November 27, 2012
— Gabriel Malor Happy Tuesday.
Speaker Boehner on the Norquist pledge and the fiscal cliff: he "opposes tax rate hikes because they hurt our economy and cost jobs."
NYTimes reporter David Carr either doesn't know that "Al Aqsa TV" is a designated terrorist organization or doesn't want NYTimes readers to know. Either is journalistic malpractice. Carr penned a piece in yesterday's paper claiming that Israel was targeting journalists simply because Al Aqsa terrorists had spray painted "TV" on their car.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
02:47 AM
| Comments (213)
Post contains 85 words, total size 1 kb.
http://is.gd/N4d73y
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 02:48 AM (YdQQY)
http://is.gd/fzLV87
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 02:48 AM (YdQQY)
http://is.gd/AhBIHE
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 02:48 AM (YdQQY)
http://is.gd/UH41tr
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 02:48 AM (YdQQY)
http://is.gd/xoLWl2
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 02:49 AM (YdQQY)
http://is.gd/hHq9ee
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 02:49 AM (YdQQY)
http://is.gd/wciQcr
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 02:50 AM (YdQQY)
http://is.gd/cQ65WL
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 02:50 AM (YdQQY)
http://is.gd/GYmH8m
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 02:51 AM (YdQQY)
Promise Not to Tell
School nurse Kate Cypher has returned home to care for her ailing mother. When she arrives, a young girl is murdered, mirroring a crime from Kate's childhood. More than a murder mystery, Jennifer McMahon's debut is a story of friendship, family, devotion, and betrayal that's deeply insightful and utterly unforgettable.
And thatÂ’s it for Tuesday. Not much out there today.
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 02:51 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: Tocquevillian at November 27, 2012 02:52 AM (iuY0Y)
He'll sells us out quicker than he can pick up a bourbon over ice.
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 02:53 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: Lizabth at November 27, 2012 02:53 AM (JZBti)
Posted by: Opus An Arcus at November 27, 2012 02:54 AM (B3njz)
Posted by: Lizabth at November 27, 2012 06:53 AM (JZBti)
Because the housing market is in the shitter already and doing that would kill it stone dead. Not only that, but that deduction helps a lot of first time home buyers.
And why are they talking about getting rid of it? Because the Dems want to raise taxes when we didn't get here by reducing taxes. We got here by jacking up spending $1.1T. I am opposed to ANY tax increase at all until they cut spending back to Jan 1, 2008 levels.
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 02:57 AM (YdQQY)
Great. With SCOAMT's track record of companies shutting down soon after he visits, I guess Tinkertoy will go the way of Twinkies.
Posted by: Retread at November 27, 2012 02:57 AM (zxitI)
Posted by: Butters at November 27, 2012 02:58 AM (NIZHJ)
Rice to meet with McShitty, Grahamnasty, and Kelly Ayote today for discussions. I hope Ms Ayote isnÂ’t setting up to enter the unholy cabal of McShitty and Grahamnasty. In any event keep in mind that Rice will be third in line for President. Why should these three Senators have the say on her?
http://is.gd/N4d73y
Well, Vic, according to teh Gretchen (*eye roll*), Rice made the strategic chess move of praising Juan for his military service and asked for a meeting to 'splain herself. How COULD he and his other two stooges say "no"?
They'll announce their okay by lunchtime.
Posted by: RushBabe at November 27, 2012 02:58 AM (tQHzJ)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 27, 2012 02:59 AM (bZKG0)
on taxes.
CNN
GOP resistance to anti-tax pledge grows
..More and more, conservative Republicans in
Congress are breaking from a pledge they signed
years earlier against any kind of tax increase or
additional tax revenue...
ABC
Fiscal Talks Turn as Tax Pledge Questioned
..The two-party tango that is negotiations over the
"fiscal cliff" took a turn Monday as two more Republican
lawmakers expressed willingness to break with a long-standing
anti-tax pledge and the White House revealed that President
Obama made fresh overtures to congressional leaders on
both sides....
b]CBS
Movement on Debt Reduction Talks
Prominent conservatives in the House and Senate appear
to be more flexible on raising tax revenue.
So the GOP is setting it up so to the public they are the
ones actually raising taxes ala George HW Bush.
You sign on to a deal with the devil and you take the hit.
WONDERFUL!
It's the financial meltdown all over the fucking GOP is truly
a useless pile of junk.
The GOP "compromises" pisses off it's base, the general public
sees them as the ones actually raising taxes, because the
Donks and the media will create the narrative that that is how
it went down.
I'm done with the GOP, DONE.
They no longer represent my interests.
What to do though??
Posted by: General Woundwort at November 27, 2012 03:00 AM (RrD4h)
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 03:02 AM (YdQQY)
This time, da people being even angrier and more frightened, they may go with special doubled health-insurance rates (it's a tax) on drivers and smokers, but just the same: gasoline and cigarettes. Because, you know, you could always just quit.
