By Caitlin Taylor

Feb 26, 2009 8:24am

The Note, 2/26/09: Taxing Tasks — Big new plans, and a very mixed message from Obama

By RICK KLEIN That fiscal discipline thing was fun while it lasted, wasn’t it? There’s nothing quite like reinforcing a message of restraint by bracketing it with a $787 billion stimulus package, a $410 billion omnibus budget, and a $634 billion healthcare fund. With Thursday’s budget rollout, the odometer ticks toward $2 trillion. Whatever savings he outlines, we can just about roll away President Obama’s hopes of establishing himself as the guardian of the taxpayer dollar, at least for now. Here come all the ideas, all at once — from a president who’s trying to deliver as broadly and deeply as he promised. The obstacles here are multiple — on fronts political, fiscal, and PR. This is the president’s bold new vision, but it’s also a cold old portrait of taxing and spending that he’s got to be able to defend. Will trying to do everything at once make it more likely that everything gets done, or that nothing gets done? Where’s the message there — and here? Team Obama may not mind this image, but then again maybe it should: Obama’s budget plan represents “a pronounced move to redistribute wealth by reimposing a larger share of the tax burden on corporations and the most affluent taxpayers,” Jackie Calmes and Robert Pear report in The New York Times. “President Obama will propose further tax increases on the affluent to help pay for his promise to make health care more accessible and affordable,” they write. “The tax proposal, coming after recent years in which wealth has become more concentrated at the top of the income scale, introduces a politically volatile edge to the Congressional debate over Mr. Obama’s domestic priorities.” Anyone want to guess what gets more attention Thursday — healthcare or taxes? “The tax increases would raise an estimated $318 billion over 10 years by reducing the value of such longstanding deductions as mortgage interest and charitable contributions for people in the highest tax brackets,” Laura Meckler writes in The Wall Street Journal. “One concern certain to get attention in Congress: whether a change to the deductions formula would discourage charitable giving among the wealthy, or further depress the housing market given that the interest deduction would fall for some.” “President Barack Obama will propose the first tax increase on high-income earners in 16 years to help pay for sweeping health-care reforms,” Bloomberg’s Ryan Donmoyer and Aliza Marcus report. While we’re reading lips: “To partially fund the Health Care Reserve Fund, another new source of revenue — or tax hike — the President will propose applying the same income standard for premiums for Medicare Part D (prescription drugs) that applies already to Medicare Part B (doctors’ visits),” ABC’s Jake Tapper reports. And don’t say the Obama idea factory isn’t churning: “Some people within the administration are arguing that that . . . the government needs to bombard people with examples of what’s being done right — like holding big rallies for all the schoolteachers whose jobs are saved by the stimulus,” Gail Collins reports in her New York Times column. “Or — and I swear to you this is a real idea — inventing a kind of stimulus logo, like the old National Recovery Administration blue eagle, that could be posted on every federally funded project, as one official explained, ‘to show the public exactly what we’re doing.’ ” The budget rollout includes 9:30 am ET presidential remarks, with multiple briefings to follow, and all manner of response from Capitol Hill and beyond. Anyone want to guess what this does for GOP messaging? “From everything I’ve seen, it looks like the era of big government spending is back,” House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said at a Christian Science Monitor lunch Wednesday. Think Newt is smiling? Mr. Gingrich is “The Anti-Obama,” per Matt Bai’s forthcoming New York Times Magazine cover story. In it find seeds of the GOP’s version of triangulation — playing the president off of congressional leaders. “I don’t actually build oppositions,” Gingrich tells Bai. “I build the next governing majority. I have no interest in being an opposition party.” Great timing for CPAC. The Conservative Political Action Committee’s Washington meeting starts Thursday — and here’s guessing speakers like Rep. Paul Ryan, Rep. Mike Pence, and former Gov. Mike Huckabee have a theme or two they can agree on. Bill Kristol rallies the troops: “Obama’s speech reminds of Ronald Reagan’s in 1981 in its intention to reshape the American political landscape. But of course Obama wishes to undo the Reagan agenda,” he writes in his Washington Post column. Eyes wide open, at least: “The president will convene a summit on health care reform next week to begin to tackle the issue and is under no illusions that the path for such legislation will be difficult on Capitol Hill, his spokesman said today,” per ABC’s Jake Tapper and Karen Travers report. “Obama will turn over health care reform to Congress — unlike the Clinton White House’s attempt in 1993 when then-first lady Hillary Clinton kept it at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.” Backing up the case: Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., and Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., in a Wall Street Journal op-ed. “Some argue that repairing the health-care system now is impossible, given the urgency and high cost of ending the financial crisis. The claim is that we can fix one problem or the other — but not both. In truth, the two are inextricably intertwined: Solving the nation’s health-care crisis is a fundamental part of healing our economy.” As for halving the deficit: “First, many methods he says he will use have fallen short in the past — cutting waste, imposing new budget rules, curbing defense outlays and raising taxes on the affluent. Second and potentially harder to overcome is fresh evidence that, for all the talk of fiscal responsibility, Congress is not ready to mend its free-spending ways,” The Los Angeles Times’ Janet Hook and Peter Nicholas report. It’s all on the table: “The size of the gambles that President Obama is taking every day is simply staggering,” David Broder writes in his Washington Post column. “What came through in his speech to a joint session of Congress and a national television audience Tuesday night was a dramatic reminder of the unbelievable stakes he has placed on the table in his first month in office, putting at risk the future well-being of the country and the Democratic Party’s control of Washington.” “Obama must engage in a perilous balancing act. On one hand, he needs to reassure investors and make the case that his $787 billion spending bill is turning the economy around,” Fortune’s Nina Easton writes. “On the other hand, Obama has a breathlessly ambitious agenda, much of which he wants to enact this year — sweeping health care reform, doubling the nation’s use of renewable energy, creating a ‘retooled and reimagined’ auto industry, raising everyone’s education levels, halving of the nation’s deficit, entitlement reform — and, yes, finding a ‘cure for cancer in our time.’ “ Reality watch: “Many Democrats have expressed trepidation about the lofty expectations that Obama has set and are keenly aware that the party could pay a steep price in,” The Washington Post’s Shailagh Murray and Paul Kane report. Gimmick watch: “It identifies $634 billion in tax increases and spending cuts to cover the cost of part of the [healthcare] program, but does not say how the administration hopes to raise the rest of the money — hundreds of billions of dollars more. ‘TBD’ has been penciled into categories for cost savings and benefit reductions,” Lori Montgomery writes in The Washington Post. “And though Obama told Congress on Tuesday that his budget team has ‘already identified $2 trillion in savings’ to help tame record budget deficits, about half of those ‘savings’ are actually tax increases, administration officials said. A big chunk of the rest of the savings comes from measuring Obama’s plans against an unrealistic scenario in which the Iraq war continues to suck up $170 billion a year forever.” And don’t forget the transition site: “On his Presidential Transition website, President Obama said he would ‘pay for his $50 – $65 billion health care reform effort by rolling back the Bush tax cuts for Americans earning more than $250,000 per year and retaining the estate tax at its 2009 level,’ ” per ABC’s Jake Tapper. “But as we learned yesterday afternoon, though the President is certainly planning on raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans by allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire next year — making the top rate jump from 35% to 39.6% — the President plans on partially funding the Health Care Reserve fund by raising another, new tax on those families making $250,000 a year, specifically from reducing the itemized deduction rate for families with incomes over $250,000, limiting it to 28 percent. . . . This new tax is certainly consistent with President Obama’s campaign rhetoric of asking wealthier Americans to pay more, but it’s also, at least to my ears, new.” Then there’s the omnibus. The story that’s always easy to tell: “Buckets of taxpayers’ cash — adding up to nearly $8 billion — are due to shower over thousands of projects, including many that appear to have little promise of creating jobs or reducing the national debt,” James Gordon Meek writes for the New York Daily News. “There’s $190,000 set aside in the House’s version of the federal budget for bringing Cody, Wyo.’s Buffalo Bill Historical Center into the digital age, watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense found. Some may also wonder if $238,000 for educational programs at Honolulu’s Polynesian Voyaging Society is a national priority – an item sponsored by a Democratic senator.” An instant classic: “Among the pet projects is one to help producers of genuine pork, in contrast to the Congressional variety. The bill includes $1.8 million to conduct research in Iowa on ‘swine odor and manure management,’ ” Robert Pear reports in The New York Times. “Business as usual,” reads the headline on the front page of The Boston Globe. “The earmarks were inserted despite President Obama’s statement in his speech Tuesday night to Congress that he was ‘proud’ there wasn’t a single earmark in the separate $787 billion stimulus plan and the possibility that he might veto legislation loaded with pet projects,” the Globe’s Michael Kranish reports. Wait — he inherited this, too? “What may be next week’s bill is last year’s legislation,” White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said. “It may seem yet another example of Washington hypocrisy, but the Obama Administration insists there is no contradiction between its words and actions,” Time’s Jay Newton-Small and Michael Scherer report. But the president can’t be all happy: “According to a knowledgeable source, Obama pressed the lawmakers to keep earmarks out of spending bills but was resisted,” Roll Call’s Keith Koffler writes. “Democratic leaders defended the practice, insisting that it was Members’ constitutional right to insert them on behalf of constituents’ projects that they deemed worthy, that Congress had markedly reduced the practice and that earmarks represented 1 percent of spending.” (Even if you take away the earmarks — does Obama want to be signing a bill that raises domestic spending another 8 percent? Wasn’t the short-term stimulus supposed to be in the, um, stimulus bill?) Lovely timing: “The day after President Barack Obama told Congress that it would have to ‘sacrifice some worthy priorities for which there are no dollars,’ the House of Representatives passed a massive budget bill Wednesday that increases spending by 8 percent over last year,” McClatchy’s David Lightman writes. Unpacking the policy: “Democrats, freed from former President George W. Bush’s veto threats, are gutting the previous administration’s programs with funding cuts and policy changes in the omnibus spending bill that the House passed Wednesday,” S.A. Miller reports in the Washington Times. Still — a worry on the other side? “16 members broke from the party line on a vote Minority Whip Eric Cantor had urged his colleagues to reject. And the cracks in the facade appear to be the first public signal of Republican rank-and-file squeamishness with a remarkably high-risk strategy that promises an uncertain return,” Politico’s Charles Mahtesian and Patrick O’Connor report. “For Republicans, a central question looms: Is saying no to Obama’s agenda the way to get voters to say yes to an already beleaguered GOP brand?” Holding the line — and holding out: “He was elected with an awful lot of hope on the part of voters that he was actually going to do things in a different way,” Cantor, R-Va., tells ABC News. An astounding few sentences from Karl Rove, on several levels, in an attack on the president’s use of “straw men” in arguments: “Mr. Obama portrays himself as a nonideological, bipartisan voice of reason. Everyone resorts to straw men occasionally, but Mr. Obama’s persistent use of the device is troubling. Continually characterizing those who disagree with you in a fundamentally dishonest way can be the sign of a person who lacks confidence in the merits of his ideas,” he writes in The Wall Street Journal. (Remind us again of who said this: “Republicans have a post-9/11 worldview and many Democrats have a pre-9/11 worldview.”) Former President Bill Clinton was a fan of Obama’s Tuesday speech: “I think he drew the right balance — he didn’t sugarcoat anything, he didn’t say it’s gonna get better tomorrow,” he tells The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent. A different cut on discipline: ABC’s Teddy Davis reports that a handful of powerful liberal groups are putting Democratic officeholders on notice Thursday that they will challenge congressional incumbents who become “more responsive to corporate America than to their constituents.”

