
The deficit is approximately $1,4 trillion now, but much of that is blamed on the bad economy Bush also handed to Obama.
You have probably gotten your erroneous facts from Rep. Jeb Hensarling and his facts have been proven to be a Texas Sized Whopper.
The government shut down that you are so proud of cost the taxpayers dearly and did nothing to reduce the deficit. Facts count.
I will not respond further on this post, so you will have to argue with someone like Jefferson's Guardian or Mary or someone who knows what he/she is talking about. That is, if he/she cares to take up the challenge. I swore I would never read one of your idiotic comments again, but you got my attention with my name. No more, friend - I will not waste any more of my time replying to know-nothings.
These guys can troll all they want, but if there are few things that senior citizens really live for, it has got to be retirement in Florida, golf, and reading, but these things are second place to Medicare and voting, so kiss the race goodbye in 2012. Political suicide is a more than ample observation. You can argue your face blue about the economics behind these things, but what it boils down to, is perception.
Boltok, you said...
"Not enough top two percenters and corporate profits to confiscate in the universe."
Nonsense. Taken together with a slashing of the military budget by at least one-half (and eliminating the Bush-era "supplemental budgets"), a balanced budget could be achieved within about five years.
Boltok,
My examples suffice no matter what you blather on about.
Class warfare has always existed. Crushing unions has always been a priority for totalitarians. The greenhead elites are always scamming, exploiting and ripping off the people. It's easier than ever, now that they own the politicians by Divine Right of Wealth handed them by CU v. FEC.
Money is free speech and Big Money talks the loudest. Relax; your plutocracy will be fine. Your team is winning. They cannot relent in their class war because of two facts we know for certain; greed is limitless and power never relinquishes voluntarily.
The voter disenfranchisement of minorities and students will continue at greater levels, unions will be destroyed, and the remaining vestiges of democracy shall be crushed by Amerikan Republikanism. Public services and safety nets will be dismantled while the surveillance/police state keeps a sharp watch on Peace groups and dissent against the corporatists. Soon advocates for minorities and the poor will be silenced. Totalitarianism is the only logical end to this consolidation of power in the hands of the few.
So cheer up, those despots are all on your side. It’s the Constitutional general welfare of the people, and Democracy itself, that are your enemies and you will prevail.
When half of all Republican voters believe Obama is a foreign born Marxist Muslim, the Big Lie is in effect. When Beck accuses Obama of being a racist who hates white people and still keeps his multimillion dollar job as propagandist and fear-monger, the Big Lie is in effect. When Limbaugh claims that the Left, not the Right is racist, the Big Lie is in effect. When a hundred thousand pro-union demonstrators peacefully protest a governor stripping their rights, and are constantly called “union thugs” anyway, the Big Lie is in effect. When liberals must be portrayed as communists, and accused of destroying America, this is scapegoating, exactly in the pattern of fascists of the last century.
"Conservatives” hate democracy. Not real conservative people like the Amish or honest, humble working class Americans, but political Right Wingers who've hijacked the word conservative, like they slimed the word liberal.
Now "Conservative" means anything that favors the agenda of the economic elite. And the elites are certainly opposed to democracy. Aristocracy will never tolerate democracy.
Don't take my word for it. Open your eyes and see what's going down, from Union busting to the Patriot Act. This is fascism on the rise. The powerful elite have made the working people of America their enemies.
And heed the words of the enemies of democracy:
"I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of the people. They never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.” – Heritage Foundation co-founder Paul Weyrich
Interesting but ludicrous. Maybe the Republicans you know are like that- but the ones I know don't want anyone to die.
But anyways, you suggest that it is wrong to cut taxes and say that it doesn't promote economic growth, right? Hypothetically speaking, if we did raise taxes on the top 2%- what would stop them from passing that tax on to consumers?
I was just going to post a little, simple "thank you" on your post, Tom.
But then I read the last post before mine about the top 2% raising taxes on the rest of us if the taxes on them is raised. Many of the top 2% who would have their taxes raised don't seem to mind the fact that their taxes would be raised. They acknowledge the fact that they would never even feel the pinch of the extra taxes that would be taken. There are some among the very wealthy who do care about the "little people" I will acknowledge that much.
Catharine also has a point about jobs going elsewhere - health insurance won't improve much until the companies will hire AND TRAIN PROPERLY their customer service work force who can effectively help the many Americans who don't understand the ins and outs of health insurance. Of course, that would require a company that cares about their employees making the employees care about their customers. (Such a concept!)
"Not asleep, not asleep at all. Just amazed that you seem to feel taking more income by taxes is the solution instead of spending less on social programs, and continuing to promise to spend more is a viable solution."
What's with all the focus on cutting social programs, when military expenditures and tax cuts are the two biggest motivators towards the deficit? And what's with treating the taxation of the wealthy as though it is somehow sancrosanct and therefore untouchable (unless you want to offer them more tax cuts)?
A lot of people are still holding on to the belief that if you give the rich as many breaks as they want and lower their taxes as much as they want, they'll somehow, out of the kindness of their hearts, start spending more of their money, thereby completing the "trickle down" process as more and more of their money somehow ends up in the economy and eventually, into the hands of Joe Average.
Instead, the rich are parking that money in offshore bank accounts or funnelling it into stocks, derivatives and futures. Joe Average is asked to take on the workload of his three co-workers who got canned because having one employee doing the work of four equaled a bigger bonus and his boss getting a pat on the back and a round of golf with the corporate bigwigs as a reward for "promoting better workplace efficiency". And his taxes stay the same. Or they go up, along with the price of food, fuel and other expenditures.
I'd probably be more inclined to believe the "lower taxes" bullshit if it were the poor and working class getting tax breaks instead of the top 1% wealthy. After all, the poor and working class put the most money back into the economy because they have to spend it on ordinary consumables and other things that other Joe Averages make and sell by default, while the wealthy either sit on their money or buy yachts, exotic cars, properties and lands with low taxes thanks to various loopholes and "farming" exemptions that most other people could not get away with and other things that very few Joe Averages (or none, at all) help create. The money stays at the top.
Oh, and exactly how can Republicans claim that they're standing against spending when they ignore two of the biggest expenditures in the U.S. budget? Are they really willing to take a stand on curbing military spending? Or ending the Bush tax cuts? Or closing loopholes that allow wealthy tax scofflaws to skate through?
"At what point are regular-type folks going to realize that rich people are never going to create jobs for them."
I've been thinking about that for a while, trying to put into the best way this answer: "take away the sitcoms and reality shows, Facebook, Youtube, abundant food, running water and electricity and take away the same things from their neighbors, then let Americans stare at each other starving to death while they see the plutarchists live in the lap of unprecedented luxury". But I can't, so there it is.
Ordinary Americans have this sort of "Stockholm Syndrome" affliction when it comes to the wealthy. People who are just a paycheck or two away from complete destitution see themselves somehow as "equals" to their wealthy superiors. I guess Americans never had class distinctions drilled into them over millenia as the Europeans have, so they don't quite grasp how far they are beneath their "betters". Americans also respect and admire their wealth, to an extent, plus they often see themselves as being wealthy "someday", so they practice this "do unto the wealthy as you would have others do unto you on the off chance you become wealthy" thing.
I'm guessing starvation will override "Stockholm Syndrome" and revert people back to "survival" mode. And if that means breaking into the palatial mansion of the wealthy man you admired months back and stealing his food and valuables, oh well. It's a cold world out there.
