comment #1

Dirty Harry says ...

Note: Last night from The Liberator of 50 Million to Hollywood, leftie, hypocritical fatcats:

“Others have said they would personally be happy to pay higher taxes. I welcome their enthusiasm, and I am pleased to report that the IRS accepts both checks and money orders.”

There you go. Now, be good little consistent liberals, put your money where your wealthy mouths are, and leave the rest of us alone with our "Right to Choose."

comment #2

bents75 says ...

He liberated 50 million people?

Hey, good for him.

Would those fifty million include the 9 bodies and 10 severed heads found today in Northern Iraq?

Or would just that 10th body that's missing be the one that's liberated?

I'm confused...

comment #3

Jay T. says ...

Is it me, or does this actually make Hillary look better than Obama? Yeah, let's fucking attack Iran!!!

comment #4

Dirty Harry says ...

Yeah, cuz, you know, Saddam never killed a few million.

comment #5

Dave says ...

It's not about us attacking Iran-- it's about Iran attacking us. Which they've done since 1979.

These are bad guys, folks. Not the regular people, but the guys at the top. Like it or not, America has been at war with them for close to thirty years.

None of that changes into the Age of Aquarius with the election of President Clinton, Obama, Romney or McCain, no matter how much we may wish it so, in our self-absorbed "The world obeys whatever our Beltway insiders want" viewpoint.

Tehran trembles not at the voice of Chris Matthews.

comment #6

christian says ...

DH, who exactly pays for all the wonderful weapons and their contractors? Hmm. I guess that's something you love about the federal government.

Actually, Obama/Clinton both took turns "leaping to applaud." The only proper response to this President is stony silence. Or booing. Seeing them go along with the PNAC playbook makes me ill. It's apt watchng these faux-liberals adapt to the neo-con position. So it goes.

comment #7

Dirty Harry says ...

"DH, who exactly pays for all the wonderful weapons and their contractors? Hmm. I guess that's something you love about the federal government."

Did you know that Kennedy, Reagan, and now Bush have proven time and again that the effect lowering taxes has on the economy actually increases tax revenues? It's spending that causes defecits and tax cuts that bloom the economy and create revenues.

Hmm. I guess if you really cared about revenues you'd want lower taxes. But stickin' it to the man feels better than actually funding the govt. FREE THE PROLETARIAT!

But at least, Christian, we agree that the weapons and military contractors are "wonderful." Face it, Halliburton's done more for the third-world than the UN ever will.

comment #8

Walter Sobchak says ...

Hillary had to commission a lightning focus-group poll to find out if standing to applaud was the politically expedient thing to do.

comment #9

christian says ...

Then why is the economy in trouble DH? You were just gloating a month ago over some Townhall-style economic happy joy joy that was completely wrong. Even Bush had to fess up last night.
Hey, wha' happened?

"Face it, Halliburton's done more for the third-world than the UN ever will."

Well, both do overcharge for bad work.
Yet Halliburton is better at gang-rape:

Jamie Leigh Jones, now 22, says that after she was raped by multiple men at a KBR camp in the Green Zone, the company put her under guard in a shipping container with a bed and warned her that if she left Iraq for medical treatment, she'd be out of a job.

"Don't plan on working back in Iraq. There won't be a position here, and there won't be a position in Houston," Jones says

In a lawsuit filed in federal court against Halliburton and its then-subsidiary KBR, Jones says she was held in the shipping container for at least 24 hours without food or water by KBR, which posted armed security guards outside her door, who would not let her leave. Jones described the container as sparely furnished with a bed, table and lamp.

"It felt like prison," says Jones, who told her story to ABC News as part of an upcoming "20/20" investigation. "I was upset; I was curled up in a ball on the bed; I just could not believe what had happened."

Finally, Jones says, she convinced a sympathetic guard to loan her a cell phone so she could call her father in Texas.

"I said, 'Dad, I've been raped. I don't know what to do. I'm in this container, and I'm not able to leave,'" she said. Her father called their congressman, Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas.

"We contacted the State Department first," Poe told ABCNews.com, "and told them of the urgency of rescuing an American citizen" -- from her American employer. http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=3977702

comment #10

Mjs says ...

"Yeah, cuz, you know, Saddam never killed a few million."

Then I guess it's okay for Bush to do it.

comment #11

Dirty Harry says ...

Christian: Shall I list the UN scandals? Is there enough space on Wells' server?: Blue helmets raping those they're supposed to protect, looking the other way or standing by as people are machete'd to death, bribery, oil for food... Good heaven's man...