Posted by: comatus at November 27, 2012 03:02 AM (qaVK+)
Posted by: billygoat at November 27, 2012 03:02 AM (CfGGV)
Posted by: RushBabe at November 27, 2012 03:03 AM (tQHzJ)
Posted by: eman at November 27, 2012 03:03 AM (bWwMZ)
Posted by: BurtTC at November 27, 2012 03:06 AM (BeSEI)
I've said it before, I'll say it again: the R party doesn't always (read rarely) select conservatives to head their tickets, but they always select their candidates conservatively.
Which means, you already know the 2016 nominee. It won't be a surprise, and it won't be somebody new.
Now, I'm not saying it'll be Jeb, but you could probably count on one hand the number of human beings in this country who have a realistic shot of being the R nominee for President. Jeb is one of them.
Posted by: BurtTC at November 27, 2012 03:09 AM (BeSEI)
Posted by: Opus An Arcus at November 27, 2012 03:11 AM (G4Fi2)
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 03:15 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 03:16 AM (YdQQY)
**and yet professional bloggers aren't really journalists, pfft.
You know what you're missing, to be seen as "real" -- violence to sell the Grey Lady. She's that hard up on her luck. That, and spray paint "TV" on your blog.
Posted by: panzernashorn at November 27, 2012 03:17 AM (BAnPT)
Not that most of us would feel any better about it, but I think I am right.
Posted by: Miss Marple at November 27, 2012 03:17 AM (GoIUi)
Not that most of us would feel any better about it, but I think I am right.
Posted by: Miss Marple at November 27, 2012 07:17 AM (GoIUi)
You're right, I missed one. She's 4th in line.
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 03:18 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 06:47 AM
There's a difference?..
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at November 27, 2012 03:19 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: Museisluse at November 27, 2012 03:19 AM (SsWgR)
it's amazing.
Republicans break their pledge not to raise taxes!
The media, the donks and the GOP have created the narrative that
the economic downturn we have been experiencing for the last 4 years
was the fault of Bush and the GOP, since the GOP took the blame for the
financial and housing meltdown they have taken ownership for the
bad economy.
Why our very own "Republican" Presidential candidate would take
every opportunity to tell anyone that would listen that Obama inherited
a bad situation, inherited from whom?
There is only one inference that can be drawn from that, Obama inherited it from Bush and the GOP.
So now the GOP is going to be the adults again and is for the 'good' of the
country and in the spirit of bi-partisanship agree to raise taxes.
The are in effect going to be the ones held responsible for raising taxes.
It's just so fucking stupid, it really is.
Posted by: General Woundwort at November 27, 2012 03:22 AM (RrD4h)
Posted by: Museisluse at November 27, 2012 07:19 AM (SsWgR)
If memory serves it goes from the VP to the Speaker of the House to the President pro-temp of the Senate and then through the Cabinet departments by seniority.
So she would be right behind either Harry Reid or Timmy Geitner. (can't remember if State or Treasury is senior).
A real sh*t sandwich in either case.
Posted by: Nighthawk at November 27, 2012 03:23 AM (RSqz2)
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 03:25 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: Thorvald at November 27, 2012 03:25 AM (1V6Pv)
/hardy har har, "consitutionally eligible"
Posted by: panzernashorn at November 27, 2012 03:26 AM (BAnPT)
No real conservative is signing on to these tax increases. So far it is only the RINOs.
Yesterday, the MFM was sympathetic to Boner. Poor dear is being squeezed by those to whom he made his "no new taxes" pledge and 12 GOP stalwarts who said they will not, under any circumstances vote for new taxes. He knows he'll be embarrassed if he goes along with the donks only to be owned by members of his own party.
What to do, what to do?
Posted by: RushBabe at November 27, 2012 03:27 AM (tQHzJ)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Wonders what Dagny thinks at November 27, 2012 03:28 AM (3Y7RV)
Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 07:25 AM (YdQQY)
The whole line of succession is something that the IMPEACH!!!111!!! crowd should look at very carefully.
Be careful what you wish for...
Posted by: Nighthawk at November 27, 2012 03:28 AM (RSqz2)
If we are ever in a situation where 4th in line is necessary the republic is in effect over, so I don't think we would get as far as 5th let alone 17th.
Posted by: General Woundwort at November 27, 2012 03:28 AM (RrD4h)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Wonders what Dagny thinks at November 27, 2012 03:29 AM (3Y7RV)
Posted by: Thorvald at November 27, 2012 03:30 AM (1V6Pv)
Posted by: beach at November 27, 2012 03:31 AM (LpQbZ)
Hugely 15%
Marginally 27%
Zero 59%
http://www.jerrydoyle.com/poll-archives
Posted by: panzernashorn at November 27, 2012 03:31 AM (BAnPT)
on taxes.
Posted by: General Woundwort at November 27, 2012 07:00 AM (RrD4h)
Good. The tax pledge was stupid. And the voters voted for higher taxes. Why the hell should conservatives keep taking the political bullet to protect voters from their bad decisions?
Posted by: Jon (not the troll) at November 27, 2012 03:34 AM (E8Ag4)
Posted by: soothsayer at November 27, 2012 03:35 AM (i/uD6)
Taking bets, sooner than later the DHS Secretary will be legislated to the top of that list.
DHS building is spending billions to not yet construct, btw.