"If you and your artist friend are so concerned, I offer a suggestion. I assume each of you have an extra 10 discretionary hours per week. Why dont you use that time to make some extra money and give all of it to a good cause, preferably the government. You know, the government knows best. Email that to everyone."
Have you done any of that? I doubt it. And there goes your throwaway cop-out line.
I know some of you folks would rather have private charities and churches solely handle the problem of homelessness. But then again, you probably haven't worked in a soup kitchen or a privately-run homeless shelter. Resources and the funds used to get them are finite, and most organizations are on the bleeding edge of financial destitution. The government has far more resources than most charities can ever imagine to muster up, but those resources are declared off-limits since it would look too much like "welfare" or "handouts" or something equally silly.
So those resources end up in the pocketbooks of the wives of some well-heeled bankers. I guess we'll have to rely on them tossing the genuinely destitute and dispossessed a few, meager crumbs at rare moments.
Good liberals:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7l-pEBYeLI
Darlene,
Did 9/11 occur or are you a truther?
I can give you support for almost every name brand democrat supporting the Iraqi invasion.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a88_1176477796
Obama supported Afghanastan, go to his election speeches.
Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae doubled the debt at the end of the Bush presidence. Bush and Treas Secretary John Snow tried to regulate theses GSE because of the risk they posed. Democrats went ape shit.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6w3i4_2004-dems-refuse-to-reform-freddie_news
How many dems enriched themselves from these agencies. Bush did not do this. This is the heart of the troubles we face today.
Dems dripping in guilt yet blame it all on Bush. Hypocrits.
JG, do American's have any private property rights and is there any limits to the amounts they can be taxed. Just curious.
Obama's buddy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksnWxSWqX2Q
A serious recommendation:
Attached is a presentation by a physician turned investor who made a killing by shorting the housing market. His presentation to a college is an excellent description of the chronology of the housing crisis:
http://news.vanderbilt.edu/2011/04/video-burry-cls/
Boltok, you asked (with improper punctuation -- twice)...
"JG, do American's have any private property rights and is there any limits to the amounts they can be taxed."
Yes, and no.
Tom's readers: I'm attending a corporate tax dodger demonstration later this morning. If you're in the vicinity, please join us. If you're not, there's probably something happening this weekend (or Monday) near you. Check out US Uncut for other locations.
And there goes Boltok, talking through his anus. You say you know no homeless people and then you say "Many of these people wouldn't go to a soup kitchen or a facility unless forced"... if you know NO homeless people how the fuck can you say many would refuse to eat? You stupid arrogant asshole! I have been homeless myself, son, and I can tell you there is no place in America which will gladly lend a hand. I begged on the street for food or work, please and I worked for my food and slept under bushes. I also have had two elderly, ill parents who often had to decide which to pay for: food or meds. Unlike you, speaking from arrogance and ignorance, trying to sound intelligent while spouting nonsense, I work from experience and knowledge, whereas you invariably speak from dogma and bullshit. You have never failed to post something that had no logic, no "examples" you didn't make from whole cloth. You need to find another country, maybe Ukraine, where people like you are respected. Here you are like the obnoxious little boy at a wedding reception and nobody can find his parents because they are in the bathroom tooting coke. You annoy me no end. You are the Anti-Tom. Just freaking amazingly dull witted yet you can operate a keyboard.
Good one, Will!
I thought much the same thing when I read that jaw-droppingly ignorant post. I thought immediately of Marie Antoinette's infamous - and ultimately fatal - quotation, "Let them eat cake".
People like boltok just don't get it. They never have. They never will. Empathy is impossible for them.
Keep 'em coming.
Tom
JG
Which is it?
Will Shirley
Because I volunteered the hot line for a charity that removed homeless children from the streets in the inner city of NYC after college, and subsequently tried to do my part by sending them a few bucks every year. Is that good enough for you Delta 9.
TD
Jaw dropping ignorant? What exactly do you have on your resume? From prior blogs, I gathered that you are separated by homelessness by the affluence of prior generations? Does that make you an expert? Does being a street pusher of liberal nonsense for the Kennedy and Wilson school elites imply intelligence.
I say after we tax the rich the top 2% of Americans and do not quit spending, we go after the next top two per cent!
I say we keep doing this until there is no privately held wealth or property!...Until we all have no hope for becoming independent of government. The government owns everything.
I say let's do it now! I say lets cut our military budget by 50%, who needs it, that's what the UN is for. I say we drop what is left of our border with Mexico and allow free and easy access into our country, save lots of money that way.
I say we convert all our energy supply to job creating green energy sources, like wind, and sun. This is where all the out of work UAW members can go when no one can afford a car, much less need one.
I say we do like China and limit the number of kids a family can have, only we limit the white kids births, it's only fair.
Yes, we will be the leader of the planet if we just do these things.
I can't wait!
Relgion, there will be none which might cause a problem for Muslims, but what the heck, once they see what a wonderful world we have created, rolling back civiliation 1400 years will seem like a dream.
I can't wait!
IMAGINE, IF ONLY.
Could Detroit be the new Amsterdam -- a city where prostitution and marijuana are both legalized to help attract young people and turn the troubled city’s prospects around?
Why not, barrister and occasional mayoral candidate Geoffrey Fieger said during a taping of “Michigan Matters” on what he would do if he walked in Detroit Mayor Dave Bing’s shoes and tried to address the city’s woes.
“I could turn it around in five minutes,” Fieger said.
“I’d shovel the snow and I’d clean the streets and parks. Then, I’d tell the police department to leave marijuana alone and don’t spend one dime trying to enforce marijuana laws. I also would not enforce prostitution laws and I’d make us the new Amsterdam.”
“We would attract young people,” Fieger said. “You make Detroit a fun city. A place they want to live and they would flock here.”
Fieger ran as a Democrat for governor.
The personal attacks and name calling really detract from the issues being addressed. Perhaps we are taking a cue from the recent trend in General Elections. It's appalling. Dialog degenerates to ridicule and the issues become obscured by tirades of idiocy. The road to the truth has become a dead end street...we all lose.
Anon 10:33 is just bursting at the seams with wingnut-generated hyperbole. He actually believes that fair taxation, energy conservation and saner military spending are Communist/Marxist acts. The corporatist Plutarchists (with the help of Fox News) have taught him well.
There's no hope for guys like these. The Stockholm Syndrome has them in a death-lock and they'll continue to love their captors until their dying breath.
Hey, Mack!
What's wrong with the hopes for a better more fairer America as out lined in post 10:33 a.m.?
What part(s)do you disagree with? What part(s) do you think are unreasonable?
Where was Communist/Marxist brought up in the post? Explain why you are against this wish for utopia as outlined in the post? Not far enough or too far? Which is it Mack, which is it?
Very easy to dismiss out of hand while not giving specifics, so try to focus a little and explain why that post was inspired by Fox News or corporatist Plutarchist's?
@anoydrama - your hyperbole is so over the top melodramatic. you should try out for the cast of "The Hills" or "CSI: Miami"
Bless you, Will, I read this just after I got the news that my Pennsylvania unemployment has run out. I confess to feeling a little sorry for myself. Your post reminded me that there is always someone who is "worse off then you" as my parents always taught me.
I looked into the Emergency Unemployment Compensation from the federal government and now, thank God that we have a sane person like Barack Obama in the White House.