The new political action committee is called “Accountability Now PAC.” It is being led by Markos Moulitsas of DailyKos, the Service Employees International Union, and MoveOn.org. Other groups supporting Accountability Now include: Color of Change, 21st Century Democrats, BlogPAC, and Democracy for America .

ABC’s Jonathan Karl on Thursday grabs the first post-White House interview with Laura Bush. The first piece will air on “World News with Charles Gibson,” with much more to come on “Good Morning America” Friday. What’s holding up HHS? “A senior Obama administration official tells The Brody File that concerns voiced by pro-life groups about potential HHS Secretary Nominee Kathleen Sebelius have come up in high level White House discussions but it has not disqualified her from the job,” David Brody reports. “Pro-life groups believe Sebelius’s connection to Kansas late term abortionist George Tiller is a major problem.” ABC’s John Hendren explores the audacity of informality: “Dancing a few steps to pander to the middle-American viewers of ‘Ellen’ during the campaign was one thing, but bare arms and Oprah-esque phrases like ‘I get it’ during a congressional address are quite another. What’s next? White House casual Fridays?: The Kicker: “Do you know the website number?” — Vice President Joe Biden, trying to dial up Recovery.gov. “When I was growing up, the priests taught us to think that was a sin.” — Sen. John Kerry, asked by Politico’s Patrick Gavin how often he Googles himself. Bookmark the link below to get The Note’s daily morning analysis:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/the_note/index.html For up-to-the-minute political updates check out The Note’s blog . . . all day every day:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/ Follow The Note on Twitter: http://twitter.com/thenote

User Comments

Tax the rich? Overdo it and they will simply MOVE! Why should they pay for trillions of dollars worth of pork alone? This is a true disaster. Washington has gone crazy and this is what happens when you don’t have TWO parties controlling the government.