Posted by: panzernashorn at November 27, 2012 03:36 AM (BAnPT)
Posted by: Jon (not the troll) at November 27, 2012 07:34 AM (E8Ag4)
Because we're the only ones who pay the consequences for those decisions.
On that cheery note, I'm off to work where I'll be stuck in depositions all day. Bah humbug.
Posted by: alexthechick at November 27, 2012 03:36 AM (Gk3SS)
I paid over 40,000 in taxes last year, I'M TAXED ENOUGH!
I'm paying my fucking fair share pal and then some.
Posted by: General Woundwort at November 27, 2012 03:37 AM (RrD4h)
That from the idiots with no memory of 2010 results.
"The voters voted" WHICH voters voted for that?
NOT I.
Posted by: panzernashorn at November 27, 2012 03:37 AM (BAnPT)
NYTimes reporter David Carr either doesn't know that "Al Aqsa TV" is a designated terrorist organization or doesn't want NYTimes readers to know. Either is journalistic malpractice. Carr penned a piece in yesterday's paper claiming that Israel was targeting journalists simply because Al Aqsa terrorists had spray painted "TV" on their car.
Hell, if Israel would send soldiers over here and blow every van labeled “TV” or “News” to hell, I’d convert in a heartbeat.
Good morning, ‘rons and ‘ronettes. Thanks, Gabe and Vic for the news. Frankly, you’re better men than I am. Just reading the THC thread is depressing enough; imagine how depressing it is finding content for it!
TodayÂ’s story concerns the actor Ralph Bellamy. You probably know him best as FDR in the movie Sunrise at Campobello and in the mini-series The Winds of War or as the evil doctor in RosemaryÂ’s Baby.
He was hired by Columbia Pictures in 1932 for the movie Forbidden, but after signing, Columbia head Harry Cohn insisted that Bellamy also make another movie – I can’t find the name, but it was apparently a “sea dog” movie that the studio remade every few years under a different name. Since shooting on the sea movie ended the day before shooting on Forbidden began, Bellamy asked for a stand-in.
“What the hell is this?” Cohn screamed when he was told. “You New York actors, always wanting a stand-in!” Bellamy tried to explain that to do justice to either part, a stand-in was essential, but Cohn wouldn’t listen. The two men argued bitterly, with a number of good old Anglo-Saxon expressions being traded during the discussion. Finally, Cohn gave in. “OK, you can have your stand-in, but on one condition. Don’t tell Jack Holt!” (Jack Holt was under contract to Columbia and made scores of pictures under very tight schedules).
A year later, Bellamy was under contract at Columbia. This was before the formation of the Screen Actors Guild, so there was no set time for starting or stopping a shoot. Bellamy – who had a number of films under his belt by this time – noted that a lot of his fellow actors had begun quitting at six o’clock. Well, if anybody has the right to do that, I do, Bellamy thought, and he did.
A few days later, Cohn summoned Bellamy to his office. “What the hell is this?” Cohn screamed. “You New York actors, walking off a set!” Once again, the two men launched into a shouting match. Finally, Bellamy said, “Harry, if that’s the way it is, you can tear up my contract!”
That quieted Cohn down. He sat back in his chair and muttered, “All right, you can quit at six o’clock, on one condition. Don’t tell Jack Holt!”
“I was at Columbia for five years,” Bellamy later said. “And in all that time, I never even saw Jack Holt.”
Hope you all have a wonderful day.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at November 27, 2012 03:38 AM (zF6Iw)
That's good. /almost like Rand's Galt.
Posted by: panzernashorn at November 27, 2012 03:41 AM (BAnPT)
Posted by: soothsayer at November 27, 2012 03:41 AM (i/uD6)
Posted by: pep at November 27, 2012 03:41 AM (YXmuI)
Posted by: soothsayer at November 27, 2012 03:43 AM (i/uD6)
Posted by: Thorvald at November 27, 2012 03:43 AM (1V6Pv)
Posted by: panzernashorn at November 27, 2012 03:44 AM (BAnPT)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 27, 2012 03:46 AM (XkWWK)
Posted by: panzernashorn at November 27, 2012 03:47 AM (BAnPT)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 27, 2012 03:48 AM (5DR1j)
McShame: "My friends, I have met with Susan Rice ans found her to be an accomplished, skilled, articulate, and, most of all black, woman of unquestionable integrity. Obviously, when I previously expressed concerns about her incompetence, I meant there is no doubt as to her competence. You have nothing to fear from a Susan Rice in any conceivable office President Obama chooses to
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD (for the Children) at November 27, 2012 03:48 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Libra at November 27, 2012 03:50 AM (kd8U8)
Posted by: pep at November 27, 2012 07:41 AM (YXmuI)
The problem here is that you are expecting R Senators to have principles (and spines).
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD (for the Children) at November 27, 2012 03:50 AM (Cnqmv)
I think we are being lied to by our gov't betters ....
"If you get all 364 items repeated throughout "The Twelve Days of Christmas" carol, youÂ’ll pay 6.1 percent more this year, according to the so-called Christmas Price Index that PNC Wealth Management of Pittsburgh updates annually.