Before anyone attacks me, yes, I have been looking for work and no, I do not ENJOY being unemployed. I have averaged about two interviews a week since I lost my job in October, 2010. That makes nearly 50 interviews. So far from that I've gotten two emails saying they hired someone else, 1 reguar mail letter and 1 telephone message stating the same thing. I wonder where manners have gone in the U.S. So there's 45 employers out there that do not have a clue that the unemployed are waiting for that marvelous telephone call saying "You got the job!" or at least, "We're so sorry, we hired someone else for..." (pick a reason).
As of right now, I have no medical insurance and get scared every time I have the slightest twinge in my chest or ache or pain. So far, I've been fine but who knows?
Okay - so, I guess now I'll just go find a bereft turnip patch and eat the last turnip at sunset after which I'll look to heaven with fist raised while declaring, "As God is my witness...that I'm going to live through this, and when it's all over..." (Cue the orchestra to a big crescendo...)
So Dearest Friend,
How is the Hope and Change working for you? Unemployed since 2010, still blame Bush? Still think the only solution is more government spending?
Jobs have been created under Obama. More people are working now then when he entered the White House. No wonder you post anonymously.
Since I do have the "hope" of eating again tomorrow and the day after that, then yes, it is working for me.
That's all I ask - the basic necessities - food, shelter, clothing and oh, I don't know - gas money? I have the "hope" also that perhaps private industry in the United States will make "change" and create new jobs.
I said nothing about government spending...if the jobs were out there, perhaps, there wouldn't be such a deficit as created by the governing of the prior administrations.
Boltok, you asked (and I'm at a loss as to why)...
"JG Which is it?"
It's unfortunately that I have to spoon-feed you. The answer is "yes", to your first inquiry; "no" to your second.
I don't see how I could have been more straightforward.
Anonymous- I have the hope that you will change your way of thinking (not to mention talking to people). How's that?
"The personal attacks and name calling really detract from the issues being addressed. Perhaps we are taking a cue from the recent trend in General Elections. It's appalling." - GypsyBob
GB - they may be taking cues from the author of the blog.
Anonymous "Just amazed that you seem to feel taking more income by taxes is the solution instead of spending less on social programs, and continuing to promise to spend more is a viable solution."
1. Obama started with a trillion dollar defict. One that was there the day he took office.
2. Revenues have tanked because of the bursting of the Mortgage Bubble.
3. Increased spending (on unemployment insurance and Medicaid if nothing else) is required in a recession, lest the proles revolt.
4. Two wars which were funded "off budget" are now, as they should've been from the start, on budget.
5. If you think the Bush-era "temporary" tax cuts created jobs, {citation needed}. Remember that, although he was on watch during the fall out from the bursting of the Tech Bubble and 9/11 he also sat on, and pumped up, probably the largest bubble in modern history.
(6. Obama, and any politician in his right mind, could have gone populist and pointed the pitchfork and torch bearing mob at Wall Street. Only a couple did, and Grayson's out of a job. The Wall Street chicanery will not stop until they start going to jail, as there's no reason for them to stop gambling since they get paid when they win, get baillouts when they lose, the people that police them are the same people that have or will work for them and, in the rare cases that they get fined the fine is less than the profit.)
(7. Few will talk about the serious conversation that needs to be had about Medicare/Medicaid. The GOP simply wants to break it and pass the buck on to the poor and the old, who will either get less or will pay more. And the old will get to swim the predatory insurance waters for coverage that they won't be able to get because "old" is the greatest pre-existing conditiong. The Dems, meanwhile, can't touch it with the necessary "cost controls" because the GOP will demagogue the hell out of them if they try...and that includes Medicare Part D, which is consistently more expensive than regular Medicare, and as a bonus is unfunded. Meanwhile, Single Payer Socialized Medicine remains off the table, as there's too much money to be made by private companies on the backs of the rest of us)
"If raising taxes on ALL Americans to 51% will not provide for a balanced budget, then how can taxing more of the top 2% American earners?"
They're the only group that has consistently benefited over the last few decades. The bottom rung has fallen, and the middle class only maintained its standard of living by mortgaging it.
boltok "MO is a fool."
Links please to your rebutting of my rebutting of your ignorant talkingpoints.
"I don't track the quality of his remarks."
If they were the weather they'd be described as "partly sunny with a chance of awesome". True story.
"Actually, I stopped reading them."
I still read yours. You still suck. You should be less suck.
Dave Dubya "Ending class warfare is a great idea. Warren Buffett admits to the class warfare his side is winning. Too bad the ones who started it, you know the Right Wingers who called FDR a 'traitor to his class', and now blame liberals for the debt that George W. Bush left us are not interested."
You got the New Deal out of the Depression because those on top realized that the little people were perilously close to revolution. They forgot that lesson. Remarkably, they've got a bunch of the little people fighting for them, and fighting to cut the programs that benefit the common man, to boot.
"I’m sure Medicare recipients would be happy to give money to insurance companies..."
Unelected bureaucrat? Tyranny and "Death Panels"! Unelected, nameless insurance company lackey? The American Way and The Free Market.
"...and Social Security recipients would all love to let Wall Street run their money into the ground after skimming all they can into their pockets."
I'm amazed (amazed!) that the GOP would come back to SS privatization of so soon after: 1) the Bush-era attempt, and 2) the recent Market meltdown. It's like the national memory is that of a goldfish.
"But you know what? When that all goes to hell, the liberals will be blamed for it."
Didn't you hear? FDR caused the Great Depression. And Obama did the same! (Also, Carter and sneaky negroes)
Darlene "If they can't see that jobs are going overseas in droves because the big corporations care nothing for this country or its people and the bottom line is all that they care about, then they are fools."
Nowhere in corporate law is the duty to serve the markets in which they sell. A corporations highest fiduciary duty is to maximize profit. Legally, corporations are people. Immortal, amoral, billionaire people. The weird part is that the ideal seems to be a Walmart world; where everyone works there (or works for a supplier), everyone shops there and everyone earns so little that they can barely afford to do that; one where the investor class has all of a smaller pie. Say what you want about Henry Ford's mad anti-semitism, but he knew that he needed his workers to be able to buy what they made.
Anonymous "Give the GOP the Senate in 2012 and you'll get a balanced budget."
No, give the GOP the Senate and you'll have programs cuts run rampant over the bottom and tax cuts for the top, and no change in the deficit. The Dems, for all their terrible faults, at least seem to try. The GOP doesn't even pretend to work for you.
Darlene "That is, if he/she cares to take up the challenge. I swore I would never read one of your idiotic comments again, but you got my attention with my name."
Me too! But he just sucked me back in...with the suck.
I just want to say that my Teleprompter was programmed with the wrong talking points for my interview with ABC News George Stephanopoulos regarding my Senatorial vote in 2006 opposing a debt increase:
"I think that it’s important to understand the vantage point of a senator versus the vantage point of a … president. When you’re a senator, traditionally what’s happened is, this is always a lousy vote. Nobody likes to be tagged as having increased the debt limit for the United States by a trillion dollars. … As president, you start realizing: ‘You know what? We — we can’t play around with this stuff. This is the full faith in credit of the United States.’ And so that was just a example of a new senator, you know, making what is a political vote as opposed to doing what was important for the country."
I just want to apologize for being full of shit and unqualified for the job of President.
