Hope and Change Obama Style

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

again, you didn't answer the questions: how is a children's book an example of "chicago politics", and why do you express outrage that a) the publisher is paying the writer and b) the writer is authoring a book?

edit:the bush's childrens book "net proceeds" went to two charities, but both laura and her daughter have been paid for other multi-million $ book deals, one for laura's memoirs.

seems you are just against anything obama all the time regardless.

if he rescued a kid who was about to be hit by a car you would express outrage that he screwed with the driver's right to drive their car....

Just for you.. Chicago Politics was just a toss-out line...of course there are no politics involved in this affair....Just tackiness.

[alexamenos]

I just saw a clip of some sanctimonious congressman saying that the tax on the bonus was justifiable because the money should be returned to its rightful owners....

....the taxpayers!

That's wonderful news. I wonder when we'll receive our refund checks.

[dude1394]

Nice...I'm so happy that Obama is going to take 90% of those multi-millionaires' bonuses who screwed AIG and the taxpayers.

You know..those multi-millionaires who make 125K. Rich bastards..

TARP Bonus- For purposes of this section--

(1) IN GENERAL- The term ‘TARP bonus’ means, with respect to any individual for any taxable year, the lesser of--

(A) the aggregate disqualified bonus payments received from covered TARP recipients during such taxable year, or

(B) the excess of--

(i) the adjusted gross income of the taxpayer for such taxable year, over

(ii) $250,000 ($125,000 in the case of a married individual filing a separate return).

[Mavdog]

odd, but when I look at the sponsors of the hr 1586 it doesn't have obama's name anywhere on it....and I've never read that obama asked for this new tax, unless you have a quote that says different.

oh yeah, I forgot, according to the right everything that congress does is tied to the president. every item in every bill, right? obama "owns it" if congress passes it and he signs the bill, correct?

[dude1394]

Gosh what an adoring fan. Is he going to sign it, is he demagoguing(sp) these bonuses everywhere he speaks.

Is there nothing that he's responsible for? Will he not be responsible for any bill that he signs?

Now we are going to divorce obama from his own party so that he can be absolved blame.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

Gosh what an adoring fan. Is he going to sign it, is he demagoguing(sp) these bonuses everywhere he speaks.

Is there nothing that he's responsible for? Will he not be responsible for any bill that he signs?

Now we are going to divorce obama from his own party so that he can be absolved blame.

it is interestng to see that you fail to respond to the simple quesion- is the president responsible for every item congress puts into the bills that the president signs.

your sidestepping the question is due to the answer- no, the president doesn't "own" (as you put it) items that he didn't promote or ask for.

so no, obama doesn't get the "blame" for these punitive taxes on the bonuses paid to tarp recipients.

as for if it is demogaugery, don't see that he crossed the line. if he did promote the tax in his speeches I'd agree it was, yet all he spoke to was the audacity of aig paying bomuses to employees with the monies that were given to keep them solvent.

I've got no problem with bonuses, but to pay bonuses to executives who made such poor decisions that the compnay almost was destroyed seems to not provide accountibility.

and I do not want 90% taxes retroactively applied to that compensation.

[92bDad]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

it is interestng to see that you fail to respond to the simple quesion- is the president responsible for every item congress puts into the bills that the president signs.

.

He's as responsible for the things that happen under his administration as the last President was responsible for Acting on intelligence of WMD's.

Ultimately as President these men have to either enjoy the benefits of others making sound decisions, or suffer the consequences of blame.

Seems to me, that the current President is having a fairly eventful blame tenure so far...perhaps he should rethink the type of people he surrounds himself with...of course the perception of him being an empty suit is starting to look a bit more genuine as an assessment.

Exactly who is pulling his strings?

[dude1394]

Now THIS he will be very good at. No doubt.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123792991709930321.html

WASHINGTON -- The White House said it would launch a search for new tax revenues, as Congressional leaders moved to scale back proposed spending increases and tax cuts in President Barack Obama's ambitious budget.

The budget blueprint estimates a federal deficit of $1.75 trillion for 2009.