Posted by: M. Summer | February 26, 2009, 8:40 am 8:40 am

ABC had a forum up on Obama banning bullets and assault rifles last night. What happened ABC, you had so many against speaking out, you figured you would take it down, or did the Obama team tell you to take it off?

Posted by: ajax | February 26, 2009, 8:44 am 8:44 am

I’m getting perty dern tired of politicians spending money for nuttin’.

Posted by: Kitty | February 26, 2009, 9:11 am 9:11 am

Um, I thought this was what voters wanted when they elected B. Hussein Obama? He often said in his speeches pre-election that he planned to “spread the wealth, spread the wealth”. Also, I find it ironic he is calling his program “Make Work Pay” since it’s staying true to it’s name. He just left part of the title off, “Make Work Pay for those too lazy to work themselves.”

Posted by: Nancy Dickinson | February 26, 2009, 9:16 am 9:16 am

Fiscal discipline? In this horrible economy? The Republicans had 8 yrs to attain fiscal discipline. What did they do? a $1 trillion dollar deficit. Now all they’re concerned about is fiscal discipline??!! Come on people! We’ve got a totalled economy. How are we gonna attain fiscal discipline now?

Posted by: Bob | February 26, 2009, 9:17 am 9:17 am

if you taxed the top 1% – 100% of their salary next year – it still wouldn’t cover half the deficit. i think when he said america needed “hope” instead of fear – he really meant “hope” instead of dealing with reality.

Posted by: yikes! | February 26, 2009, 9:21 am 9:21 am

WHAT IS THIS COUNTRY COMING TO???? WE HAVE VICE PREZ JOZO THE CLOWN IN CHARGE OF OVERSIGHT….AND PREZ BAROBIN OBAMAHOOD ROBBING MY CHILDREN AND GREAT-GRANDCHILDREN’S $$$

Posted by: CATHY | February 26, 2009, 9:21 am 9:21 am

Even if Obama taxes the rich more, it’ll still be at a much lower rate than it was before Reagan. I suspect though that the press will come after Obama HARD on this because, with their additional cable TV pundit dollars, the press now makes more than they did before Reagan. They are the rich.
As for the study of swine smell and manure management, if you’ve ever lived near a large factory farm, you know it’s money well spent. But chances are you don’t, they only put those farms near impoverished rural regions. It’s poisonous. America lives completely in the dark when it comes to their food supply chain. And now it’ll just be a punch line. Typical.

Posted by: T Barlow | February 26, 2009, 9:21 am 9:21 am

This is what is known as a double standard. Do as I say, not as I do.
The government is growing at unprecedented bounds. Our tax burden is going to be the greatest ever known to the history of America and this is what Obama calls change and a better America.
Has he fulfilled even one campaign promise?

Posted by: Fran | February 26, 2009, 9:23 am 9:23 am

First they should ban assault rifles and bullets. We do not need the Wild West in this economy.
Second, I’m tired of everyone complaining. We have had eight years leading to this mess and never saw Mr. Bush get up and talk tough and do something. He just said it was hard work.
Now after they get us into this mess it’s all Pres. Obama’s fault? Grow up people…we have to do something and just cutting taxes as the Repubs is not going to do it. We need to create jobs…and if people don’t have jobs there will be no taxes to cut.
Let the man do his job….I don’t think people realize just how serious this is. He’s only been in a month…it took 8 years to create the mess it will take years to fix it.
And to everyone who lived beyond their means, this is your fault also!

Posted by: Barb | February 26, 2009, 9:24 am 9:24 am

I feel like our Government resembles a room full of ADD kids off their meds for a few days. Their is no clarity in what they are doing except they seem hell bent on making everyone the same and that is when all of us become very poor.

Posted by: david | February 26, 2009, 9:24 am 9:24 am

“ABC had a forum up on Obama banning bullets and assault rifles last night.”
What kind of bullets? And what’s wrong with banning assault rifles? The right to bear arms doesn’t necessarily protect your right to spray bullets fast and furiously to your heart’s content.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 9:24 am 9:24 am

read the wall street journal’s opinion column today titled “obama’s 2% illlusion” math doesn’t lie – we are ALL going to have higher taxes soon – or our country will go broke due to our government’s over-spending.

Posted by: real math | February 26, 2009, 9:25 am 9:25 am

and real math: most people also overspent…credit cards maxed out, homes beyond what they could afford….there is much blame to go around. And now everyone is complaining…we need big screen tvs, all kinds of fancy cable, restaurants every night, all kinds of fancy clothes, vacations…people just spent and spent also. And now they wonder why we are in this mess. Yes the government overspent the last 8 years including Iraq and so did the people.

Posted by: Barb | February 26, 2009, 9:27 am 9:27 am

“Their is no clarity in what they are doing except they seem hell bent on making everyone the same and that is when all of us become very poor.”
Your analytical skills could use some work. Striving to get health care for children and the poor and to slightly ease the pain of those struggling in this economy is hardly an attempt to “make everyone the same.”

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 9:28 am 9:28 am

“ABC’s John Hendren explores the audacity of informality”
Why does ABC have to go down that road? Is it helpful to the country to launch attack personal attacks on the President? If ABC has a problem with Obama’s policies, than raise those issues, explore alternative plans, whatever, but why amp up the partisan smear machine on Obama personally? I think we all know why: ABC wants to be YOUR Republican network. They want to be a mainstream FOX. 99.9% of ABC headlines and The Note posts are snarky, negative attacks on Democrats and Obama. I guess the days when networks strove to be trusted news sources is over. Times have changed.

Posted by: Amy | February 26, 2009, 9:30 am 9:30 am

Silky, that’s right…Pres. Obama is trying to get health care for everyone..don’t people realize that if some don’t have the health care the ones that do pay for it? And he is trying to create jobs. I would like to see what some of these not too bright people would do. All they do is complain.
He is trying to straghten this all out and I’m so tired of these doomsayers…Let’s all do our part and pray that we will get out of this.

Posted by: Barb | February 26, 2009, 9:30 am 9:30 am

You may not like Obama’s plan but do you have a better one that you can propose that is not the same thing that got us into this mess?? Obama ran a great campaign in every sense, therefore I will give him the benefit of the doubt on his plan which will take 2 – 3 years before we know if it it worked. He is a great leader thus far and a wonderful speaker. I like his goals except I would nationalize the FED and any banks that took TARP money. Other than that so far his is doing fine. I hope he never touches SS or diminishes it in any way, since I am a baby boomer, and although I plan to work full time to age 69 or 70, I will need my SS to help support me in old age. Most baby boomers will since their 401k went south on them.