Yeah, the economy is in trouble in some places (never said anything different) but it's in trouble in some places because of low-taxes? Go ahead, raise 'em, that'll fix it. Nothing like removing money from the economy to make it grow.

comment #12

dangovich says ...

Actually, we've been at war with Iran a lot longer than 30 years, or did you forget the overthrow of Iran's democratically elected leader in 1953, and the subsequent installation of a dictator in his place?

Facts can be so inconvenient when planning an unnecessary war.

comment #13

Dirty Harry says ...

Yeah, Bush has killed a few million. You go ahead and wrench that into your ideology to live with it.

The Iraqi people voted for freedom and are dying for it right next to us. Obama pledges to abandon them in a matter fo weeks. How so very compassionate. What a good and decent man.

comment #14

bents75 says ...

"Yeah, cuz, you know, Saddam never killed a few million."

Well if you're referring to the Kurds in the 80's, then my undestanding is independent sources put the death toll between 100,000-200,000. Which is just a tiny bit shy of a "few million." But if I'm somehow overlooking 2.8 to 2.9 million other deaths you're aware of, then please enlighten me.

I'm not defending the guy. No one ever is...you just like to make that assumption. I'm only saying when we roll into a country with our balls hanging out and either directly or indirectly cause the exodus of several million people, kill several hundred thousand more, and officially piss off an entire generation because we killed, violated, layed off, or imprisoned someone in their family... that's not what I would call "liberation."

But I know this is a futile argument. The fact remains Harry, you'll most likely be long gone when my generation is still cleaning up the mistakes yours made and rebuilding the American image which has been pretty much burned to the ground.

comment #15

christian says ...

Right DH. After all, we'e in the struggle for our civilization. Why expect Americans to help pay for infrastructure? Sure, there's never been a war-time tax in US history cut until Bush came in, but you can see the sterling results on the economy. Like FDR said, "I don't want to see a single war millionaire created in the United States as a result of this world disaster."

Actually, I'm just relieved knowing Obama and Bush feel the same on Iran. Compromise! Might as well vote for McCain because he'll get to war quicker.

comment #16

Dirty Harry says ...

bents75: Fair question.

http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/hussein.html

Let me correct my sentence: "Responsible for the death of a few million." The article I link to chooses not to count many I would, but "millions" is not in dispute.

"The fact remains Harry, you'll most likely be long gone when my generation is still cleaning up the mistakes yours made and rebuilding the American image which has been pretty much burned to the ground."

Iraq is gonna work. Libya disarmed. Afghanistan and Iraq are now our allies. George W. Bush is a great man who left America and the world more peaceful, freer, and safer than he found it. Sometimes the only to peace is thru war. Actually, it's the only way when facing evil.

comment #17

christian says ...

"George W. Bush is a great man"

This is why one should not trust Republicans praising Obama.

comment #18

storymark says ...

"Afghanistan and Iraq are now our allies."

With friends like these...

comment #19

Dirty Harry says ...

Christian: "Right DH. After all, we'e in the struggle for our civilization. Why expect Americans to help pay for infrastructure?"

You refuse to acknowledge lower taxes grow the economy and increase tax revenues. If you truly wanted more tax revenue you'd want a growing economy and you grow the economy thru lowering taxes.

You dont want revenues. You want higher taxes. That's fine -- you want to punish The Man. But for you to desire more revenues AND want higher taxes is a contradiction.

Tax revenue is not tied to tax rates. Tax revenues are tied to economic growth. If the economy is doing well, tax revenues increase.

Tax increases shrink the economy and lower tax revenues.

Tax decreases expand the economy and increase tax revenues.

Even JFK understood that -- that's why JFK lowered taxes across the board (even for the evil rich) -- that's why Reagan copied JFK's tax cut -- but JFK would be a Rethuglican today.

comment #20

storymark says ...

"George W. Bush is a great man who left America and the world more peaceful, freer, and safer than he found it. "

Wow. Just... wow.

Can anyone think of a bigger load of bullshit? I think DH has corner the market.

Possibly the dumbest thing I've heard in months, at the least. But you just keep steppin in line there, Harry....

Christ.

comment #21

storymark says ...

"You dont want revenues. You want higher taxes. That's fine -- you want to punish The Man. But for you to desire more revenues AND want higher taxes is a contradiction. "

I love how, just because someone disagrees with you, you feel that you can dictate what others believe in.

You know you are a raging asshole, correct? Just checking.

comment #22

Dirty Harry says ...

Christian, my friend, I meant no offense by that. If I came off as a raging asshole, my apologies.

However, If I came off as a rightwing extremist, ChimpyMcHitlerBushSmirker lover, my work here is done.

comment #23

Mjs says ...