The Obama administration plans to create a task force to consider elimination of corporate loopholes and subsidies, tougher enforcement against tax avoidance, and tax simplification, White House Budget Director Peter Orszag said late Tuesday.

[92bDad]

While everyone else in the world is in the process of cutting back budgets...the Obama government continues to increase spending.

Why doesn't the Obama Government believe it has a duty to cut back on spending rather than finding new ways to increase taxing by basically stealing money from the American people?

Why are some people more outraged at Big Business bonus than they are at the Obama Big Government Bonuses being handed out to these companies?

When are people going to be outraged at all the handouts to companies...keep in mind those handouts are being paid by you and I, the People!!!

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by 92bDad

He's as responsible for the things that happen under his administration

ok, then you must support the statement that bush is totally responsible for the economic mess the usa finds itself in today.

[92bDad]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

ok, then you must support the statement that bush is totally responsible for the economic mess the usa finds itself in today.

Okay, sure...along with every other politician (Representatives & Senators) that served during those years.

For that matter, we see a tie back to the Clinton years, heck back to Bush Sr, Reagan and Carter...so I believe that ALL of them are responsible.

Since they are all gone and out of office, nothing they did can change their legacy...but there are some in office today, who are completely missing the boat.

These are the ones we should be focused on. Obama is responsible for the current mess. His administration, his congress. They need to stop the spending/bail out frenzy...make the tough choices to cut the budget...or we need to start electing people who do what they say, rather than say whate they believe we want to hear.

By the way, The last administration also helped to bring freedom to the Nation of Iraq, as well as provide security to Americans throughout the globe.

He inherited a mess in terms of National Defense and he as well as the nation paid dearly for it on 9/11...he acted swiftly to fix those mistakes...the mistakes that were made under the Clinton administration while Clinton was too busy staining intern dresses. It was under Clinton that the Intel capability of the USA was seriously damaged and thus lead to the 9/11 attack. Bush worked hard to rebuild this capability, even if Dems continued to road block his efforts.

But why do I bother conversing with you...I believe there is a Biblical verse that says something about not casting pearls before swine. So go on, continue being swine...when you are willing to face the reality of how poorly the Democrats govern, then perhaps your eyes will be opened the truth and reality.

Take care my friend...it's time for me to keep working on being a good American and bailing out our country through my own hard work...hopefully one that Obama wont steal from my income...

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by 92bDad

Okay, sure...along with every other politician (Representatives & Senators) that served during those years.

ok, and then you say

Obama is responsible for the current mess.

that is called "talking out of both sides of your mouth", and it's not a complimentary phrase btw.

[92bDad]

You might be right...so let me rephrase...Obama and this Current Administration and Congress.

By the way, Obama was a Senator in the last administration...hmmmm And he was involved with the biggest culprate of this crisis...ACORN...see a pattern yet???

Best of luck to you and your views...obviously there is no point that will change your perception of reality. It's truly misfortunate, I believe you could be a great assett for the American people, but instead you choose to support those who aim to destroy this nation.

This is not about winning a debate or an argument...but rather it's about how this country will come out of the tragic turn of events caused by the Democratic party.

Complain about the Patriot Act all you want...this administration is doing it's worst to break America into a dependant nation...if all citizens are dependant on the government then they are no longer free.

No money is not freedom, but take away the peoples ability to earn their own keep and make them rely on the government for necessities, and you have yourself a nation of subjects rather than Free Citizens.

The scary part is that Obama isn't the one pulling the strings...their are others controlling Obama. He's just a puppet and none us know who the Puppet Master truly is...

[Mavdog]

you know, bs like this is as repulsive as it gets.

for you to take the position of being the only side to the discussion who is patriotic, who is the only one who truly loves this country, is not only insulting it reveals your ignorance.

stupid is as stupid does....

[92bDad]

What can I say...reality and truth hurts...and at times can be repulsive.

It's funny, I post based on my own opinion based on my experiences and what I learn through what I read, listen and experience first hand. As such an opinion is simply that...it's my thoughts and beliefs.

So, I have no objection to anyone who disagrees with me, after all it is everyones own beliefs and opinions and for that matter everyone has a different experience in life than I.