Tom,
"jobs have been created under Obama. More people are working now then when he entered the White House. No wonder you post anonymously.
2:37 PM
More people working now than when he (Obama) entered the WH? You have lost your mind. Unemployment is what now vs. the date he took office?
PLEASE, get in touch with reality or turn your self into rehab with Dr. Drew.
"if the jobs were out there, perhaps, there wouldn't be such a deficit as created by the governing of the prior administrations."
Does this mean that jobs are a creation of government?
MO,
""If raising taxes on ALL Americans to 51% will not provide for a balanced budget, then how can taxing more of the top 2% American earners?"
They're the only group that has consistently benefited over the last few decades. The bottom rung has fallen, and the middle class only maintained its standard of living by mortgaging it.
Answer the question.
If raising taxes doesn't solve the problem then why do it? Or is this just a Canadian version of class warfare?
Dear Crock-O-Bama,
Apology accepted, now please resign before you ruin what is left of a once great nation.
I received this e-mail yesterday from a guy named Steve Eldred from Battle Creek Michigan that I wanted to share with you:
You know Tom...we now have what constitutes a 3 party system (something the Democrats have always said could never happen) and two of them are pro-wealth Conservatives. The third one is pro-wealth Democrats who are only socially liberal.
WHY THE F#%K CAN'T THESE G-D PROGRESSIVES GET THEIR SHIT TOGETHER!?
Seems like the answer to that question is always something like: [True liberals are of the more intelligent crowd. They resist playing Simon Says like the con's do...so they spend their time stubbornly refusing to cooperate with anyone who has a different slant on things; after all we're INDEPENDENT thinkers.]
There's enough of us...we are more intelligent...and we piss it all out the window while we get hammered by society's simpletons. We have a two front war and we aren't fighting either of them. Jeez! Why the hell can't we take this opportunity when there actually is an emerging third party...to organize and mold ourselves into a fourth party?
Wish I'd said that.
Unemployement charts. See 2nd and 3rd charts down. Look at U6 un- and under-employment.
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/06/roundup-of-employment-charts/
Darlene,
Why did S&P ratings put the USA on credit watch negative this morning? I couldn't find a satisfactory answer on factcheck.
JG,
I there are no limits to the amount someone can be taxed, what property rights does that person theoretically possess?
Please answer monosyllabicly so I can understand. Thanks in advance.
MO
I accidentally read the last sentence of your diatribe. I am glad I suck in your eyes. I'd hate for you to think otherwise.
Don't know what you do for a living. You would be good at writing two hour long ramblings speeches for third world dictators. You should look in to it. You have a gift.
Boltok, in your inquiry addressed to me, you asked...
"I[f] there are no limits to the amount someone can be taxed, what property rights does that person theoretically possess?"
Whether theoretically taxed at zero rate (of value), or theoretically taxed at 100% (of value), that person would still legally possess said property. Now, whether that person chooses to retain said property under, for example, the economic system in the United States, he or she could choose to pay the levied tax rate or not. If not, he or she would pay a penalty determined by the state. If he or she didn't want to pay the levied tax requirement in the future, he or she could sell the property to the highest bidder and relinquish tax liability to the next owner.
Do you have any more anarcho-capitalist questions, Boltok?
JG
I think we are getting to the heart of the matter. Let me get this right.
If I am taxed out every thing I own, 100%, you argue that I am still owner because of my partial ownership of those assets by being a citizen of the USA. So I am a pari passu owner of everything in the USA and I should be ambivalent as to whether it is under my control or the states?
Then we could consider Obama King George III.
If my synopsis is correct, you are the first lib I know to own up to your turn intentions.
Congratulations!
BTW, that is the opposite of private property rights.
Boltok...
I'm not sure where you get the idea, via pari passu, that I'm advocating your common ownership in property owned by others. I just gave you a brief synopsis, theoretical as it may be (and no more theoretical than your inquiry), of how property rights, in relation to taxes, are legally viewed in the United States. That's it -- no more, no less. How you can bring those other factors into the foray, I have no idea. (I suppose only the conservative mind could understand.)
So, Boltok, please attempt to enlighten me: What's your view of "private property rights" (since you seem to disagree with that which is practiced in the United States)?
JG
I an generally a fan of consumption taxes but consumption taxes only. Or a flat tax in lieu of the above.
I have a few problems with current tax system, and it is not that a certain amount of taxation is necessary.
One, the govt taxes literally everything that moves. If they could hook a meter up to your back end and tax your output they would. They would hit you with back taxes and penalties if you diet or get constipated.
Seriously though, I think every single person of age of majority should pay taxes. That way everyone has some skin in the game. Taxes could be very low on basic necessities, and relatively higher on everything else.
I think what people own after taxes is theirs, period, end of story. I have an issue with property taxes feeding unions. Government workers get paid well, and some poor bastard who fails to pay his property taxes gets a visit by the sheriff and auctioneer.
And, as you may have guessed, I thing government spends too much.
So, in a nutshell, tiered consumption taxes first choice, flat tax second choice, tiered progressive tax with no deductions third choice, and the elimiation of all other forms of sizeable taxes.
Taxes should be simple and adequate. Think how many handouts could be paid for with the IRS budget for starters.
Some tax day factoids:
http://www.businessinsider.com/facts-about-taxes-2011-4#the-irs-has-more-employees-than-there-are-people-in-flint-michigan-106k-vs-102k-1#ixzz1JtewLCQN
* Households received $2.3 trillion in government income support in February.
* Government cash accounts for79 percent of household income growth since 2007.
* Since 2007, household tax payments have fallen by $312 billion.
Note to self:
Get fired asap and start getting government income, its the Obama way!
Anonymous "Households received $2.3 trillion in government income support in February. * Government cash accounts for79 percent of household income growth since 2007. * Since 2007, household tax payments have fallen by $312 billion."
In a recession? Outrageous!
Also, in context:
For the first time since the Great Depression, households are receiving more income from the government than they are paying the government in taxes. The combination of more cash from various programs, called transfer payments, and lower taxes has been a double-barreled boost to consumers’ buying power, while also blowing a hole in the deficit. The 1930s offer a cautionary tale: The only other time government income support exceeded taxes paid was from 1931 to 1936. That trend reversed in 1936, after a recovery was underway, and the economy fell back into a second leg of recession during 1937 and 1938.
...
As then, the pattern now reflects two factors: the severe depth of the 2007-09 recession and the massive fiscal policy response to it. The recession cut deeply into tax payments as more people lost their jobs, and it boosted payments for so-called automatic stabilizers, such as unemployment insurance, that ramp up payments as the economy turns down. Plus, policy actions, including the Recovery Act, boosted payments to households by expanding and extending jobless benefits and creating other income subsidies while extending the Bush-era tax cuts and adding new reductions in income and payroll taxes.
...
Government transfers of income to households started to overtake personal taxes at the start of 2008, and the gap has been widening. In February, households received more than $2.3 trillion in income support from unemployment benefits, Social Security, disability insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans’ benefits, education assistance and other cash transfers of government funds to individuals. In the same month, households paid $2.2 trillion in income, payroll, and other taxes.
con't:
All this should be a yellow flag for the White House and Congress as they work toward reducing the deficit. Until the labor markets are strong enough to power consumer spending without the outsized income support from the government, withdrawing that support too quickly could put spending and the economy at risk to some unexpected shock.