That comes to $107,300.
"The rise is larger than expected considering the modest economic growth weÂ’ve had," said Jim Dunigan, managing executive of investments for PNC. He noted the governmentÂ’s Consumer Price Index had risen just 2 percent in the 12 months before September." (Kevin Begos, The Associated Press)
Actual inflation is 300% greater than is being stated!
Torches and pitchfork time baby.
Posted by: Sophistahick at November 27, 2012 03:50 AM (UhXzR)
Posted by: Sexypig at November 27, 2012 03:50 AM (jvRxT)
Posted by: sTevo at November 27, 2012 03:51 AM (YSd1Q)
That's not going to happen as long as the Dems are able to divide white voters along class lines.
Which they will continue to easily do, as long as the GOP sticks to the absolutist position of never raising taxes on millionaires by a single penny, ever.
Posted by: Jon (not the troll) at November 27, 2012 03:53 AM (E8Ag4)
If your tax rate isn't 110%, you aren't paying your fair share! I have important cronies and bundlers that need those federal grants.
Posted by: Barky Ochooma at November 27, 2012 03:53 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Sexypig at November 27, 2012 03:53 AM (jvRxT)
If your only reason to oppose stealing more of the wealth I create is the purely "practical" reason of "the economy," then you are not sufficiently grounded in Conservatism.
I'll take it, because it's better than what the other side wants to do to me, but until Politicians as a class remember and publicly recognize that taxation is seizure of the People's wealth, and that an income tax is (philosophically) especially odious, they will, indeed, sell us down the river at the first opportunity.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 27, 2012 03:53 AM (5DR1j)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 27, 2012 03:54 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Wonders what Dagny thinks at November 27, 2012 03:55 AM (3Y7RV)
Absolutely. I'm going to bang this drum for a while: we don't live in a post-racial society, but we do need new terms for our screwed up concepts of race.
I've been batting around the idea of calling it a hyper-racial/post-racist society, in that white people are so worried about being called racist that they are hypersensitive about it, and blacks, latinos, etc will exploit this hyper-racial thinking to their advantage.
Posted by: BurtTC at November 27, 2012 03:56 AM (BeSEI)
And if they won't, it will be absolutely clear where the problem lies. The GOP then says, ok, we'll offer our budget, with no tax increases. Call us when you're serious.
Posted by: pep at November 27, 2012 03:56 AM (YXmuI)
That from the idiots with no memory of 2010 results.
"The voters voted" WHICH voters voted for that?
NOT I.
Posted by: panzernashorn at November 27, 2012 07:37 AM (BAnPT)
Ah, yes WHICH voters voted for higher taxes? Not the ones who are paying taxes now, that's for sure.
Allowing people who do not pay taxes to vote is what is ruining this nation.
I pre-denounce myself for your convenience.
Posted by: Nighthawk at November 27, 2012 03:56 AM (RSqz2)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 27, 2012 03:56 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Truman North at November 27, 2012 03:57 AM (I2LwF)
Posted by: Sexypig at November 27, 2012 03:58 AM (jvRxT)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 27, 2012 03:58 AM (piMMO)
NDH, Homes are not an investment. Theyt are a good that is consumed.
Why should I subsidize anyone's home especially some mcmansion?
Regarding stabilizing and whatnot, there exist laws that require structures to be of certain quality and owners want to maintain properties. No further incentive required.
Posted by: Sophistahick at November 27, 2012 03:59 AM (UhXzR)
Posted by: Truman North at November 27, 2012 04:01 AM (I2LwF)
Posted by: Thorvald at November 27, 2012 04:01 AM (1V6Pv)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Wonders what Dagny thinks at November 27, 2012 04:02 AM (3Y7RV)
Posted by: Thorvald at November 27, 2012 04:02 AM (1V6Pv)
Posted by: Jean at November 27, 2012 04:02 AM (UIE9v)
The interest deduction is a huge incentive for home ownership.
Why not just rent instead of own, no property taxes, no maintenance costs for upkeep, no HOA fees etc...
Once again the gov. always goes for those who work hard to accomplish things first, and those who voted for obama and don't own a home will go for this big time, another way to even the playing field.
Because it's not fair, and we won so shut up.
Posted by: spypeach at November 27, 2012 04:03 AM (pwTow)
Posted by: Thorvald at November 27, 2012 04:03 AM (1V6Pv)
The ironic thing is that my McMansion is mostly paid for, and I'm hit with AMT anyway, so losing the deduction doesn't really hurt me, other than to tank the market. I'm not moving, so even that is fine by me. My point is that Obama's "soak the rich" strategy will end up hurting young homebuyers while leaving prosperous older folks like me relatively untouched. IOW, more income redistribution from young to old.
Posted by: pep at November 27, 2012 04:03 AM (YXmuI)
Posted by: Sexypig at November 27, 2012 04:03 AM (jvRxT)
In the election cycles since Reagan the GOP has pushed 'middle of the road' Republicans' if not out right RINO's that never represented conservative idea's.
Call me when they nominate a real conservative, otherwise I'm not going to bother showing up to do anything.