However, when I see others do their best to remove their own views and simply state facts, only to find Mavdog and others who support the Obama crusades taking place, I cringe as I see an UNwillingness to be open to the possibility that what they support could be improved through another means.

I see nothing that shows anyone on the left is any more an example of tolerance and open mindedness than anyone on the right.

Thus we are truly divided in this nation.

The worst part of this exercise over the past few years, is that under the previous administration, I saw a President who consistantly compromised in order to allow some things from the left to go through, in hopes that his cooperation would allow some things from his own agenda work its way through. Only he gets critized and blamed as if it was only his fault...without any praise for the good that took place under his watch.

Meanwhile, we see the Democrats continue the blame game and doing everything they can to avoid taking responsibility for what are some obvious bad choices along the way.

I personally don't have an answer, but I can share that from my view, I see Democrat continueing to take and take and take...They are the greediest most selfish group that I have ever observed!!!

What I believe we will see is more moderates getting angry at the ultimate Dysfunction of the Democratic party...the swing to the left may be a benefit to Conservatives around America. Fortunately this last election was by a slim margin and I believe the Democrats are doing a fair job of reminding everyone why they voted Republican after Clinton in the first place.

Now Republicans need to be prepared to do the right things when they get back in office...they need to stand up against Democrats and stay away from compromising on Conservative values.

It may take us some 10-20 years to rebound from the economic crisis.

Sad, if terrorist had caused this much damage, we'ld declare war on them...but for some reason, we listened to the media and were basically manipulated into electing the very people who have nearly bankrupted this nation.

There's a part of me that wonders if conceivably we could cause the Government to crash and start over...what if 100% of Americans simply stopped paying taxes...what are they going to do arrest us all? They couldn't afford it.

Is the U.S. Government the new Enron?

[Mavdog]

as ron reagan liked to say, "there you go again..."

[92bDad]

Was it Bush that said...."Get er done!!!"

:-)

[dude1394]

Doing what he does best.

http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2009/...arity-tax.html

One basic lesson of tax incidence (see Chapters 6 and 12 of my favorite textbook) is that the burden of a tax does not always stay where our political leaders try to put it. My Harvard colleague Martin Feldstein gives an example:

[Flacolaco]

So...he found a way to tax rich people and poor people at the same time...genius.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

So...he found a way to tax rich people and poor people at the same time...genius.

It takes a tremendous intellect and skill doesn't it. He can demagogue the rich...while at the same time taxing the poor. Kewll....

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

Doing what he does best.

http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2009/...arity-tax.html

is it your opinion that people only give money to charities because they can get a tax deduction?

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

is it your opinion that people only give money to charities because they can get a tax deduction?

Of course not...but it helps. Is it your opinion that people ONLY buy a house because of the tax deduction...no but it helps.

Do you think people only add energy efficient windows to their home because of the tax deduction...no but it helps.

Since theOne IS adding a tax deduction to promote energy efficient homes. You do agree that he IS adding this tax deduction, correct?

The converse must be that he is REMOVING a tax deduction from charitable contributions to suppress charitable contributions.

But I expect you knew all this when you asked the question.

[Mavdog]

fyi the tax deduction for a charitable contribution will still be there under the obama proposal. it's just that there is a ceiling on the deduction. people who are in the highest tax brackets will have it treated at the lower tax bracket rather than the higher tax rate.

seems to me that people who want to give to charity will continue to do so, and they will continue to get a tax deduction. so what's the big deal?

those who scream the obama plan will stop people from making charitable donations are merely seeking things to bitch about imo.

as for the house, I'm going to buy a house because I need a place to live, and buying makes more sense than renting. for that matter my home is paid off, am I going to go buy a new one, or take out a mortgage just to get a tax deduction? absolutely not.

the tax credit (the energy incentive is a credit, not a deduction) for energy efficient home repair was there already, so this is not something new in the obama plan. it certainly helped me make my decision last year when I replaced a broken water heater with a tankless water heater and got what? $500 back. it didn't make up the difference between popping another tank in vs the tankless, but it did reduce the delta.