"George W. Bush is a great man who left America and the world more peaceful, freer, and safer than he found it."

Some people have forced themselves to believe this. It's the only way they can live with the horror this man (whom they voted for) has contributed to the world.

"Iraq is gonna work"

Depends on your definition of "work". How many innocents have to die? How many troops have to die? How much money has to be spent? How many parents have to grieve their child's senseless death?

I assume you're not over there, and so it's easy to offer up these lives as sacrifice.

comment #24

rocco says ...

Then why is the economy in trouble DH?

That's oversimplifying things. Not sure what your background is, christian, but no one is an authority on everything...knowing one's limitations is a virtue. Taxation is one of those areas that is very emotional but needs to be managed emperically and objectively. DH may be saying some crazy things up yonder, but his points about taxes are prudent.

And you can't blame Bush or his spending on our current economic ills. The economy is "in trouble" because of overzealous (in some instances criminal) lending and irrationally exuberant borrowing. The economy is in trouble because we've officially become the "bling" generation, doing whatever is necessary to promote appearances of affluence...buying houses beyond ones means, investing in non-assets like vacations, cars, big-screen televisions, etc, and yes, even houses--unless one is borrowing and spending against them--are not assets when considering cash flow. Add rising demand for commodities from China, India, and other emerging economies and you have a pretty good of why we are where we are. Bush's government has played a role in the dollar's decline, flooding the world markets with greenbacks, but the US consumer has been just as eager.

Surely this is not a complete or thorough posting on my part...I've been interrupted by a few phone calls and emails, but overall it's a good taste of the true challenges putting pressure on our paychecks and portfolios.

comment #25

York "Budd" Durden says ...

"George W. Bush is a great man who left America and the world more peaceful, freer, and safer than he found it."

Stupendously outrageous, depraved, delusional. I would expect nothing less from DH.

comment #26

bents75 says ...

I'm not bothered by the W comment because I know you honestly believe that Harry. I just don't understand the "evil" label though.

I mean, we're not sending GI Joe over there to fight Cobra Commander. How can you believe you have this just position when you view the conflict in such cartoonish terms?

There are a lot of people over there that are "bad guys", for a lack of better words, but the extremists aren't all that far off from the moderates over there. They're all following a religion which is in dire need of reform and their way of life is programmed as such. They're not evil- they're archaic, uncivilized, and religious. And most of them are willing and able to join the fight if you keep giving them a reason to.

As far as I'm concerned the guys who blow themselves up so they can meet their virgins are just as silly as someone who believes Moses parted the Red Sea. Neither religion has any foundation in logic – and for you to brandish their guiding beliefs as “evil” is exactly the sort of black and white view that will never accomplish anything. Unless your intention is commit genocide and completely remove every person from the equation, you will never win that war because there will never be an end to it.

You can’t beat two thousand years of belief out of these people. You can only attempt to change it and find some compromise in the meantime.

comment #27

Dirty Harry says ...

You all laughed when we said Reagan would be remembered as a great man. Remember that? Now you have to make Charlie Wilsons War to try and me-too how wrong you all were.

You've been on the wrong side of history since JFK was assassinated. You still are. Make all the Charlie Wilson's Wars you want, but time will acquit Mr. Bush: The Abraham Lincoln of the Middle East.

comment #28

Dirty Harry says ...

Bents; you don't understand the "evil" label? I don't even know how to respond to that. I don't want to risk being called a raging asshole again, but I sincerely don't understand that.

I'm sorry but you "cannot" change these people. You have to exterminate them. I am not talking about Muslims -- I am talking about evil.

Evil: Those who target the innocent to further their selfish goals.

Good: Those who try not to kill the innocent but kill those who do.

Great men like King, Mandela, Gandhi.. They could change things peacably because the other side wasn't willing to exterminate them in order to win. A moral reasoning could be achieved.

You can't reason with these terrorists. You have to kill them. If you can kill them and refuse to that's immoral because they will kill the innocent.

comment #29

christian says ...

DH, your John Wayne war movie fantasy movie leaves out one plot point for those caught in the collateral damage of our Iraq invasion:
when American troops rape a girl, kill her family and burn their bodies; when Blackwater forces shoot down civilians; when citizens are detained tortured and released without charge; when all evidence points to a stream of mistruths from the US government to justify war; word spreads from town to town, city to city, nation to nation, and all George Bush's bullshit about evil-doers and freedoms are outed as lies and hypocrisy.

If the families of those innocents killed decide to fight againt the US occupiers, it's not to "terrorize" the West. It's revenge for the liberation of their families lives. And you can't blow all those folks back up to Heaven. Pray as you might.