Posted by: eyeonyou | February 26, 2009, 9:30 am 9:30 am

Dumbest article EVER. WE ARE IN A FINANCIAL MESS left by the previous administration.
Obama is going to do whatever it takes to get us out of this and if that means being labeled as a tax and spend liberal” by a few morons on the right then so be it.
They are the ones who got us into this mess with their tax cuts and inaction.

Posted by: silentbob | February 26, 2009, 9:33 am 9:33 am

t. Barlow–you must be a vegetarian–pigs stink–and it is disgusting to think that we need to pay for your sensitive nose. put a cotton ball in your nose and shut-up. people are losing jobs because of Obama. And don’t try to work hard and be successful–Obama will take it from you so he can jet around more on airforce 1 and promise the world to lazy people who don’t pay their mortgages.

Posted by: janey | February 26, 2009, 9:33 am 9:33 am

Eyeonyou, Silent Bob and Amy, you are all right.
And Amy, yes, I believe ABC and Fox just write hateful articles, they are Republican based. I hate the media because they cause a lot of this….they see our country is in trouble and instead of standing behind the Pres. they just make hurtful comments to get a rise out of people who live off of this kind of talk…We need to come together and be a country united again. You can’t believe everything you read and it’s a shame.

Posted by: Barb | February 26, 2009, 9:36 am 9:36 am

eyeonyou–you can forget about your SS or 401K–Obama took care of all that–he only helps people who don’t work–and that does not include you if you have a 401K. I worked like a dog as a nurse all of my life–only to see 401K cut in half–money gone forever–good luck to all of you hard-working people. my advice is to sit on your butt and take govt. money.It’s the only way you will survive when Obama gets through.

Posted by: janey | February 26, 2009, 9:38 am 9:38 am

You have to look at this as a compromise budget from Obama. Steep cuts combined with new taxes and a pathway to universal health care.
Conservatives must understand that they LOST the election. This is the best they can expect for awhile.
http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | February 26, 2009, 9:39 am 9:39 am

“t. Barlow–you must be a vegetarian–pigs stink–and it is disgusting to think that we need to pay for your sensitive nose. put a cotton ball in your nose and shut-up. people are losing jobs because of Obama. And don’t try to work hard and be successful–Obama will take it from you so he can jet around more on airforce 1 and promise the world to lazy people who don’t pay their mortgages.”
Boy it gets messy when they ignore pillcRUSHer’s copy/paste memos and venture out on their own.
I would like to request that ABC put up a new picture of Rick Klein. This one makes me want to flick my computer screen.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 9:40 am 9:40 am

“I worked like a dog as a nurse all of my life–only to see 401K cut in half”
Pssstttt…it already was when he got into office.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 9:42 am 9:42 am

Not to mention, you looking for a quick fix to long-term problems. Settle down and be a grown up. This is not Obama’s making and any solution is going to take time. Channel your frustration into some adventurous sex or a serious narcotic bender, like a good American.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 9:45 am 9:45 am

The Democratic spending spree…. I love how all the BO lovers want to give him YEARS to succeed…. while NOT taking ANY responsibility for the current deficit… even though BO was supposedly a Senator when the economy went south… and the Democrats were fully in charge of the BUDGET for the last two years…

Posted by: speciousmedia | February 26, 2009, 9:45 am 9:45 am

He IS a tax and spend liberal. That’s what people voted for when they voted for him. Why is it so bad to call him what he IS? That IS what he IS. It’s not moronic to call him that. It’s the truth. Obama IS a tax and spend liberal and the majority of people who voted voted for that. Geez.

Posted by: Kitty | February 26, 2009, 9:46 am 9:46 am

Speciousmedia: When are people going to realize the Dems were not in charge for the past two years? Yes they had a majority, of ONE. And everytime they wanted something passed, Bush would reject it. Do you understand Bush was the president for the last eight years?

Posted by: Barb | February 26, 2009, 9:46 am 9:46 am

“I love how all the BO lovers want to give him YEARS to succeed….”
While I’m not a “BO lover”, I am one who thinks we should give him more than 5 weeks.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 9:47 am 9:47 am

Just a continuaion of the Bush mess, fiasco, cluster @$#$, whatever you want to call it.

Posted by: dfg | February 26, 2009, 9:48 am 9:48 am

“First they should ban assault rifles and bullets. We do not need the Wild West in this economy.”
Yea.. try this one. Try it. You don’t have a clue, do you?

Posted by: ajax | February 26, 2009, 9:48 am 9:48 am

Not to be mean but the guy who wrote the rich would leave!? Let them,,,
I’m sure someone will be glad to take that job they are doing… Im tired of hearing about how this affects the RICH! What about us, (me) My family is just as important as yours. Haven’t the RICH gotten enough breaks?

Posted by: Kristy | February 26, 2009, 9:49 am 9:49 am

I just wonder how many times they can go take money from the over $250K folks.
I would be afraid they are looking at “paper” revenue gains and the real taxable income might not be there in the amounts they are projecting. Thus, we get stuck wtih expensive ongoing budget expenditures. Additonally, they seem to be spending the same money multiple times.
Allowing the tax cuts to expire as scheduled is one thing, adding mroe and mroe taxes or limiting deductions is quite another. I am not sure we will see the tax revenues anywhere close to what they are projecting.
If we need an example of the impact of super high taxes on the few, just look at CA and NY…their states are in a real quandry.

Posted by: scott jeffries | February 26, 2009, 9:52 am 9:52 am

You idiots sure didn’t have a problem spending trillions of dollars to pay for the Bush folly into Iraq..so shut the hell up now.

Posted by: Mark | February 26, 2009, 9:52 am 9:52 am

“Yea.. try this one. Try it.”
What? Banning assault rifles? Okay. I wrote Pelosi when I lived in SF and expressed my interest in seeing assault rifles banned. There’s no reason for them to be in the general population. Period.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 9:52 am 9:52 am

The “rich” take risks that poor people can’t fathom ever taking. The “rich” don’t get that way by complaining about the “rich”. They watch what the “rich” before them did and then take risks, too. It’s not rocket science.

Posted by: Kitty | February 26, 2009, 9:53 am 9:53 am

“Additonally, they seem to be spending the same money multiple times.”
I’m not disputing this, just curious what you’re referring to.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 9:53 am 9:53 am

Another $3 TRILLION. “In Debt We Trust.”