[dude1394]

The availability of the tax deduction will factor into even YOUR assessment of whether to buy x house or y house...Or whether you can afford to buy one now or you have to wait.

Pretending that tax policy has no effect on behavior is not rational.

So the tax credit (deduction whatever..) had an impact on your decision...ergo...so will obama's new tax (tax-deduction removal) on charitable giving.

[Mavdog]

without a doubt, we use the tax code to influence decisions. does the deduction on contributions determine of a person gives to charity or not? remember, if you don't itemize you don't get the deduction. people who don't itemize still give to charity.

again, the proposed plan says there will still be a tax deduction for charitable contributions available to every taxpayer who itemizes.

all will have the tax deduction, it's just all deductions will be treated like the filer was in the 28% tax bracket.

the deduction is not going away, so why the bitching?

[dude1394]

As the article states...theOne is too silly to understand what will happen, as most liberals he just thinks he can continue to milk the gravy train...in his world it's never-ending.

He think he can just raise taxes and nothing will change....eeeee...wrong answer.

People will react and his attempt to get his greedy little paws on more tax dollars so that he can spend it buying votes (imo) will only wind up causing less charitable funds to go to charities.

That's the bitching.....but with this guy I'd better start watching my shorts...he'll tax those next. He's REALLY good at it.

[Mavdog]

<sigh> if the deduction for charitable contributions is going to be available for all taxpayers who itemize (just like it is today), why don't you explain what change in behavior is going to occur?

you keep screaming that "less charitable funds go to charities", but if the deduction will still be available, why will this happen?

answer: if the taxpayer still gets the tax deduction, the behavior won't change.

much ado about nothing.....

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by 92bDad

It's funny, I post based on my own opinion based on my experiences and what I learn through what I read, listen and experience first hand. As such an opinion is simply that...it's my thoughts and beliefs.

So, I have no objection to anyone who disagrees with me, after all it is everyones own beliefs and opinions and for that matter everyone has a different experience in life than I.

Originally Posted by 92bDad

Best of luck to you and your views...obviously there is no point that will change your perception of reality. It's truly misfortunate, I believe you could be a great assett for the American people, but instead you choose to support those who aim to destroy this nation.

My only dog in this fight is the Logic dog, and these two statements are completely logically inconsistent.

[Flacolaco]

I see the president is telling Europe that Al Qaeda is a big threat to them. (Which is true)

I'm going to keep an eye out for cries of "fear mongering" from the media.

[mcsluggo]

.... because...... ?

[12 Tone Melodies]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123879833094588163.html
APRIL 4, 2009
Obama Wants to Control the Banks
There's a reason he refuses to accept repayment of TARP money.
By STUART VARNEY
I must be naive. I really thought the administration would welcome the return of bank bailout money. Some $340 million in TARP cash flowed back this week from four small banks in Louisiana, New York, Indiana and California. This isn't much when we routinely talk in trillions, but clearly that money has not been wasted or otherwise sunk down Wall Street's black hole. So why no cheering as the cash comes back?

My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell 'em what to do. Control. Direct. Command.

It is not for nothing that rage has been turned on those wicked financiers. The banks are at the core of the administration's thrust: By managing the money, government can steer the whole economy even more firmly down the left fork in the road.

If the banks are forced to keep TARP cash -- which was often forced on them in the first place -- the Obama team can work its will on the financial system to unprecedented degree. That's what's happening right now.

Here's a true story first reported by my Fox News colleague Andrew Napolitano (with the names and some details obscured to prevent retaliation). Under the Bush team a prominent and profitable bank, under threat of a damaging public audit, was forced to accept less than $1 billion of TARP money. The government insisted on buying a new class of preferred stock which gave it a tiny, minority position. The money flowed to the bank. Arguably, back then, the Bush administration was acting for purely economic reasons. It wanted to recapitalize the banks to halt a financial panic.