And Bush is indeed like Lincoln if one substitutes Iraq for slaves in this quote:

"But for your race among us there could not be a war, although many men on either side do not care for you one way or another."

comment #30

Dirty Harry says ...

Christian: You're cherry-picking tragedies and looking at events through a soda straw to anecdotalize your point. You dwell on a handful of tragic events and ignore the unbelievable good we are doing over there. Americans dying to help people they don't even know. We are so good and generous it's impossible for me to even articulate my pride in this country.

We're not occupiers. We are invited to stay at the behest of a democratically elected govt. Big distinction that cannot be ignored.

We don't target the innocent. We are not there to kill the innocent. We are there to protect the innocent and sometimes, sadly, the innocent are killed in this mission. Still the distinction is the very difference between good and evil.

Think of the lives saved had we gone into the Sudan ten-years ago in the same way we went into Iraq? Yes, it would've been messy and costly in every respect, but think of the innocents that wouldn't have died once we got through it. Once we got to where we are now in Iraq.

America is not immoral when she uses her force to spread liberty. America is immoral when she can and doesn't.

comment #31

christian says ...

You don't have to tell me, DH.
Tell the families in Iraq.

comment #32

Dirty Harry says ...

Christian: The families in Iraq are fighting and dying to kill the same enemy as we are -- bravely, right there next to us.

The families in Iraq voted for freedom.

The families in Iraq will die needlessly if Obama wins and keeps his pledge to pull-out in "a matter of weeks."

You and I are thankfully past the personal rancor, and I don't question that you're a good man, but I don't understand...

comment #33

bents75 says ...

"I'm sorry but you "cannot" change these people. You have to exterminate them. I am not talking about Muslims -- I am talking about evil."

That's gotta be one of the most frightening responses you could have given, but I'll give you credit DH, at least you say what the exterminators in power only think.

Unfortunately I still don't understand how you delineate between one and the other. How do you identify who is an Evil Muslim and who is a Good Muslim? I wish you were right and that we could just accept Bush's ignorant claims that it's just us versus Al Queda, but they're a relatively small margin of the problems in that country. It's the fact that you can't easily tell who is who is why we're going after anyone who might possibly be and we're killing or imprisoning a lot of innocent people as a result of it. And then you're turning those people against us too.

I mean, if you define "evil" simply as someone who kills the "innocent", then what is your definition of innocent?

And the Iraqis didn't vote for freedom, that's a crock of shit. When you take out their leader and leave a vacuum of power...what else are they going to vote for? You didn't give them any other choice. Do you really think they would have wanted us to invade their country if we had asked them in 2002?

Which would you prefer, to continue to live under a dictator who didn't allow any disent...or terrorism? Or to be plunged into state of chaos as we bomb your cities, destroy your infrastructure, imprison your family members, attract foreign terrorists, and occupy your territory with military bases and corporations for the next five decades?

You may or may not have the high ground, but if you asked them that in 2002 they would have picked the lesser of "two evils"...and from their perspective, which is a lot more important in their own lives than your limited perspective, you know damn well which one they would have chosen.

comment #34

Jay T. says ...

"lower taxes grow the economy and increase tax revenues."

This is hilarious because it's so short-sighted. Yes, this is true in the short term, but can have devestating long term effects if taken too literally. I think we all know (or should know) that the proper amount of taxation is a balancing act and from economic standpoint changes quite a bit from year to year. Also, the idea of applying this to the Bush tax cut (when he first moved into office) is absurd, given that most of the tax dollars saved went to people who already had enough money to buy whatever they want, so for the most part the money just sat in the bank or the market earning interest/dividends and didn't really stimulate the economy. This much has been well documented.

comment #35

Jay T. says ...

"time will acquit Mr. Bush: The Abraham Lincoln of the Middle East."

Holy shit... that's probably the most bat-shit crazy thing I've ever heard.

comment #36

Dirty Harry says ...

Q: How do you identify who is an Evil Muslim and who is a Good Muslim?

A: The same way I identify the difference between a good Christian and an evil Christian -- or Jew -- or atheist. People who intentionally target and intentionally murder the innocent in pursuit of a selfish agenda that doesn't save lives. The difference between Hiroshima (and act done to save lives) and the ovens of Auschwitz (an act to take life).

Q: What is your definition of innocent?

A: Civilians. Anyone who is not a direct threat to your life.

Q: And the Iraqis didn't vote for freedom, that's a crock of shit. When you take out their leader and leave a vacuum of power...what else are they going to vote for? You didn't give them any other choice.