Boltok, you said...
"I have a few problems with current tax system..."
I do too, mainly that multinational corporations get away with tax dodging and avoidance continually, year after year.
"One, the govt taxes literally everything that moves. If they could hook a meter up to your back end and tax your output they would."
Sorry, it's already being done. It's called the federal (and state) income tax.
"I have an issue with property taxes feeding unions. Government workers get paid well..."
C'mon, Boltok, quit dancin' around the issue. Don't you really mean that you don't like public school teachers...and police officers...and fire fighters? Property taxes fund these very necessary functions of society.
"I thing government spends too much."
I do too -- especially, and particularly, on bloated military budgets, along with tax subsidies ("corporate welfare") to multinational corporations.
"...in a nutshell, tiered consumption taxes first choice, flat tax second choice, tiered progressive tax with no deductions third choice, and the elimiation [sic] of all other forms of sizeable [sic] taxes."
Everything's been tried; at one time or another, in some place or another. I don't claim to be a tax expert, far from it, but the real topic-at-hand is the deficit and resulting gigantic debt we have incurred as a nation. As I've mentioned previously (which you continually choose to ignore), if this nation would dismantle the obscene military-industrial-congressional complex, we'd have a balanced budget within a few short years. That's a fact.
"Taxes should be simple and adequate."
Agreed. I'm also glad you're in agreement that they're necessary -- a necessary evil in exchange for living in society and within civilization. It just can't be any other way. If you don't want to pay taxes, and want to keep everything you earn, live as a hermit on top of a mountain or on an uncharted island somewhere. You'd be able to keep 100% of everything!
Left wing talking point words for the week of 4/17/2011
"multinational corporations"
For the week of 4/10/2011
"corporatist Plutarchists' (which by the way, is not a word, but it sounds like A great Latin word)
Last year at this time they were
"radical right"
and
"Tea party"
Stay tuned to this blog and others like it for the LIBERAL TALKING POINT WORDS OF THE WEEK!
Technology has enabled mice to become men. You no longer need to look your victim in the eye before you kill him...now just hit "ENTER"
Browns44, the term "multinational corporations" has been a term used for decades by the Left to identify the source of our continually eroding democracy in this country. It's nothing new -- only to your "ears", I suppose, because you keep yourself isolated from knowing and understanding the truth.
Where have you been? I thought I ran you off when I wouldn't let you off the hook with your discriminating accusations that all American Muslim groups should be investigated by Congress for terrorist activities. Do you remember?
(I know you do...)
S&P Cuts Outlook on U.S. Debt: Could See Downgrade in Next Two Years:
"Standard & Poor’s cut it long-term outlook for on U.S. debt on Monday to Negative from Stable, saying it could lower the country’s credit rating within the next two years if not enough is done to curb the deficit."
It time to take the credit card from the children in Washington who spend like drunkin sailors!
JG,
I answered you many, many strings/posts ago. Typical liberal revision history attempt on your part.
Browns44, you addressed to me...
"I answered you many, many strings/posts ago. Typical liberal revision history attempt on your part."
No you didn't. I just checked the post (Gerry and the Glass Ceiling) where you degenerated into demeaning and discriminating discourse about American Muslim groups. Your only reply was a smart-ass retort about your conversion to liberalism, but you never responded to my questions.
Typical conservative tactic when confronted with the truth: Ignore it.
JG,
Cant help it if you are not smart enough to understand what I wrote. In fact my reply to you was that I wrote what I meant. Your question was what did I mean. You in fact were caught by other posters inferring something in what I posted and when called on it you asked me to clear up your understanding.
You must be reading too many of Thomm Hartmann's book to have a clear mind any more.
Sorry, I meant what I wrote, not what you think I meant.
Browns44...
Just as I thought, evading the issue.
That's fine. I'll catch you on something else, I'm sure. Due to your ignorance, your kind has a tough time hiding the racist undertones that underscore everything you say and stand for. But you'll slip up, once again, and I'll be there to rub your face in it. ;-)
You can count on that.
Anonymous, you angrily said...
"...that post was about a region not a race!"
First of all, I wasn't addressing you (unless you're also known as Browns44). But, since you've decided to take up for your fellow racist, I'll answer your statement by telling you you're wrong. Browns44 distinctly said "American Muslim groups". Look it up.
If he was speaking of a particular "region" (as you incorrectly claim -- again, I challenge you to go back and check. Prove it to me.), it must be the American region, wouldn't you say?
JG
Deficits are larger than miliatry budget now, plus half of military is paid jobs.
I like public sector unions. I dont thing they need to be paid multiples of the average person's wages with benefits into perpetutity.
Libs use to the obvious need for some taxes to justiy taxes on everything.
Corporations have the highest tax rates in the world and are the source of private sector jobs. What is more important to you, corporate taxes or jobs?
JG
Deficits are larger than miliatry budget now, plus half of military is paid jobs.
I like public sector unions. I dont thing they need to be paid multiples of the average person's wages with benefits into perpetutity.
Libs use to the obvious need for some taxes to justiy taxes on everything.
Corporations have the highest tax rates in the world and are the source of private sector jobs. What is more important to you, corporate taxes or jobs?
The brainless left strikes out, again.
(Des Moines Register) — A case of mistaken identity has entangled a small family-owned Des Moines company in union protests and led to a death threat.
Angry callers are mistaking Koch Brothers, a Des Moines office supply firm, with the brothers who own Koch Industries, the global energy conglomerate. Billionaires Charles and David Koch have fought Wisconsin unions, financed the tea party and opposed climate change rules.
Dutch Koch, president of the Des Moines company, wants everyone to know he’s not one of those Koch brothers, and he’s not politically active.
“I initially thought it was humorous to be confused with a multibillionaire,” he said, but then a death threat was left on his answering machine. Koch reported the call to the FBI, which he said traced it to a California man.
The Koch Brothers employ 65 employees in Des Moines and Cedar Rapids. Brothers George, William and Frank Koch founded the company in 1889 as a spinoff from the Des Moines Register and Leader’s job printing shop.
Koch Industries, based in Wichita, Kan., is the nation’s second-largest private corporation. It employs dozens of lobbyists and finances several conservative causes, including a group that has run TV advertising supporting Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s standoff with public unions. A subsidiary, Flint Hills Resources, owns four ethanol plants in Iowa.
Both surnames are pronounced “coke.”
Jefferson's Guardian said:
"The truth: End war, you end deficits."
Words that should be etched in stone.
Now what the heck did I do with my chisel?
Boltok, you said...
"Deficits are larger than miliatry [sic] budget now, plus half of military is paid jobs."
Yes, the deficits are larger. That's why I wrote "we'd have a balanced budget within a few short years." It's not going to happen overnight. Nobody's made that claim (that I'm aware).
You're way off about the military pay being "half". It's not even a quarter (closer to 23%), according to OMB data for the 2010 budget year. Where did you come up with your data? (I thought you were an economist.)
Additionally, In real terms, the war in Iraq alone has already cost more than every past United States war except for World War II. Combined, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have already exceeded the cost of the Vietnam War -- the second most costly past US war -- by about fifty percent. This is the first time in American history that taxes have been cut while the country was involved in a major war. Is it any wonder we're saddled with such debt? It shouldn't be.
The truth: End war; you end deficits.
PART II
Boltok, you also said (and asked)...