McRino, then Mittens?
Fuck that.
Posted by: Gmac at November 27, 2012 04:04 AM (IanLz)
Posted by: Jean at November 27, 2012 04:05 AM (UIE9v)
I actually think you're both right.
As Conservatives, our first reaction to raising taxes on anyone should be (as Vic so often points out) "We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem."
On the other hand, raising income tax rates on "the rich" is very politically expedient, and the Takers will vote for anyone who promises to do so- especially if that person also promises to give them more free stuff.
We have to accept that reality while also working to change it.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 27, 2012 04:05 AM (5DR1j)
Let It Burn would be far preferable to what they will acquiesce to.
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD (for the Children) at November 27, 2012 04:07 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: BCochran1981 at November 27, 2012 04:08 AM (6gk77)
Posted by: Sexypig at November 27, 2012 04:08 AM (jvRxT)
Posted by: Thorvald at November 27, 2012 04:09 AM (1V6Pv)
Posted by: Jon (not the troll) at November 27, 2012 04:10 AM (E8Ag4)
Posted by: Sexypig at November 27, 2012 04:11 AM (jvRxT)
Now you are just being stupid. That's as bad as trying to throw the SoCons out the party, and for roughly the same reasons.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 27, 2012 04:12 AM (5DR1j)
Posted by: Sexypig at November 27, 2012 04:13 AM (jvRxT)
Posted by: toby928© for TB at November 27, 2012 04:13 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: Sexypig at November 27, 2012 04:14 AM (jvRxT)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Wonders what Dagny thinks at November 27, 2012 04:15 AM (3Y7RV)
Two problems with that: who determines Net Worth (which is what I'm guessing you'd be taxing), and how do you prevent the ultra-rich from hiding their assets?
Remember, despite bringing in millions upon millions of dollars, very few Hollywood movies ever "break even." On paper. It's not actually all that hard to make it look like you have much less wealth than you do.
Possible problem: If my net worth is negative, do I get a rebate?
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 27, 2012 04:15 AM (5DR1j)
Pretty sure toby928 is using it to point out the hypocrisy of the ultra-rich leftists. People like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet don't have very big incomes- they live off their investments.
However, their "wealth" (or Net Worth) is in the billions. If you started taxing them on their Net Worth in addition to their income, they'd start screaming.
Just until they could divest themselves (on paper) of all their own assets. Or expatriate.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 27, 2012 04:18 AM (5DR1j)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 27, 2012 08:15 AM (5DR1j)
Obviously you aren't working hard enough comrade!
You need to get off your butt and get that blog up and running so we can tax that too.
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD (for the Children) at November 27, 2012 04:21 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Thorvald at November 27, 2012 04:23 AM (1V6Pv)
Either is journalistic malpractice.
I have to respond to this before reading Vic's news dump....(which i enjoy, thank's Vic!)
Journalists are the enemy. We are at war over the future of our children. There can be no 'malpractice' when your enemy has no honor, no shame, nor morals. The media fights for the opposition. The sooner we realize this and fight the enemy where they are, the better. I have been calling for widespread picketing (at the very least) of the media for several years. 'Jounalistic malpractice'. Spit.
Posted by: Cicero Kid at November 27, 2012 04:23 AM (OOML8)
Posted by: Eisenhorn at November 27, 2012 04:25 AM (OjQYm)
Posted by: uterus cannon at November 27, 2012 04:26 AM (3ZtZW)
Homeownership is good for society at large.
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 27, 2012 07:54 AM (piMMO)
well sure, but that doesn't necessarily mean homeowners should get a special tax break.
Incidentally, there are already tax incentives for first time home buyers (e.g., the retirement account trick for getting a down payment) that ought to be under consideration as well.
Posted by: chemjeff at November 27, 2012 04:27 AM (d/5qf)
Posted by: In Cognito at November 27, 2012 04:29 AM (HEWhR)
http://tinyurl.com/bwz5x7k
Posted by: chemjeff at November 27, 2012 04:29 AM (d/5qf)
Posted by: Butters at November 27, 2012 04:29 AM (NIZHJ)
Posted by: Butters at November 27, 2012 04:30 AM (NIZHJ)
Is there any feasible way at all to get the income tax amendment repealed?
sigh, don't bother answering, I already know the answer
Posted by: chemjeff at November 27, 2012 04:31 AM (d/5qf)
Posted by: Thorvald at November 27, 2012 04:31 AM (1V6Pv)
-
Right. And then it'll have to fight to prevent Whites being further reduced as a share of the population, otherwise it'll eventually have to win 110% of the White vote.
88 That's not going to happen as long as the Dems are able to divide white voters along class lines.
-
Right. I've suggested policy ideas (like ending affirmative action) that no White has any real interest in opposing.
88 Which they will continue to easily do, as long as the GOP sticks to the absolutist position of never raising taxes on millionaires by a single penny, ever.
-
Right. Which is another reason why Instapundit's tax ideas are great.
http://tinyurl.com/ceubb3c
http://tinyurl.com/bo69dp5
In addition to their major obvious benefits they would serve as a signal that the Republican Party is prepared to increase some taxes under the right circumstances - but that in doing do it's not prepared to play the liberal game of gutting right wing constituencies while leaving the longstanding privileges of left wing constituencies untouched and sacrosanct.