Posted by: Geo | February 26, 2009, 9:55 am 9:55 am

He’s been saying one thing and doing another all along. Say’s he’s cutting budget but introduces a version of last year’s budget on stearoids. Say’s he won’t interfere with 2nd amendment rights then wants to ban/register guns and limit the sale of ammunition. Says guns from America are falling into the hands of Mexican drug cartels. Easy solution. Control the border. Gosh we can stop Mexico from buying guns from Argentina’s automatic weapons factory by registering our guns in America. Who’d have thought of that? Guess there will be lots of new outlaws. The high income top 2% can suffer a loss of 3% or so from their incomes, but it won’t make a dent in the budget deficit. Surely people will see his party’s deceit soon.

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 26, 2009, 9:56 am 9:56 am

@silky,
About all Assault rifles are already banned. The bullets that (what people call) assault weapons use the same Ammo as HUNTING rifles. You band the bullets for assault rifles, you are banning bullets used in hunting rifles.
Most crimes and robberies in this country are committed using HANDGUNS. NOT RIFLES. Walking into a bank with a rifle in you hand is a little damned obvious, DON’T YOU THINK?
Reading makes you smarter.

Posted by: ajax | February 26, 2009, 9:57 am 9:57 am

I love how people want to TAKE money they DIDNT earn…. its now an American RIGHT to to be stupid, lazy, and just plain ignorant and have other people support thier chosen life style…..

Posted by: speciousmedia | February 26, 2009, 9:57 am 9:57 am

Higher taxes on businesses, to a point, can actually be better for the economy then low tax rates. Under high tax rates businesses will invest more in staff, jobs, and infratstructure to grow their business in an effort to artificially lower their profit margins. They still made money but they then invest it in their own business to reduce their actual net profit so they lose less money to taxes. However low tax rates may actually discourage these investments as businesses instead take that profit and invest it in financial markets. This money is no longer used to improve and grow their business and sits in a savings account/stock market. If you get across the board tax cuts this may initiate this process on all businesses in the country, effectively removing that wealth from investment in anything BUT the financial markets. This may grow for a short time but in essence if the money is not in infrastructure or jobs what does it really represent? If a majority of major inverstors do this at once you can get the formation of a bubble, with more assesed wealth in the system than actually exists, and sooner or later bubbles burst.

Posted by: Ordermonger | February 26, 2009, 9:57 am 9:57 am

“t. Barlow–you must be a vegetarian–pigs stink–and it is disgusting to think that we need to pay for your sensitive nose. put a cotton ball in your nose and shut-up. people are losing jobs because of Obama. And don’t try to work hard and be successful–Obama will take it from you so he can jet around more on airforce 1 and promise the world to lazy people who don’t pay their mortgages.”
Wow, Janey….Your 401K was cut, did that just happen? My husband’s went downhill all last year. Ummmmm, who was the president then? hmmmmmm. Jobs are being lost? REally? Just in the LAST month? My niece lives in NY, NY, she said she lost her job a couple of months ago………. Wait a minute, who was president then? hmmmmmmmmm
I have been out of work since May, 2008. You are right it IS Obama’s fault. Have an IQ test lately?

Posted by: scentsofroses | February 26, 2009, 9:58 am 9:58 am

eyeonyou
It doesn’t take much to come up with a better idea.
–Don’t give $800 million to Palestine to rebuild what will be blown up again in a few months with American supplied missiles. Cut out aid to other nations while we’re at it.
–Remove the pork from the stimulus bill.
$50 million for the National Foundation for the Arts. (That’s a lot of ballet)
$2.4 BILLION for carbon-capture demonstration projects
$400 million for global warming research.
$337 million to teach kids how sexually transmitted diseases are transmitted. (Uh, let me guess)
I’d give you a complete list but much of the pork is hidden so deep that nobody knows all of it.
–Close foreign military bases and use our troops to guard our borders for a change.
–Move ATF responsibilities to the FBI and Treasury department who already oversees alcohol and tobacco.
I’m sure I could come up with a few more ideas without a lot of work.
If you raise taxes on a rich business man he’ll just raise his prices to cover it. Who actually pays the tax? The consumer. Why not institute a national sales tax and be honest about it?

Posted by: Oonogil | February 26, 2009, 9:58 am 9:58 am

“Reading makes you smarter.”
I asked what bullets. That’s all I said about bullets. All automatic weapons should be outlawed, afaic.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 9:59 am 9:59 am

THE MIDDLE CLASS HAS BEEN STAGNENT SINCE 1980 WHEN REGAN SHIFTED TAXES TO FAVOR THE TOP 10 PERCENT OF THE TAXPAYERS.EVEN WARREN BUFFET SAID SOMETHINGS WRONG WITH THE SYSTEM WHEN HIS SECRETARY PAYS A HIGHER TAX RATE THAN HE DOES.THE WEALTH HAS BEEN DISTRUTED FROM THE MIDDLE CLASS TO THE TOP 10.THIS WILL SHIFT IT BACK SO THAT ALL AMERICANS CAN ENJOY GROWTH NOT JUST THE WEALTHY

Posted by: cable | February 26, 2009, 9:59 am 9:59 am

I think many people–including Rick Klein, apparently–do not know that deductions are ALREADY limited for people in the 28% tax bracket–3% for every 1000 over. Remember, however, that this is not 28% of total income, but only on that income that exceeds the threshold for the next lower tax bracket. So Obama’s plan simply aplies the same reduction to a larger number of people. Rick Klein must not be paying attention to his own taxes–does he use Tom Dashle’s tax preparer?

Posted by: Mike | February 26, 2009, 10:00 am 10:00 am

Australia banned assault weapons after the last civilian massacre by a demented kook.

Posted by: Amy | February 26, 2009, 10:00 am 10:00 am

@Silky,
Read and learn.
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcassaul.html
Definitions
A genuine assault weapon, as opposed to a legal definition, is a hand-held, selective fire weapon, which means it’s capable of firing in either an automatic or a semiautomatic mode depending on the position of a selector switch. These kinds of weapons are heavily regulated by the National Firearms Act of 1934 and are further regulated in some states. (See machine guns.)
However, current “assault weapon” legislation defines certain semi-automatic weapons as “assault weapons.” A semi-automatic weapon is one that fires a round with each pull of the trigger, versus an automatic weapon which continues to shoot until the trigger is released or the ammunition supply is exhausted. These kinds of “assault weapons” are sometimes referred to as military-style semi-automatic weapons.
An example of assault weapon legislation is the Federal 1994 Crime Bill. The bill in part outlaws new civilian manufacture of certain semi-automatic assault weapons. It also prohibits new civilian manufacture of “large capacity ammunition feeding devices” declared certain weapons as assault weapons, and states a semi-automatic rifle is an assault weapon if it can accept a detachable magazine and has two or more of the following:
A folding or telescoping stock
A pistol grip
A bayonet mount
A flash suppressor, or threads to attach one
A grenade launcher.