Fast forward to today, and that same bank is begging to give the money back. The chairman offers to write a check, now, with interest. He's been sitting on the cash for months and has felt the dead hand of government threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales. He sees the writing on the wall and he wants out. But the Obama team says no, since unlike the smaller banks that gave their TARP money back, this bank is far more prominent. The bank has also been threatened with "adverse" consequences if its chairman persists. That's politics talking, not economics.

Think about it: If Rick Wagoner can be fired and compact cars can be mandated, why can't a bank with a vault full of TARP money be told where to lend? And since politics drives this administration, why can't special loans and terms be offered to favored constituents, favored industries, or even favored regions? Our prosperity has never been based on the political allocation of credit -- until now.

Which brings me to the Pay for Performance Act, just passed by the House. This is an outstanding example of class warfare. I'm an Englishman. We invented class warfare, and I know it when I see it. This legislation allows the administration to dictate pay for anyone working in any company that takes a dime of TARP money. This is a whip with which to thrash the unpopular bankers, a tool to advance the Obama administration's goal of controlling the financial system.

After 35 years in America, I never thought I would see this. I still can't quite believe we will sit by as this crisis is used to hand control of our economy over to government. But here we are, on the brink. Clearly, I have been naive.

Mr. Varney is a host on the Fox Business Channel.

[bernardos70]

I present you Banco do Brasil

No, Brazil is not a communist state and has done quite okay through this enduring crisis.

[alexamenos]

worth a watch

[dude1394]

It's for the children.

Maybe theOne and the democrats sorta have NEA and Children confused??

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/...rter-the-cost/

D.C. Vouchers: Better Results at a QUARTER the Cost

Posted by Andrew J. Coulson

The latest federal study of the D.C. voucher program finds that voucher students have pulled significantly ahead of their public school peers in reading and perform at least as well as public school students in math. It also reports that the average tuition at the voucher schools is $6,620. That is ONE QUARTER what the District of Columbia spends per pupil on education ($26,555), according to the District’s own fiscal year 2009 budget.

Better results at a quarter the cost. And Democrats in Congress have sunset its funding and are trying to kill it. Shame on them.

If President Obama believes his own rhetoric on the need for greater efficiency in government education spending and for improved educational opportunities, he should work with the members of his own party to continue and grow this program.

[kg_veteran]

Anybody who doesn't recognize what's going on is incredibly naive.

[alexamenos]

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

Anybody who doesn't recognize what's going on is incredibly naive.

Just a healthy dose of fascism to keep the trains running on time and a massive inflationary drive that's almost certain to destroy the currency teamed with a constant and consistent build-up of the police state.

nothing to see here...move along.

[wmbwinn]

Just a healthy dose of fascism to keep the trains running on time and a massive inflationary drive that's almost certain to destroy the currency teamed with a constant and consistent build-up of the police state.

nice to see this all summed up so succinctly...

glad to see some people do get it...

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

Anybody who doesn't recognize what's going on is incredibly naive.

Okay, I confess to being incredibly naive. Tell me what I should recognize?

[12 Tone Melodies]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/11/wo...gram.html?_r=2
Obama to Appeal Detainee Ruling
By THE NEW YORK TIMES
Published: April 10, 2009
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration said Friday that it would appeal a district court ruling that granted some military prisoners in Afghanistan the right to file lawsuits seeking their release. The decision signaled that the administration was not backing down in its effort to maintain the power to imprison terrorism suspects for extended periods without judicial oversight.

In a court filing, the Justice Department also asked District Judge John D. Bates not to proceed with the habeas-corpus cases of three detainees at Bagram Air Base outside Kabul, Afghanistan. Judge Bates ruled last week that the three — each of whom says he was seized outside of Afghanistan — could challenge their detention in court.

Tina Foster, the executive director of the International Justice Network, which is representing the detainees, condemned the decision in a statement.

“Though he has made many promises regarding the need for our country to rejoin the world community of nations, by filing this appeal, President Obama has taken on the defense of one of the Bush administration’s unlawful policies founded on nothing more than the idea that might makes right,” she said.

A version of this article appeared in print on April 11, 2009, on page A6 of the New York edition.

[Flacolaco]

Finally he does something within the realm of the best interest of the people he supposedly serves (i.e. common sense). Bravo.