"Corporations have the highest tax rates in the world and are the source of private sector jobs. What is more important to you, corporate taxes or jobs?
Yes, you're right, multinational corporations (MNCs) are a source of private sector jobs (but, as you probably know, over half of the American workforce is employed by small businesses). You're also aware, I hope, that the only real job creation and growth by MNCs is outside of this country -- in third world and developing countries. Given this fact, the concept of "trickle-down" economics is a fraud and a lie. By extending tax cuts to the ultra-rich, the only investment that trickles down -- in the form of jobs -- is overseas. The American middle and working classes don't benefit at all. In truth, the slightly higher corporate tax rates are not what squelch jobs in America; it's the lure of dirt-cheap labor and lack of environmental regulations overseas.
Given these undeniable truths, I want MNCs to pay their damn taxes. This, coupled with a slashing of the military waste (we call a "budget"), the deficit would be eliminated in a few short years and the debt could be managed to stay within a favorable ratio of GDP.
JG –
You’re not taking into account the rise in SS/Medicare burden imposed on employers – it is not insignificant. You don’t tell the whole story. The fact is the corporate tax burden has at best remained steady, even with declining tax rates and, in some cases, has risen. Corporations are paying their way. And, I’m not sure I understand your argument for taxing them harder when you correctly point out the multinational nature of their scope. They have no qualms about moving where they can increase returns for shareholders.
Jefferson's Guardian is a blog stalker.
Creepy.
Examples of Islam, the religion of peace.
Muslim rioters in Nigeria protesting the just concluded presidential elections have killed more than 100 Christians and burned down more than 40 churches in an attack that began yesterday.
This revelation is contained in a report by the Regional Manager for Africa, International Christian Concern (ICC) (www.persecution.org), Jonathan Racho noting that this latest demonstration is in response to the election of Jonathan Goodluck, a Christian, as president of Nigeria.
He pointed out that the rioters even destroyed the homes of many Muslims who supported President Jonathan Goodluck adding that the Muslim attackers allege that the election was rigged and General Muhammadu Buhari, a Muslim presidential candidate, is the rightful winner.
===================================
The American media are reluctant to report what the French media have made clear: Al-Qaida has established a beachhead in Libya and fully intends to install Sharia law once government forces are overcome.
An April 19th article in the prominent French daily, Le Figaro, does not shy from chronicling the obvious. It highlights an interview that Al Qaida spokesman Saleh Abi Mohammad gave to the Saudi journal Al-Hayyat, which is published in London.
====================================
Muslim prof in Kansas: Muslims should ask Congress to outlaw Qur'an-burning -- because it incites violence
Liaquat Ali Khan teaches commercial law, arbitration and international law at Washburn University in Topeka, Kansas. He argues here that Muslims should petition Congress to outlaw the burning of the Qur'an because doing so incites violence -- in contrast to the burning of the American flag, which, he says, the Supreme Court declined to outlaw because "no disturbance of the peace actually occurred or threatened to occur."
And so here we have a vivid example of how the stealth jihad and the violent jihad go hand-in-hand, support each other, and are two aspects of the same effort. Muslims go crazy and kill innocent people over a burned Qur'an, and their useful idiots in the mainstream media blame the Qur'an-burner instead of the Muslims who behaved violently and irrationally. Then a smooth and rational voice -- a law professor -- says that because burning the Qur'an leads to violence, it must be outlawed.
The whole thing is based on a false premise: that someone who burns a Qur'an is responsible for the violent actions of someone protesting the burning of the Qur'an.
====================================
Muslim fanatics plan to hijack the Royal Wedding by burning effigies of Prince William and Kate Middleton.
Extremists belonging to the group Muslims Against Crusades were behind the poppy-burning outrage on November 11 last year.
According to police, they have now vowed to turn the wedding celebrations into a ‘nightmare’. They plan a ‘forceful demonstration’ with thousands of protesters set to burn the Union Flag, images of the Crown, and effigies of the bridal couple.
Suck on this JG!
Anonymous "Al-Qaida has established a beachhead in Libya and fully intends to install Sharia law once government forces are overcome."
So should we support Kaddafi?
"Muslim prof in Kansas: Muslims should ask Congress to outlaw Qur'an-burning -- because it incites violence. Liaquat Ali Khan teaches commercial law, arbitration and international law at Washburn University in Topeka, Kansas. He argues here that Muslims should petition Congress to outlaw the burning of the Qur'an because doing so incites violence -- in contrast to the burning of the American flag, which, he says, the Supreme Court declined to outlaw because 'no disturbance of the peace actually occurred or threatened to occur.'"
He can ask. He has that freedom. Freedom of speech works in two directions. Heck, Congress can even pass a law banning it. In this hypothetical world, where America's daliance with Muslim-baiting magically turns into the opposite of that, the court would strike it down. The First Amendment contains no exception for the Heckler's Veto.
"Muslim fanatics plan to hijack the Royal Wedding by burning effigies of Prince William and Kate Middleton. Extremists belonging to the group Muslims Against Crusades were behind the poppy-burning outrage on November 11 last year. According to police, they have now vowed to turn the wedding celebrations into a ‘nightmare’. They plan a ‘forceful demonstration’ with thousands of protesters set to burn the Union Flag, images of the Crown, and effigies of the bridal couple."
So extreme, so dangerous, so deadly that they were fined £50; a fine for essentially being rude. That's "extremist"? o words mean anything anymore? If someone playing a long-con like Choudhury threatens the British way of life, then the Brits don't have much to lose. (Also, EDL. I don't know which group of small-minded, bigoted, absolutist assholes to root for less)
Here's the news, just waiting for MO to tell us what it means, in Canadian.
Three Afghans held for disrespecting Qur’an
Three people have been arrested as officials probe claims that a paper mill in Afghanistan recycled copies of the Holy Qur’an into toilet paper, the attorney general’s office said yesterday. Around 1,000 angry demonstrators, some throwing stones, held a protest on Monday at the mill on the outskirts of Kabul, leaving the building partially destroyed. Copies of the Qur’an were found inside the factory, Kabul police spokesman Hashmat Stanikzai said, adding that no-one was injured in the protest. “The attorney general’s office and Kabul police have jointly tasked a delegation to investigate the alleged disrespect to our holy book in that factory,” a spokesman said.
From the Gulf Times
Harley, you said...
"Corporations are paying their way."
How can you justifiably make such a claim? Everything in the news lately indicates otherwise. Doesn't Faux News tell you these things? We're hemorrhaging jobs in this country, while the multinationals bum off the American taxpayer whenever they need help.
"And, I’m not sure I understand your argument for taxing them harder..."
When did I say to tax them "harder"? I said they need to "pay their damn taxes." They shouldn't be allowed to avoid paying their fair share (which they don't).
PART II
Harley, you continued to ask...
"They have no qualms about moving where they can increase returns for shareholders."
Let 'em! Why do we need to have them here? Let them headquarter somewhere else. As Robert Sheer wrote in yesterday's Truthdig:
"Of course it will be argued that multinational corporations have the right to arrange their business as they see fit in order to maximize profit. But if that is the case, do beleaguered American taxpayers have to foot the bill? When those corporations run into trouble overseas because of financial hustles or hostile locals and need the diplomatic and military might of the U.S. government to protect their interests abroad, it is again the U.S. taxpayer who must pay to maintain this new world order. It is an order, as we see with three current wars and a military budget that rivals Cold War highs, that is contributing mightily to the U.S. government debt. More than half of all discretionary spending, the dollars that the Republicans in Congress now want to take out of needed domestic programs, is accounted for by defense spending. That defense spending to support a massive network of military bases and deployed weapons and troops is key to establishing an order in which the interests of American corporations are attended to. If the companies don’t feel that way, let them operate under the flag of Liberia or the Cayman Islands."