A: They would've voted by staying home. That was their choice and we would've had egg on our face and THEN become occupiers. Those brave people came out under threat of death at a higher rate than we did under threat of John Kerry. Did you forget that? There was a hunger for self-determination even the very real threat of death couldn't stop. And if you remember a certain percentage had to vote in the Constitutional election for it to be considereed legal and valid. And a certain percentage did.

Q: Do you really think they would have wanted us to invade their country if we had asked them in 2002?

A: You don't think the kurds and shiites wanted us to invade and remove Saddam? And they make up 75-80% You're just wrong about that. Dead wrong.

Yes, it's been chaotic and near-disastrous. But wait. Wait five-years to ask those questions of the Iraqis about it being worth it. You can't ask now. Wait for it to settle. Wait till it pans out. You can't ask now. No one knows yet if it's worth it.

JAYT: "the Bush tax cut (when he first moved into office) is absurd, given that most of the tax dollars saved went to people who already had enough money to buy whatever they want, so for the most part the money just sat in the bank or the market earning interest/dividends and didn't really stimulate the economy"

Jay T -- the money doesn't sit in banks. Those banks turn around and lend that money to small businessmen, building projects, and other things which expand and grow the economy. There's not a big safe somewhere with a lot of money gathering dust in it. It's goes right out the other door stimulating the economy.

Also, it's been consumer spending that's kept GDP growth alive so where you get your ideas is beyond me.

The debate of what causes tax revenue: Tax increases or a growing economy is over. Tax increases slow the economy and hurt tax revenues. Tax cuts boost the economy and increase tax revenues.

It's a fact.

In 1981 federal tax revenues were $500 billion a year. After eight-years and MASSIVE across the board tax cuts, annual tax revenues nearly doubled to $950 billion. The defecits of the 80's were caused by spending, not tax cuts.

I'm sorry but anyone truly interested in tax revenues does not call for tax increases.

comment #37

mizerock says ...

The housing bubble kept consumer spending up, not trickle-down effects from billionaires. The tax rates are still slashed, but the housing bubble is gone. Consumer spending is down. Or maybe we just need to cut taxes on the rich even more?

The mission in Iraq was always about the oil + transferring wealth to military contractors. Oh yeah, and some good old fashioned revenge / Christian Crusades. Mission accomplished. You don't have to pretend anymore that it was about 9/11 or compassion or whatever. Seriously, you won, you raided the budgets & took everything for your buddies. More gloating, less psuedo-logical explanations please.

comment #38

SpinDozer says ...

'Tax cuts boost the economy and increase tax revenues.

It's a fact.'

Golly Mr. Wizard, lets cut everyone's taxes down to like dime or something and then our revnues will shoot through the ceiling and we can have Universal Health Care & Free College & daycare & a clean environment & all that shit. Great thinking!

comment #39

SpinDozer says ...

'Tax cuts boost the economy and increase tax revenues.

It's a fact.'

Golly Mr. Wizard, lets cut everyone's taxes down to like a dime or something and then our revnues will shoot through the ceiling and we can have Universal Health Care & Free College & daycare & a clean environment & all that shit. Great thinking!

comment #40

mizerock says ...

'Tax cuts boost the economy and increase tax revenues."

A little research shows - sometimes they do!

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/wm182.cfm

Not that this has anything to do with Iraq or Obama.

comment #41

Dirty Harry says ...

Spin: That's beneath you. I could just as easily turn that around and say, "Yeah, let's tax everything 100% and see how much we get, duh-ha."

If Democrats would stop wanting to punish the rich and were actually interesting in figuring out what marginal tax rates would be most effective at boosting tax revenues, we could embark on a national experiment to discover at what rate we hit the point of diminishing returns -- though I suspect the Reagan rates are close, but we could go lower and see what happens.

But Dems aren't interested in maximizing revenues, they want to play class warfare, punish the rich, and socialize the economy.

comment #42

SpinDozer says ...

"I could just as easily turn that around and say, "Yeah, let's tax everything 100% and see how much we get, duh-ha."

Well, you could do that, but it'd make you look even dumber than your idiotic generalization about tax cuts always leading to increased revenue. And here's why: I made no such generalization.

comment #43

Dirty Harry says ...

Spin you took my point to an absurd extreme to make yours. I was simply pointing out how little sense that made because I could do the exact same in reverse.

And tax cuts increasing revenues is not a generaization. It's a fact.

comment #44

SpinDozer says ...

'A little research shows - sometimes they do!'

Next time you want to do a little research which will support any right wing scheme, you could hardly do worse than go to the Heritage Foundation; they bottle the stuff.

comment #45

christian says ...

DH, by the way, seriously. What have you sacrificed for this war? You expect our troops to bear the physical/emotional burden, then when they return, they're treated like refugees. Have you forgotten what happened at Walter Reade?