Posted by: ajax | February 26, 2009, 10:01 am 10:01 am

The people will tire of Obama’s nonsense and take the country back!!!! It’s not just Obama it’s the whole political syatem that is the problem….

Posted by: for sure | February 26, 2009, 10:02 am 10:02 am

“THE MIDDLE CLASS HAS BEEN STAGNENT SINCE 1980 WHEN REGAN SHIFTED TAXES TO FAVOR THE TOP 10 PERCENT OF THE TAXPAYERS.”
Curse you, Donald Regan!!!

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 10:02 am 10:02 am

My previous post is a summary of one economic model that some have come up with. I can think of 3 times that tax cuts have been used extensively, largely for the wealthy and business. The first is obviously the Bush tax cuts, that many can see the track record for those. The second was that Reagan cut taxes in ’81, followed by a recession in ’86/87. The third instance of tax cuts was in the years preceeding the Great Depression. Calvin Coolidge intiated tax cuts prior to the GD, cutting income tax on the weatlthy from 73% (yes it was 73 back then!) to 46% in 1924. This was followed by the GD in 1929, at which point Herbert Hoover made more tax cuts only to see the economy continue to decline for 3 more years. Only once FDR took over and instituted the New Deal did the economy start to recover.

Posted by: Ordermonger | February 26, 2009, 10:04 am 10:04 am

You’re talking to the wrong person, ajax. If it was up to me, all guns would be illegal.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 10:05 am 10:05 am

Amy; ABC wants to sell advertising. Reporting of the news and events is just a sideline activity.

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 26, 2009, 10:05 am 10:05 am

I will take a brilliant Rhodes Scholar–Jindal-over an affirmative action Harvard grad any ole day. Also, substance over style.So, now Obama is hinting at a cure for cancer in his term? Good luck, as fewer donations will be made because he got rid of all those “nasty rich people”who gave all of the money for research.

Posted by: janey | February 26, 2009, 10:06 am 10:06 am

Suprisingly I am saying this, but before I do I would like to know the previous spending budget of the last 5 administrations and still want to take into consideration that this president has inheritied the worst economy since the great depression. He would not have won the election nor would have the political clout to pass such a bill without the financial mess that we’re in. Now not knowing all the facts( including how much has been spent thus far on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) and also how much any president NORMALLY spends on a budget.All that being said, and with little information to go on( like the info we get from these news articles).With my limited information on how to run a government that is by the people and for the people I am concerned about the money figures I’m hearing thrown around.I campaigned for Obama. I still have the Obama/Biden sign in my window. All that being said, I am surprised to say I feel and hear a little of what the republicans are saying aboout out of control spending.Is this budget necessary and will it help the American people. I support my president( some of my friends say I’m a fanatic) but let’s make sure he is making the right decisions with this money.My trust in his actions is wavering a little and I’m becoming concerned.Maybe I wouldn’t be if he didn’t HAVE TO respond to the crisises that arose from the previous administration.He is responding to years of abuse in the financial market but it is a scary how much money is being aloted for this. Thinking about it I guess his sick patient theory comes to mind.Our economy is sick and the procedures to fix it are painful to look at.Like an I.C. patient.I love the president , but let’s make sure no one in his party is taking advantage of us.Let’s make sure he really knows what hes’ doing.I hope he does.We have to hold him acountable.

Posted by: TV | February 26, 2009, 10:06 am 10:06 am

People who make UNDER $250,000 who don’t think their taxes are going up are IDIOTS… because they WILL…. you may not them directly… because the tax hikes on the so-called rich will be past on to you, the CONSUMER, in the price of the goods and services that the so-called rich people provide to you …. just another smoke and mirror tale from BO and the Democrats

Posted by: speciousmedia | February 26, 2009, 10:06 am 10:06 am

This guy is bent on destroying the USSA
(united socialist States of America)
Everyone was warned, but networks like ABC, CBS and NBC hid the truth about this guy
Now the military is questioning his aurthority to be commander-in-chief

Posted by: O-DUMB-AH | February 26, 2009, 10:07 am 10:07 am

Tea party anyone?

Posted by: bo | February 26, 2009, 10:08 am 10:08 am

“Now the military is questioning his aurthority to be commander-in-chief”
Yeah, good luck with that one.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 10:09 am 10:09 am

I was trying to illustrate that higher taxes on businesses, to a point, can actually be better for the economy then low tax rates. Under high tax rates businesses will invest more in staff, jobs, and infratstructure to grow their business in an effort to artificially lower their profit margins. They still made money but they then invest it in their own business to reduce their actual net profit. However low tax rates may actually discourage these investments as businesses instead take that profit and invest it in financial markets. This money is no longer used to improve and grow their business and sits in a savings account/stock market. If you get across the board tax cuts this may initiate this process on all businesses in the country, effectively removing that wealth from investment in anything BUT the financial markets. This may grow for a short time but in essence if the money is not in infrastructure or jobs what does it really represent? If a majority of major inverstors do this at once you can get the formation of a bubble, with more assesed wealth in the system than actually exists, and sooner or later bubbles burst. All this may mean higher taxes, to a point, promote long term slow growth while low taxes may lead to speculation and an inflated bubble.

Posted by: Ordermonger | February 26, 2009, 10:10 am 10:10 am

Only partisans were stupid enough to think that Democrats would spend less than Republicans. Republicans went crazy on spending, but Democrats can always be counted on to spend more.

Posted by: Ricky | February 26, 2009, 10:12 am 10:12 am

scentofroses–my 401 K did not tank until the Democrats took over. don’t make up false information. Bush was not the pres after Nov-2008. the Democrats were in charge of the economy since 2006–you are on the wrong blame train.

Posted by: janey | February 26, 2009, 10:13 am 10:13 am

Janey,
As a scientist I can tell you that almost all money for medical research comes from the government with the exception of a few sources. This was funding that was cut for the first in decades under Bush. Government funds almost all basic research in this country, setting the framework and the basics that private companies then take and turn into money earning projects. But government money is at the root of nearly every innovation.

Posted by: Ordermonger | February 26, 2009, 10:14 am 10:14 am

I wonder why the President continues to block the release of a copy of his original birth certificate, the one created in 1961, not the recently created abstract. What is he hiding?