So, I'll ask once again, what value do multinational corporations bring to the American public any longer? They don't produce American jobs. They don't pay their taxes. And last, but not least, they siphon-off our tax dollars, through bloated military spending, in order to protect and enhance their foreign investments.
More from the world famous anti western and therefore loved by JG, MM and other left wingers,religion of peace and tolerance.
CAIRO, April 21 (Reuters) - Protesters in a southern Egyptian city insisted on Thursday their new Christian governor resign, stepping up a week-long challenge to his appointment by the country's military rulers.
====================================
CAIRO – Hundreds of Islamists have staged a protest in front of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo to demand the release of an Egyptian cleric imprisoned in the United States for plots to blow up New York City landmarks.
Omar Abdel Rahman, also known as the blind sheik, is serving life in prison after a 1995 conviction for his advisory role in conspiracies to blow up the United Nations and several New York bridges and tunnels.
On Thursday, protesters near the heavily fortified embassy held banners reading "freedom for our sheik" and chanted slogans and held prayers.
The protest leader was Abboud el-Zomor, who was released from an Egyptian prison in March after serving multiple sentences for his role in the assassination of former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat.
The army generals ruling Egypt since President Hosni Mubarak's ouster appointed Emad Mikhail, a Copt and a senior former officer in Egypt's vilified police force, as governor of Qena province earlier this month.
But he has so far not taken up his post because thousands of demonstrators have contested the decision, resorting to the same people-power that ended Mubarak's 30-year rule in February.
Protesters have blocked highways and railway tracks leading to Qena, a province with a large Coptic Christian population and whose previous governor was also a Christian.
They have also surrounded the governor's office, vowing to prevent Mikhail from ever entering.
"Mikhail, Mikhail, you're never coming here," protesters chanted.
Ibrahim Saadani, one of the protesters, told Reuters by telephone: "We do not want someone from the previous regime and worst still from the police force as governor. The revolution came to change the previous regime but we are not seeing new faces."
The protesters said they would hold a big rally on Friday to force Mikhail's resignation and would not negotiate with a government envoy sent from Cairo to resolve the matter.
Ok, MO give us the "Canadian" view point on this.
But it is a religion of peace and knowledge and molesting goats!
NAIROBI, Kenya, April 20 — Two Muslim extremists in Somalia murdered a member of a secret Christian community in the name of Islam in Lower Shabele region as part of a campaign to rid the country of Christianity, sources said.
An area source told Compass two al Shabaab militants shot 21-year-old Hassan Adawe Adan in Shalambod town after entering his house at 7:30 p.m.
“Two al Shabaab members dragged him out of his house, and after 10 minutes they fired several shots on him,” said an area source who requested anonymity. “He then died immediately.”
The militants then shouted “Allahu Akbar [God is greater]” before fleeing, he said.
Anonymous, just as these Rutgers students have, you need to apologize to others for your behavior and, especially, your sins. It's the only chance you have of going to Heaven.
Oh, by the way, Satan's living in your bedroom closet. Be careful. Be very careful.
JG, sure the minute after those peace loving followers of Islam do. But I wouldn't hold your breath for that to happen any time soon.
However, if you have the balls to watch this, you could learn the another view of your religion of peace.
youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EKerbOi_mrI
More insight to the world view held by members of that reasonable peaceful faith of billions, Islam.
As the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks approaches, the United Nations is no closer to reaching a universal definition of terrorism than it was in 2001 — or indeed than it was five years before then, when negotiations first began on drafting a comprehensive convention on international terrorism.
The main hurdle, then as now, is the insistence by the bloc of Islamic states that any definition of terrorism should leave a loophole for “resistance” against foreign occupation.
The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), which was established in 1969 with “liberating” Jerusalem as its primary focus, is unwilling to give ground on the issue as many of its governments believe that doing so would be tantamount to betraying the Palestinian cause.
The “occupation” exemption is usually cited in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but it would also provide cover for the anti-Indian jihad in Kashmir, a Muslim-majority territory divided between India and Pakistan and claimed by both.
India has been a major target of terrorism, both in what some Islamic states call “Indian-occupied Kashmir” and elsewhere. Not coincidentally, New Delhi has spearheaded the push for a international terrorism convention since 1996.
A U.N. General Assembly resolution passed that year established an “Ad-Hoc Committee” to elaborate on the draft convention proposed by India. It has met every year since then, for a one- or two-week period usually in the spring, but consensus on a terrorism definition remain elusive.
Its 15th session was held in New York last week.
According to Anne Bayefsky, editor of the Hudson Institute’s Eye on the U.N. project, the OIC once again raised the argument that there is a “distinction between terrorism and the struggle for the rights of self-determination by people under foreign occupation and colonial or alien domination.”
Anonymous "Ok, MO give us the 'Canadian' view point on this."
Hundreds of Islamists have staged a protest in front of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo to demand the release of an Egyptian cleric imprisoned in the United States for plots to blow up New York City landmarks.
Ooo. Protesters. Hundreds of them. Must've been a 2011 Tea Party protest.
As for the other half, I don't have to. The story already did (and, yes, there's going to be religious and tribal strife. I fail to see how continuing to support Mubarak would've done anything but delay and magnify that. What would you have done when the protests started, bombed the protestors?):
"We do not want someone from the previous regime and worst still from the police force as governor. The revolution came to change the previous regime but we are not seeing new faces." (emphasis mine)
People, you see, tend not to want their torturers or their supporters and financiers to be their leaders.
Anonymous, you said to me...
"...if you have the balls to watch this, you could learn the another view of your religion of peace."
Of my religion of peace?? Mine??
Please, if you could, provide evidence that I've ever made that claim. As far as I'm concerned, you folks are as violent and out-of-your-minds as they are. As a matter of fact, I lump all three monotheistic brands in the same way. You can have 'em all. I have no use for them.
By the way, I don't watch any videos if you don't provide a hyperlink. Sorry.
Jefferson's Guardian, said "I lump all three monotheistic brands in the same way. You can have 'em all. I have no use for them."
You are lucky to live in the country of the monotheistic brand that allows your position and statement. If this were a country of the Muslim brand of monotheism, you just might be murdered for you belief.
That's the "subtle" little difference that you overlook in your defense of Islam. Your current belief could cost you your life in brand Muslim. It doesn't in the other two brands.
Anonymous, you said...
"That's the 'subtle' little difference that you overlook in your defense of Islam."
First of all, I need to mention that I find you as incoherent and thickheaded as your buddies. Please, please, please...recite to me once when I "defended Islam". Like I said, I think you're all unrealistic and out-of-touch to some degree. But, hey, if that's what floats your boat, have at it.
What I did defend is followers of Islam being able to practice their faith freely and openly, in this country, without the fear of government retribution, reprisals or persecution. Our Constitution grants this very simple, and not so subtle, basic right. I would defend your right, too, to follow your faith -- whatever it may be -- for the very same reason.