No, I'm sorry, but for all the endless blather about supporting the troops and the struggle for civilization, all the GOP can do is argue for tax cuts and a greater surveillance state. Is that your idea of sacrifice?

If this was 1941, and the Japanese just attacked us, would you immediateley hoist the flag and cry out, "And now we must cut taxes!" You'd probably be called a traitor. Otherwise, you'd have to give up on oil, meat and other goodies.

I know, it sounds positively Bolshevik.

comment #46

Dirty Harry says ...

Christian,

You can choose to believe this or not, but I have two jobs. One is the website where I make most of my living, the other is screenwriting where I do okay.

After expenses and taxes, every penny I've made screenwriting since the Iraq War began has gone to a charity called Soldiers Angels -- and a few others, but mostly there.

Listen, I'm a Chickenhawk. When young enough I was too into myself to consider joining and now I regret it. But I'm not a chickenhawk who, like many, many liberal Hollywood filmmakers and activists disparage and insult the troops,

I'm a Chickenhawk who honors and respects what shames me.

comment #47

SpinDozer says ...

'And tax cuts increasing revenues is not a generaization. It's a fact.'

No, its not and you missed the point. If we had no taxes, we would not be drowning in a sea of tax revenue.

Economic growth is what drives tax revenue. Since you (heart) your version of class warfare you have conjoined and conflated the two. Tax cuts do not always lead to economic growth. There are circumstances where one could argue that it does, but its difficult to prove whether forgone revenues lead to technological breakthroughs or if its the marketplace. Same with resource exploitation. One does not necessarily have to do with the other.

comment #48

Dirty Harry says ...

Spin: Yes, of course there's a point of diminshing returns where you can cut taxes too much. But we don't know that point yet. We should find out and liberals truly interested in maximizes revenues should want to find out. But you don't because it's not about increasing revenues, it's about class warfare and taxing the rich.

But you're wrong that there's no correlation between tax cuts and revenue increases. Wrong on the facts. Period. Forty years of data going back to JFK's tax cut. JFK was a supply-sider. No, really.

comment #49

SpinDozer says ...

'But you're wrong that there's no correlation between tax cuts and revenue increases.'

Which of course is not what I said. I said its difficult to prove that tax cuts = economic growth. I would be pleased as punch if it were and we could go immediately to the correct rate and maximize our revenues. The reality is that Class warfare is always happening, and its the rich against us, and they are always seeking to minimize their tax burden and transfer it to us and it is to this end that many tax cuts owe their genesis, not some altruistic attempt to maximize tax revenue, though they would be happy to have you believe that.

comment #50

Dirty Harry says ...

SPIN: It's even easier to prove the correlation between tax cuts and economic growth.

The rich pay taxes as follows:

"The top-earning 25% of taxpayers -- pay 86% of the taxes.

"The top 1% of taxpayers earned about 21% of the nation's income, yet paid more than 39% of all federal income taxes collected.

"That means the top 1% paid about the same amount of federal individual income taxes as the bottom 95 percent, and the top 5% paid more (about 60% of all taxes collected) than the bottom 95% (about 40% of all taxes).

ME: After the Bush "tax cuts for the rich" the dreaded top 1% actually now pick up a higher percentage of the overall tax burden:

"The top 1% paid 35.7% of all taxes in 2004, and 39.38% of all taxes in 2005, suggesting the "rich" now pay more as share of all taxes than before and the tax burden on the rich has increased."

If I were rich I'd be seeking to "minimize my tax burden" too. because my money would do more to help people in the real economy.

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/10/top-1-pay-more-taxes-than-bottom-90.html

comment #51

SpinDozer says ...

The actual quote is:

'the top-earning 25% of taxpayers (AGI over $62,068) earned 67.5% of the nation's income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86%). '

Note that this leaves out all taxes that aren't federal income taxes...like social security (percentage-wise, extremely comparable to income tax revenue). You're not under the impression that the wealthy pay more than their fair share of SS, are you? Cos its a regressive tax.

The wealthy do not spend their days trying to help people by boosting the real economy, its all about helping themselves, absolute drivel to think otherwise.

comment #52

Dirty Harry says ...

Spin: People are people. There are just as many poor people as rich who are looking out for themselves. The rich in this country are extraordinarily generous.

The SS tax should be regressive because it tops out on what you get back.

comment #53

christian says ...

I'm sure Kenneth Lay gave variations of that speech about how it's really them who's shepherding the economy. All the president's men.

comment #54

christian says ...

And good for you with Soldiers Angels. I'll contrib.

comment #55

D.Z. says ...