Right now, the Republican Party is not trusted on taxes, or a wide variety of issues, in either an ideological sense or the more important practical sense. It is not trusted to hold the line on principles it supposedly upholds. It is not trusted to play politics as though winning mattered more to the party elite than restricting who gets to be a political real player. And mainly it is rightly not trusted to favor the interests and prospects of the party's mass base of support.
On immigration, the Republican Party would clearly love to sell out its supporters (in the vain hope of getting new supporters), on social and moral issues also, and on taxes the party can't be trusted to play to win politically, to hold down taxes as the party that supposedly hews to greater economic rationality, or to protect its supporters while insisting that its real enemies and the blatantly corrupt bite the "austerity" bullet first.
For the party to be more than a fake opposition that diverts frustration against Washington into a useless channel, that has to change.
Posted by: The Lightworker at November 27, 2012 04:32 AM (4qa9e)
Posted by: Butters at November 27, 2012 04:32 AM (NIZHJ)
Posted by: chemjeff at November 27, 2012 04:33 AM (d/5qf)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 27, 2012 04:34 AM (XkWWK)
Posted by: Thorvald at November 27, 2012 04:35 AM (1V6Pv)
Posted by: little miss spellcheck at November 27, 2012 04:37 AM (a5ljo)
http://tinyurl.com/bwt8zde
He's just right on all these issues. Do people think he's joking? He's not joking, he's correct; morally, practically and politically.
Posted by: The Lightworker at November 27, 2012 04:37 AM (eh6pt)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 27, 2012 04:40 AM (5DR1j)
Posted by: Thorvald at November 27, 2012 04:42 AM (1V6Pv)
Posted by: Eisenhorn at November 27, 2012 08:25 AM (OjQYm)
If your father is still of sound mind have him deed his home and/or land to you upon his death and have your name added to his bank/money market/investment accounts. Doing a TOD for any vehicles is easy. He can make the maximum annual monetary gifts to family members to reduce his net worth. My dad did all of this before his death, and this worked out very well for my brothers and me.
Posted by: MoKim at November 27, 2012 04:43 AM (kprEX)
watch out for the stepped-up basis
Posted by: chemjeff at November 27, 2012 04:45 AM (d/5qf)
Yeah, let's build the damned fence.
Posted by: Fritz at November 27, 2012 04:47 AM (/ZZCn)
Posted by: Eisenhorn at November 27, 2012 04:50 AM (OjQYm)
Posted by: Truman North at November 27, 2012 04:53 AM (I2LwF)
Despite the warnings of history and those who have lived under its iron fist, communism has come to America, and the useful idiots who dumbly adore the Communist-in-Chief, Barack Obama (or whatever his name is), are gladly and stupidly drinking the kool-aid of ignorance in embracing that deadly and dead-end ideology. Even the Russians can see this!
Posted by: Diogenes at November 27, 2012 04:54 AM (e8kgV)
Posted by: Occupies at November 27, 2012 04:55 AM (ZRoGl)
Posted by: Nighthawk at November 27, 2012 07:56 AM (RSqz2)
I agree. When the MFM was bleating that California voted to raise taxes to "fix" its financial problems they never considered those who voted to raise taxes don't pay them. If you are on cradle to grave welfare. No vote
Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 27, 2012 04:56 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: Butters at November 27, 2012 04:57 AM (NIZHJ)
Posted by: Winston Smith (Islam edition) at November 27, 2012 04:57 AM (yE98L)
Isn't that Boston Community Organizer College? If not, it should be.
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD (for the Children) at November 27, 2012 05:00 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Butters at November 27, 2012 08:59 AM (NIZHJ)
That's over there. Here it is called the New York Times.
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD (for the Children) at November 27, 2012 05:01 AM (Cnqmv)
My only problem with the National Sales Tax is that the 16th Amendment is still in effect. Which means that, even if Republicans successfully implemented an NST, it either would in addition to the income tax.
Until the 16th has been repealed, we're stuck with an income tax. Which is why I'm on the Flat Tax side. Though, if the political realities change and we can actually get the 16th repealed, I'd totally be for the NST.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 27, 2012 05:01 AM (5DR1j)
************************************************
Secretary of State is 4th in line in the Presidential succession, not 3rd:
1. Vice President
2. Speaker of the House
3. President pro tempore of the Senate
4. Secretary of State
Posted by: angienc at November 27, 2012 05:02 AM (w3JGl)
Posted by: Butters at November 27, 2012 05:03 AM (NIZHJ)
Here you go:
http://tinyurl.com/d8n7usg
Posted by: comatus at November 27, 2012 05:04 AM (qaVK+)
The transition phase is one of the primary reasons why nothing will happen until a catastrophic economic event occurs. Nothing that the socialist redistributionist weasels in DC (of both persuasions) have almost never supported ending a tax, the hope of getting to an NST without being screwed even worse is small.