Posted by: Terry | February 26, 2009, 10:14 am 10:14 am

People are still basically good. The poor give more charity per capital than rich people do. I am sure where we need the help, we will get the help.
Janey, how rich are YOU? You must be loaded. Are you one of those “nasty rich people’?
I’m not. I am comfortable. I am certainly not wealthy. I still want a job. I do do a lot of volunteer work, however. There are a lot of people out there that need that McDonald/s job more than I.
You are a nurse? My sister’s a nurse, my daughter is going into nursing. They kind of would like a cure to cancer……….
How about giving Obama a chance. He’s only been there a month. Nobody is perfect. Oh, and my son is a genious. He has been a mensan for a decade. He is also a math major. He voted for Obama.

Posted by: scentsofroses | February 26, 2009, 10:16 am 10:16 am

As far as Jindal is concerned, he is the typical fat white republican in a different skin color.I am sick of the republicans patronizing Barack’s race by using Jindal as “someone like him” I am also sick of the republican party using there cloaked racism and ignorance by constantly calling Barack ” a gifted speaker” and constantly keep refering to the historic election. Although I agree with their concern for watching wasteful spending, I am disgusted by them using Jindal as a puppet because of his race

Posted by: TV | February 26, 2009, 10:16 am 10:16 am

Terry,
Nice to see you again. Would a birth announcement in a Honolulu newspaper for Obama put your mind at ease? Because you know…they found one.

Posted by: Ordermonger | February 26, 2009, 10:16 am 10:16 am

PERSONALLY I DID NOT VOTE FOR HIM BUT I DO WANT HIM TO DO WELL IF THE PRESIDENT DOES WELL WE DO WELL IF NOT WERE IN TROUBLE BUT YOU HAVE TO TAKE ALL EARMARKS OUT FOR NOW UNTIL THEY CAN FIX THIS MESS WERE IN.

Posted by: natale from mass. | February 26, 2009, 10:17 am 10:17 am

Noone wants to take the neo cons’ guns away. But, who needs uzi’s and assault rifles? Seriously, when Joe The Dittohead downs one too many sixpacks, I don’t need his grenade launcher landing in my back yard.

Posted by: Denise | February 26, 2009, 10:18 am 10:18 am

There is another solution to keeping assault rifles out of the hand of drug cartels that would have other benefits as well. Legalize and tax drugs. It would destroy cartels, take money from the drug dealers and put it into the govt. thus helping reducing the deficit. Also, we could take back the roughly 30 Billion annully we pay the DEA, which has failed from their inception. It would also help control our real problem- exponential population growth. People who took hard drugs would die. What would the enonomic impact be to legalize just marijuana? The cost to legalize $0, the tax revenue made would be all profit. Guess it makes to much sense to to do. Apparently we need to find a way for marijuana to kill people (alcohol, tobacco) or find a way to make it a synthetic drug companies can make all the profit.

Posted by: DSchles33 | February 26, 2009, 10:19 am 10:19 am

Mr. Obama and his party have completely and totally forgotten there are actually hard working, responsible people in this country … people that DID NOT buy a house they could not afford, DID NOT take out a second mortgage to pay for a boat they could not afford, DID NOT go out to dinner every night, DID NOT live the dream they could not afford. I am one of those people, I live within my means, and now I feel like a sucker, I have been had by all those clowns that got themselves into this mess … NOW I have to pay for them, they get off free and clear … THEIR dream comes true at my expense! The message is clear … if you are a responsible person then according to your government you are also a stupid person. It’s just your tough luck you were too damn stupid to not jump on the gravy-train and buy that $900,000 house that is really only worth $400,000 on your $85,000 a year income. You are such a sucker sitting there making the payments on your $250,000 house, each and every month on time … doing without your $95,000 boat … cooking your own meals … driving a 4 year old Ford rather than a new Lexus … wow what a sucker you are … just like me!!

Posted by: wizard | February 26, 2009, 10:20 am 10:20 am

“when you aim at the rich you always hit the middle class”. You people who hate the rich must be living in a strange world. I never got a job from a poor person. If you did, give me his name, because, with Obama running the show, we will all be out of work. Who pays taxes, then?

Posted by: janey | February 26, 2009, 10:21 am 10:21 am

“the Democrats were in charge of the economy since 2006″
They were?

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 10:22 am 10:22 am

TV ENOUGH OF THE RACE ISSUE ITS GETTING OLD IT DOES NOT MATTER TO ME IF YOUR BLACK WHITE GREEN BLUE OR YELLOW IF YOU CAN DO THE JOB THATS JUST GREAT.AND NO IM NOT A COWARD

Posted by: natale from mass. | February 26, 2009, 10:24 am 10:24 am

This is what we voted for. Loving It!
In the words of George Harrison:
“…Everywhere there’s lots of piggies
Living piggy lives
You can see them out for dinner
With their piggy wives
Clutching forks and knives to eat their bacon.”

Posted by: Loving It | February 26, 2009, 10:24 am 10:24 am

wizard–you are so right–I can hardly contain my anger for this gang who is taking everything away from those who worked so hard to get it. I have to believe the people still supporting Obama and co. are simply waiting for their handout so they can keep what you and I have to work for. Wake up America.

Posted by: janey | February 26, 2009, 10:25 am 10:25 am

Anyone who voted for Obama should be ashamed of themselves – I wonder just how many people will step up and admit their mistake.

Posted by: ravenhair49 | February 26, 2009, 10:25 am 10:25 am

Ordermonger
I’ve seen that. It looks like the standard printing of the latest public filings released by the public records office that newspapers used to publish routinely. I have no doubt that the parents filed for a birth certificate at that time, and that the public records office released the information to the newspaper. I just wonder why the President is refusing to release a copy of the original birth certificate, since it obviously exists.

Posted by: Terry | February 26, 2009, 10:25 am 10:25 am

ajax
No one is trying to ban your hunting rifle or the manufacture of bullets for it.

Posted by: Amy | February 26, 2009, 10:26 am 10:26 am

Yes Silky, the Dems have been in charge of the budget since 2006. They’ve approved the budgets from 2006 through today. And you should be ashamed of trying to slough it off as inaccurate.

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 26, 2009, 10:26 am 10:26 am

Terry; Because it’s irrelevant. If Obama’s mother was an American citizen, then so is Obama. Doesn’t matter where he was born. She was raised in Kansas.