Jay: "Is it me, or does this actually make Hillary look better than Obama? Yeah, let's fucking attack Iran!!!"

I don't think he's for attacking Iran, since he was the first of the three to suggest talking with them. He's just for defending the country against any aggression, not suggesting any aggressive tactics.

Dave: "It's not about us attacking Iran-- it's about Iran attacking us. Which they've done since 1979."

We attacked them first with a puppet government...

"These are bad guys, folks. Not the regular people, but the guys at the top. Like it or not, America has been at war with them for close to thirty years."

You mean that we've been profiting off of their war with Iraq by selling them weapons.

Harry: "Did you know that Kennedy, Reagan, and now Bush have proven time and again that the effect lowering taxes has on the economy actually increases tax revenues?"

Yeah, those the states which have 40 million uninsured displaced New Orlean residents are really raking it in...And I imagine our country having the crappiest infrastructure since Rome is a small price to pay for all the money being used to bail out the few people who can afford houses.

"Shall I list the UN scandals? Is there enough space on Wells' server?: Blue helmets raping those they're supposed to protect, looking the other way or standing by as people are machete'd to death, bribery, oil for food... Good heaven's man..."

We're looking the other way on Darfur; we sell weapons for oil to countries which blow us up; and we subsidize lobbyists.

"Obama pledges to abandon them in a matter fo weeks. How so very compassionate. What a good and decent man."

It's called tough love.

"Libya disarmed."

And now they're attacking the Iraqis...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080126/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_080119205295

"Afghanistan and Iraq are now our allies."

Is that why they want us to get the hell out and have no qualms about blowing us up?

"You refuse to acknowledge lower taxes grow the economy and increase tax revenues."

Probably because a socialist country like China is really the one footing the bills, while our corporations are laying off Americans left and right.

"Tax revenues are tied to economic growth. If the economy is doing well, tax revenues increase."

No, consumption taxes just increase; revenues remain the same.

"Even JFK understood that -- that's why JFK lowered taxes across the board (even for the evil rich) --"

http://www.mahablog.com/2007/04/15/shameless-hustles-and-tax-cuts/
http://www.slate.com/id/2093947/

"Make all the Charlie Wilson's Wars you want, but time will acquit Mr. Bush: The Abraham Lincoln of the Middle East."

Do you want the same amount of time it took for our freedom fighters to murder a bunch of Kurds and blow up the WTC?

"Evil: Those who target the innocent to further their selfish goals."

Like corporations that sell tainted pet food?

"Americans dying to help people they don't even know. We are so good and generous it's impossible for me to even articulate my pride in this country."

Is that why we gutted AIDS and tsunami funding?

"We're not occupiers. We are invited to stay at the behest of a democratically elected govt."

We weren't invited, and their government doesn't want us there.

"We don't target the innocent."

Except when we use depleted uranium...

"Think of the lives saved had we gone into the Sudan ten-years ago in the same way we went into Iraq?"

But we haven't gone into Sudan, and we haven't saved lives-because they're black.

"The families in Iraq voted for freedom."

Freedom from us.

"People who intentionally target and intentionally murder the innocent in pursuit of a selfish agenda that doesn't save lives. The difference between Hiroshima (and act done to save lives) and the ovens of Auschwitz (an act to take life)."

Bombing Hiroshima was done out of racism, not humanity. Our war in Iraq is serving the selfish agenda of the Neo-cons.

"Civilians. Anyone who is not a direct threat to your life."

Then there are a million of them who got killed by us already.

"They would've voted by staying home."

Many of them did stay home, since the government is rigged in favor of the Shiia.

"You don't think the kurds and shiites wanted us to invade and remove Saddam?"

Um, we're bombing the Kurds as we speak, in hopes that Turkey will forgive us for even considering acknowledging the Armenian Genocide. Nice try, though.

"Yes, it's been chaotic and near-disastrous. But wait. Wait five-years to ask those questions of the Iraqis about it being worth it."

We already gave them five years. It ain't happening.

"the money doesn't sit in banks. Those banks turn around and lend that money to small businessmen, building projects, and other things which expand and grow the economy."

The banks lent money to loan sharks who couldn't pay them back, not to local business.

"Also, it's been consumer spending that's kept GDP growth alive so where you get your ideas is beyond me."

We don't have a GDP anymore, because our consumer spending on foreign goods has created a trade deficit.

"Tax increases or a growing economy is over. Tax increases slow the economy and hurt tax revenues."

And yet, Clinton's tax policies led to one of the best economies of the century...

"In 1981 federal tax revenues were $500 billion a year. After eight-years and MASSIVE across the board tax cuts, annual tax revenues nearly doubled to $950 billion."