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD (for the Children) at November 27, 2012 05:05 AM (Cnqmv)
She enrolled later that year as a PhD student in the war studies department of KingÂ’s College London, where her military leadership research focused largely on Petraeus, according to BroadwellÂ’s profile on the school website. But four years on, Broadwell remains far from earning her degree, according to the department chairman, and her relationship with the subject of her research could jeopardize her progress toward a doctorate.
“We have a very stringent ethical review process,” said Mervyn Frost, head of the war studies department. “We found nothing wrong with her original proposal, but in light of what’s happened now, I suspect we’ll revisit that process.”
One of BroadwellÂ’s former professors at Harvard described her as a self-promoter who would routinely show up at office hours.
“It was very much, ‘I’m here and you’re going to know I’m here,’ ” said the professor, who did not want to be identified because of the sensitivity of ongoing investigations. “She was not someone you would think of as a critical thinker. I don’t remember anything about her as a student. I remember her as a personality.”
The professor said when Petraeus chose Broadwell to write his biography, there was shock among the national security faculty at Harvard because “she just didn’t have the background — the academic background, the national security background, or the writing background.”
A second Harvard faculty member who knows Broadwell and Petraeus had similar misgivings.
Posted by: Diogenes at November 27, 2012 05:05 AM (e8kgV)
Posted by: Justamom at November 27, 2012 05:06 AM (Sptt8)
A second Harvard faculty member who knows Broadwell and Petraeus had similar misgivings.
Posted by: Diogenes at November 27, 2012 09:05 AM (e8kgV)
Boink, boink!
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD (for the Children) at November 27, 2012 05:07 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at November 27, 2012 05:08 AM (79ueO)
Posted by: Butters at November 27, 2012 09:07 AM (NIZHJ)
It's old, gamey, bitter, and white!
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD (for the Children) at November 27, 2012 05:09 AM (Cnqmv)
**************************************************
As God is my witness, I will walk over my own tongue before I refer to illegal immigrants as "undocumented workers" or any other PC euphemism.
Remember George Orwell's concept of "Newspeak" in 1984? Redefining and/or destroying words to dumb down the population? Yeah -- I'm done playing along with that.
Posted by: angienc at November 27, 2012 05:09 AM (w3JGl)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at November 27, 2012 05:10 AM (xAtAj)
Posted by: uterus cannon at November 27, 2012 05:11 AM (3ZtZW)
In a New York Times editorial printed on Monday, Buffett suggested Congress move immediately to implement minimum taxes of 30 percent on incomes of $1 million to $10 million and 35 percent above that.
"A plain and simple rule like that will block the efforts of lobbyists, lawyers and contribution-hungry legislators to keep the ultra rich paying rates well below those incurred by people with income just a tiny fraction of ours," Buffett wrote.
"Only a minimum tax on very high incomes will prevent the stated tax rate from being eviscerated by these warriors for the wealthy," he added.
Fine, let's hit this asshole with a 99% tax rate and see how much he lectures us on how higher taxes
Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 27, 2012 05:11 AM (1Jaio)
1) End withholding. Employers can put a line "Suggested Tax Amount" on your pay check to help you know how much to sock away, but it's up to you to write that big check at the beginning of the year.
Then, once people are fed up with how much they're paying...
2) Flat tax. Yes, this will actually raise taxes on the lowest incomes. If you make $1,000, I want $150 (that's 15%, I don't think that's completely unreasonable). At this point, knowing how much to sock away is easy. It's still up to you to write that check at the beginning of the year.
At this point, it becomes necessary to cut spending in a serious way.
Once the lowest incomes are angry about paying income taxes...
3) Repeal the 16th Amendment. Create a system of levies (taxes on trade between states) and duties (taxes on foreign imports/exports) and possibly a National Sales Tax.
At this point, it is virtually impossible for the Federal Government to tax "enough" to maintain all of it's unconstitutional programs, and they can begin being abolished as well.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 27, 2012 05:12 AM (5DR1j)
Ticket scalpers had to add a VAT to scalped Rolling Stones tickets.
What "value" does a ticket scalper add to anything?
Posted by: Winston Smith (Islam edition) at November 27, 2012 05:12 AM (yE98L)
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."
...I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody...
Posted by: Where have all the good times gone at November 27, 2012 05:13 AM (n2vS6)
"You have a hobo wrapped around your bumper! That's illegal!"
"ZOMG, I'm teh offended! You are just biased against my lifestyle! BIGOT!"
Posted by: uterus cannon at November 27, 2012 05:13 AM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: Justamom at November 27, 2012 05:13 AM (Sptt8)
Would you like some revenue with that? Would you like some workplace violence? Would you like fair taxation? Wouldn't you like to save money by eliminating fraud and waste in government? Would you like affordable care so that everyone is insured? Would you like a peace dividend? Would you like to end the BUSH tax cuts?
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD (for the Children) at November 27, 2012 05:14 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Butters at November 27, 2012 05:15 AM (NIZHJ)
“There is a huge difference between increasing tax rates — which costs jobs — and increasing tax revenue through tax reform,” says a Boehner aide.
The difference being -- what exactly?