But...there's one caveat that I apply to all of you: Keep your religion to yourself, and keep it out of my government. Once you cross that line, I'm going to do everything I can to discredit and stop you.
JG said
"Keep your religion to yourself, and keep it out of my government"
Try that in a Islamic nation!
Bravo To Bravo!
Den from Oz
Thank you, Tom.
I guess it never occurred to me, until just a few minutes ago, just how dumb-downed we've become as a nation. Anonymous proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that we face an increasingly uphill struggle if we ever hope to gain any traction in the battle against conservative ignorance and stupidity in this country.
On this solemn day in the world of Christendom, may I be counted as saying, "God help us!"
Tell that to the Spanish who were blow up in their Christian nation.
Tell that to the Jewish family whose throats were slit in their Jewish nation.
Tell that to soldiers who were gunned down in Ft Hood their Christian nation by a fellow citizen/soldier.
Common thread, the killers where followers of Islam. The reason for their killing, the victims were doing what Islam said they should do.
As to the posts being stupid,they were ripped out of the headlines of today's news, to ignore them is simply putting you head up your ass, hoping you are not next.
Good luck!
Anonymous, you moronically said...
"As to the posts being stupid,they were ripped out of the headlines of today's news, to ignore them is simply putting you head up your ass, hoping you are not next."
This will be my last reply to you because, frankly, it's a hopeless cause trying to debate in any logical or rational way with those who are incessantly and compulsively irrational.
First, let me explain in the simplest and most elementary terms for you that I understand you were lifting actual "headlines" (as you phrased it) from other sources. That was very apparent. Why? Well, first of all, you don't have the capability to write in such a professional and complex style. Without your usual grammatical, syntax, and spelling miscues, it was a dead giveaway.
PART II
Continuing from above...
Secondly, it's very apparent to me, and anyone else (beyond Tom) who's still patient and vigilant enough to continue following this, that you have a difficult time making simple connections and following a line of thought to a logical conclusion. It's almost as if you're pubescent, or worse, under the influence of medication or something else that interferes with basic cognitive skills. Honestly, your line of reasoning was so far out in left field that it was actually out of the ballpark.
You, young man, are the one I wish good luck! Because, we can ignore and avoid your madness, but you have to live and dwell within yourself. That must be a very frightening existence.
Nice try JG, but it's a major FAIL on your part.
POWER TO THE PEOPLE!
A Sheboygan gas station owner is baffled after a mystery caller tells a clerk it’s a bad idea to do business with a Sheboygan-area state senator.
It started Tuesday when a woman called Dick Hiers’s Northeast Standard gas station after she thought she saw Senator Joe Leibham there. Her call was caught on the answering machine.
“I think that this whole thing has to end. It has to stop,” said Hiers. “This type of stuff is totally uncalled for.”
Hiers never thought his little gas station in the heart of Sheboygan would be the stage of political controversy. Then again, his week has been full of surprises.
“I was working back here and the answering machine went off, and I was a little surprised by that, and when I heard the message here, I was even a little more surprised.”
The answering machine here in the back of the store was left on from the night before and was recording the entire conversation.
Caller: “Can you verify that was Senator Leibham at the gas station this morning?”
Gas station clerk: “Senator Leibham?”
Caller: “Yes. Do you guys support him?”
Clerk: “I have nothing to say about that, I am not politically involved.”
Caller: “Alright, well you can tell Dick he’s not good for business, I’ll tell you that.”
Shocked over the 26-second conversation, Hiers quickly traced the call — only to get surprise number two.
“And it turned out to be coming from the Sheboygan area district school office,” he said.
“Obviously our school district equipment and the facilities are for the purposes of school,” Superintendent Joseph Sheehan responded. “Any type of phone call leaving any types of threats or condoning any type of intimidation is strictly prohibited.”
The superintendent, who was out of the area Friday, said the district’s taken what it calls “appropriate disciplinary action.
Anonymous, at 7:24 p.m. you said...
"Common thread, the killers where followers of Islam. The reason for their killing, the victims were doing what Islam said they should do."
I know I already mentioned that my last reply was my final one to you, but looking back at your quoted statement (above), I had to ask:
What does your religion say you should do?
Just curious...
JG,
You seem to know all there is to know about religions, name another one that commands it's followers to murder those who will not follow it.
Give us the passages in it's Holy book commanding the murder, please.
Gee, Anonymous, why did you make this so easy? There are literally dozens of examples throughout the Old Testament. Take your pick.
No, you're wrong, I don't "know all there is to know about religions", as you claim, but I know enough that I don't want anything to do with them. But again, as I've said before, if following a specific or particular brand is what's right for you, go for it! Just don't force me to be a part of your maniacal culture, and keep your religious beliefs out of my government.
Again, I'm asking the question that you apparently, and intentionally, avoided the last time: What does your religion say you should do?
To "love my neighbor as myself".
Anonymous...
So...why don't you?
JG,
Who are you to say I don't? At the same time I will not slaughtered like a sheep by someone who wish's to do me harm.
I understand how difficult a concept this must be for you to wrap your head around. But simply put, I'll put my neighbor before my self until that time when my neighbor decides they want to take my life. Then the equation changes.
Now with our Islamic friends, their faith states that that to their non believe neighbor they are not expected to be honest in their dealings. But you knew that, didn't you. So why do you ask?
Anonymous, you asked and stated the following...
"Who are you to say I don't [love my neighbor as myself]?"
I'm not claiming, definitively, that you don't. But I guess I'm curious about this: If a follower of Islam were, for instance, your next-door, would you?
"...simply put, I'll put my neighbor before my self until that time when my neighbor decides they want to take my life."
So, tell me, exactly what determines for you that your neighbor has decided they want to take your life? Is it when they storm your house, for example, with threatening words and/or with visible weapons, or can it be as innocuous as you just knowing they're devote followers of the Islam faith?
"Now with our Islamic friends, their faith states that that to their non believe neighbor they are not expected to be honest in their dealings. But you knew that, didn't you. So why do you ask?"
As the web-link I supplied (above) indicates, your faith claims, and I assume practices, some insidious and cruel "acts of faith" also. Is this okay, because it's "Christian"?
Unlike you and Islam, my Holy book is not "old".
Anonymous, your religion has an ugly history of burning alive alleged witches -- 50,000 to 100,000 -- during its heyday, and you're singling out Islam? What?! You've heard the idiom, "Those who live in glass houses shouldn't cast stones", haven't you?
Nevertheless, all the examples you've provided are of Muslims living and practicing their twisted faith in other parts of the world. They're not Americans! You're certainly not suggesting that all Muslims, who are citizens of the United States and live and work here, go around murdering Christians and burning homosexuals alive on their days off, are you? (Please don't say yes.)
Like I said, you can have your organized hypocrisy and believe in whomever, or whatever, you want. But, so can each Muslim, each Hindu, each Jew, each follower of Zoroastrianism, or whatever. As a liberal, and as an American, I may not agree with each faith, but I'm tolerant of each one -- assuming, of course, that they keep their religious views to themselves (which means not imposing their views or beliefs on those who don't believe -- such as homosexuals, for example) and keep their religious views out of my government. Otherwise, they're free to do whatever they want.
What part of this explanation are you having a hard time understanding? Or, accepting?
Tom, so glad I found your blog on AlterNet!
I have a lot of catching up to do---it'll be fun and informative to read ALL of what you've written!
Annie
Post a Comment
<< Home