Reagan raised taxes the next year, though...

"If Democrats would stop wanting to punish the rich"

Yeah, why should we be so hard on people who sell our jobs to Mexico? They earned their stock upgrade.

"You can choose to believe this or not, but I have two jobs. One is the website where I make most of my living, the other is screenwriting where I do okay."

Try working at a non-union job like Wal-Mart and see what happens.

"But I'm not a chickenhawk who, like many, many liberal Hollywood filmmakers and activists disparage and insult the troops,"

Yeah, you're just a chickenhawk who uses them as a human shield.

comment #56

SpinDozer says ...

'The rich in this country are extraordinarily generous.'

"The concentration of wealth and income reflects a major shift over the last three decades in how the United States shares its earnings. In
1976, the top 1 percent of the population received 8.83 percent of national income. In 2005, they grabbed 21.93 percent."

'The SS tax should be regressive because it tops out on what you get back.'

No it doesn't. "Furthermore, wealthier individuals generally have higher life expectancies and thus may expect to receive larger benefits for a longer period than poorer taxpayers, often minorities. A single individual who dies before age 62, who is more likely to be poor, receives no retirement benefits despite his years of paying Social Security tax. On the other hand, an individual who lives to age 100, who is more likely to be wealthy, is guaranteed payments that are more than he paid into the system."

comment #57

truefaith says ...

"George W. Bush is a great man who left America and the world more peaceful, freer, and safer than he found it."

George W. Bush left the world more peaceful and safer??? You're kidding, me, right?! I'll tell you what Geoge W. Bush did. He made the terrorists--such as al Qaeda--stronger by being able to recruit more terrorists. He made Iranians or the Shiites stronger. Before the Iraqi war, the Sunnis (i.e., the Arabs, the Iraqis, etc.) were in control of the Middle East. Now that the Shiites are in control of Iraq, this has made the Iranians stronger, who threaten the balance of the Middle East. And because our military is overextended, there's pretty much nothing we can do about the nuclear threats in Korea and even Pakistan. So how can you say the world is more peaceful and safer? The world is in a lot worse shape than when Bush came into office. Bush will go down as one of the worst presidents ever.

comment #58

Dirty Harry says ...

Spin: Life expectancies, now? Come on. And yes, SS tops out. You can only get so much a year because you only contribute up to a certain amount. Which is only fair. SS is the fairest tax we have.

Your bigotry against the wealthy for being wealthy is no different than bigotry against skin color. Ignorance is ignorance. Bigotry is bigotry.

Christian: Soldiers Angels is a wonderful cause. You'll be putting your money to great work. I vett charities like you wouldn't believe. What these good people do is truly special.

comment #59

SpinDozer says ...

'Life expectancies, now? Come on. And yes, SS tops out. You can only get so much a year because you only contribute up to a certain amount. Which is only fair. SS is the fairest tax we have.'

Yeah, Life expectancies, meaning a persons benefit may exceed what they put in. Which is a rather important benefit. The annual benefit is determined by contributions, specifically, the last three years. That may seem fair to you, but that is because you have a rather twisted understanding of what social programs are intended to do. I have no bigotry against the rich, just a realistic understanding of what they are. It would be just as fair to say you indulge in bigotry against the poor.

comment #60

Dirty Harry says ...

I've not said a single negative thing about the poor. If you want to have a civilized debate don't make things up. If I didn't care about the poor I wouldn't be a conservative.

You however said, "The wealthy do not spend their days trying to help people by boosting the real economy, its all about helping themselves, absolute drivel to think otherwise."

No it's absolute prejudice to think so.

And yes, SS contributions are based on annual contributions but top out. You only pay SS on your first 100k of income or so. After that you pay nothing. So your annual contribution tops out as does the check you get. Donald Trump's monthly SS check won't be much higher than your average college professor.

Life expectancy is all you got. Whatever.

comment #61

SpinDozer says ...

'Life expectancy is all you got. Whatever.'

Plus, I got the 'not a complete moron' thing happening for me which gives me a slight, but decisive, edge over you. Look up 'self-interest' sometime, Mr. free-marketplace.

comment #62

astaga.com lifestyle on the net says ...

Your work is very good and I appreciate you and hopping for some more informative posts.
| astaga.com lifestyle on the net | astaga.com lifestyle on the net |
thank you for sharing great information to us

comment #63

penis buyutucu says ...

Thank you for this useful information. In this website. I hope to find more useful information.Thanks; penis buyutucu | dis beyazlatma kalemi | sunflower krem | sunflower krem | dizi izle | film izle | sikis | porn | porno | porno izle | porno | magna rx good job.