Either way, capital is pulled out of the free market and given to the government to distribute for patronage.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at November 27, 2012 05:17 AM (kdS6q)
>>>Once the lowest incomes are angry about paying income taxes...
OK but you're assuming that anger would be rational and solved via polls, lobbying, voting, and legislative change.
Posted by: uterus cannon at November 27, 2012 05:17 AM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: Thorvald at November 27, 2012 05:18 AM (1V6Pv)
The number of people being paid over $10M on a W-2 can probably be counted on less than 5 fingers.
Posted by: Winston Smith (Islam edition) at November 27, 2012 05:18 AM (yE98L)
Posted by: Gmac at November 27, 2012 05:20 AM (IanLz)
Time. I don't have to stand in line for hours, months in advance.
Opportunity. Game/Concert/Whatever sold out? Go see a ticket scalper. Yes, you pay more, but you've got those seats you promised your kid.
And if cost (additional price) of the utility provided is higher than you're willing to pay, you don't have to buy them.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 27, 2012 05:20 AM (5DR1j)
Posted by: Butters at November 27, 2012 05:21 AM (NIZHJ)
Trillion dollar deficits solved!
Oh, wait, no, it's just more tinkering at the edges for reasons of "fairness".
Buffet should put his money where his mouth is and cut a check to the Treasury if he thinks he's not paying enough.
Posted by: Waterhouse at November 27, 2012 05:22 AM (4Lo/K)
The concerts were NOT sold out. There were hundreds of empty seats. Apparently there was a point at which people just said "no".
Posted by: Winston Smith (Islam edition) at November 27, 2012 05:23 AM (yE98L)
Taxation is not about morality, but we should be about morality in taxation.
Taxation is not about supporting one economic activity over another, but that's what they do- and that reality must be acknowledged and dealt with.
You're right that taxation is about the government confiscating money from the populace to fund its operations. And that's what people have to understand.
The current paradigm is established based on money coming from the Government (the only way you could describe any tax cut or tax exemption/credit/deduction as "lost revenue"). We have to change that.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 27, 2012 05:24 AM (5DR1j)
First official synopsis is out for the next Trek film, Star Trek Into Darkness:
"When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis.
With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction.
As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew."
Detonated the fleet did they? The miscreants!
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at November 27, 2012 05:25 AM (kdS6q)
Then you shouldn't have had to buy from the scalpers at all- you could have purchased at the ticket window.
And, like any form of "grey market" ticket scalping is prone to failure in any particular instance. It's entirely possible that all of the tickets can be purchased by scalpers, and then everyone is forced to pay a higher price, or not go.
But, as often as not, scalpers actually do provide value- even if you, personally, don't believe the additional utility is worth the additional cost.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 27, 2012 05:27 AM (5DR1j)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 27, 2012 05:28 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Winston Smith (Islam edition) at November 27, 2012 05:28 AM (yE98L)
Taxes punish activity. It is a moral force, whatever that moral principle may be.
Taxes are also forcible theft, one which we accept as a reality. A necessary evil. Is it evil to take more than the federal govt really needs?
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at November 27, 2012 05:28 AM (xAtAj)
First official synopsis is out for the next Trek film, Star Trek Into Darkness:
Sounds like my first be-sure-to-miss-it movie of the season.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at November 27, 2012 05:29 AM (zF6Iw)
***************************************************
Exactly -- it's gotten so ridiculous I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
I'm exhausted by how stupid everyone is getting.
Posted by: angienc at November 27, 2012 05:30 AM (w3JGl)
First step to tax reform, and why Boehner is right, is to eliminate all refundable credits.
Posted by: Mallamutt
Given Ford initiated, Reagan expanded, and Republicans since haven't been adverse to more growth in the Earned Income Credit, that's off the table.
Think that's most of the meat on that bone.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at November 27, 2012 05:32 AM (kdS6q)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 27, 2012 05:46 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Truman North at November 27, 2012 05:48 AM (I2LwF)
If getting Keystone approved fucks Buffet in the ass, it should be a top priority.
Posted by: Winston Smith (Islam edition) at November 27, 2012 05:51 AM (yE98L)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 27, 2012 06:16 AM (piMMO)
For 15 years, teachers in three Southern states paid Clarence Mumford Sr. — himself a longtime educator — to send someone else to take the tests in their place, authorities said. Each time, Mumford received a fee of between $1,500 and $3,000 to send one of his test ringers with fake identification to the Praxis exam. In return, his customers got a passing grade and began their careers as cheaters, according to federal prosecutors in Memphis.
Authorities say the scheme affected hundreds — if not thousands — of public school students who ended up being taught by unqualified instructors.
Posted by: Diogenes at November 27, 2012 06:20 AM (e8kgV)
The smart play would simply be to let the Bush tax cuts expire, blame Obama, and then pass a bill in the House that lowers rates and put the ball back in Obama and Harry Reid's court. If they shoot it down, pass another one until Americans get the idea of who's really for higher taxes on the middle class.
Posted by: McAdams at November 27, 2012 06:31 AM (o90Z3)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2266 seconds, 341 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: Vic at November 27, 2012 02:47 AM (YdQQY)