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 26, 2009, 10:28 am 10:28 am

TO: Janey, “Speciousmedia: When are people going to realize the Dems were not in charge for the past two years? Yes they had a majority, of ONE. And everytime they wanted something passed, Bush would reject it. Do you understand Bush was the president for the last eight years?”
Yes, Bush was a “Lame-duck” President, pretty much the whole time…..But he was still the President until Jan. 20, 2009!
You also need to re-read the previous scientist’s comment.
This economy has been tanking for more than two years. People have been allowed to have an over-the-top sense of entitlement for too long. That is the reason for the demise of the economy. That and the fact the former pres, just lied to us, the people, about what our debts were. He just conveniently left out, of our national debt, what he spent on the military. WE are only just finding out NOW>

Posted by: scentsofroses | February 26, 2009, 10:28 am 10:28 am

Wizard,
A new FBI study found that mortgage fraud has been rampant in the country since 2004 and that 80% of the time thise frauds were inititated by the LENDERS. The lenders took advantage of lendees, who admittedly did not know enough, but were listening trusting those who they thought did.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/397690_fbiweb28.html

Posted by: Ordermonger | February 26, 2009, 10:28 am 10:28 am

Silky–yes, the Dems were in charge. Congress is in charge of bills passed–not the President. Ever heard of FREDDIE&FANNIE? The democrats’ pet project? Obama has not even read the stimulus bill-just signed it over to Pelosi–he trusts her with his life.

Posted by: janey | February 26, 2009, 10:30 am 10:30 am

Amy,
There was an article on ABC last night where Holder and Obama was going to. There was ALSO a forum about it. Either it was a lie that ABC made up to get reaction, I don’t know. But, it was on here last night. It cannot be found anywhere today. That is what my first Post was about. Trying to figure out Why ABC took it off. When, I notice… it leaves others out here for a couple days.

Posted by: ajax | February 26, 2009, 10:30 am 10:30 am

Just talked to a friend of mine that has to review the Omnibus and health care funding of the “stimulus” bill. He already sees duplication of spending in one that was already passed in the other. We are from different political perspectives, but agreed that it is sickening to spend what this country just doesn’t have and can’t fund.

Posted by: CmonNow | February 26, 2009, 10:31 am 10:31 am

Why is no one talking about the Tobbaco tax increase effective April 1. Just because it is politically correct. Cigarette taxs are going up $6 a carton and for pipe smokers from $1 to $25 a pound for loose tobacco. Not a word from you guys.

Posted by: Bob | February 26, 2009, 10:31 am 10:31 am

Terry
I think we are all wondering why you are obsessed over Obama’s birth.
You hate Obama so much you are hoping he will be removed from office on a technicality?
Is it the fact Obama’s father was Kenyan that fuels your fear?
PS. My grandfather was born in Norway, does that make me scary to you?

Posted by: Amy | February 26, 2009, 10:31 am 10:31 am

“And you should be ashamed of trying to slough it off as inaccurate.”
A) They do not have absolute control over the budget.
B) The budget is not even close to “the economy.”

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 10:32 am 10:32 am

The capital gains tax is going to be 35%. This is a disaster and will cut off investment in industry. Obama’s socialism is the most destructive philosophy ever in American politics.

Posted by: brian | February 26, 2009, 10:34 am 10:34 am

scentofroses–that’s all it takes for bills to be passed–majority of one.and, do not tell me that all those people getting mortgages were hoodwinked. Lots of people I know are bragging about getting their handouts. In the meantime, they are driving a lexus to my honda and have a 60 inch TV screen. Very few people are being honest about this–that’s why they can only find a few REAL sob stories to televise on MSM>

Posted by: janey | February 26, 2009, 10:35 am 10:35 am

“Cigarette taxs are going up $6 a carton and for pipe smokers from $1 to $25 a pound for loose tobacco.”
I’m a part-time cigarette smoker and I think that’s great.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 10:35 am 10:35 am

Bob–you won’t hear any squealing about taxing our “vices” until its $6 on a Big Mac.

Posted by: CmonNow | February 26, 2009, 10:36 am 10:36 am

“Obama has not even read the stimulus bill-just signed it over to Pelosi–he trusts her with his life.”
You know this how?
“Bob–you won’t hear any squealing about taxing our “vices” until its $6 on a Big Mac.”
My God, I wish. And soda. Obesity in this country is out of control.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 10:38 am 10:38 am

Where is AARP on this one? It’s obvious where the money is going to come from to pay for all of this and that will be Social Security. For all of you who have been paying into Social Security for the past 20, 30 or 40 years sit back and watch your retirement disappear.

Posted by: edlaw | February 26, 2009, 10:38 am 10:38 am

Ajax,
Was this the article?
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=6962246

Posted by: Amy | February 26, 2009, 10:39 am 10:39 am

Ever hear of the veto-power of the President? Those crazy Dems. Yes, they had complete POWER over you stupid Republicans. You are only just now finding out. That makes Democrats really smart, is that what you are implying?
Please, I drive a 2000 Cavalier. I wouldn’t want a 60 inch t.v. if you gave it to me. It sounds to me like you really want one and are a little jealous.

Posted by: scentsofroses | February 26, 2009, 10:39 am 10:39 am

silky–I am happy you like the cigarette tax–Obama should tax more health-killing things in order to finance the research to cure smokers’ heart disease and cancer that all of us are now paying for. It would not hurt to increase tax on liquor, as well–fewer liver failure patients and people killed by drunk drivers.

Posted by: janey | February 26, 2009, 10:41 am 10:41 am

USA already have one of the highest corporate income tax in the world, that is the reason our companies are moving out. To incease taxes on corporations will speed up the moving process. Remove/lower corporate income tax and the companies and jobs will return

Posted by: Ray M | February 26, 2009, 10:41 am 10:41 am

Silky; All government spending is approved by the legislative body, all budgets are approved by the same and oversight of all private and government business is their responsibility. How is it they’re not to blame for any and all financial mishaps that occurred on their watch?

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 26, 2009, 10:41 am 10:41 am

My wife and I each make about 200k per year. As a married couple we are “rich” and must pay the higher Obama taxes, however, if we get divorced in 2010 we will not be paying these higher tax rates in 2011. So in the end the government will actually take less from us than they do now. I’m sure we are not alone here and there will be more doing the same.

Posted by: edlaw | February 26, 2009, 10:42 am 10:42 am

Ajax,
Sorry, that wasn’t it. Here it is:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960824&page=1

Posted by: Amy | February 26, 2009, 10:44 am 10:44 am

Please stop saying it took 8 years to create this mess. Get informed. It took a lot longer than that. The root of this mess started in 1977.

Posted by: USoilfromUSsoil | February 26, 2009, 10:45 am 10:45 am

Yes, I would like a 60 inch TV–but not from Obama–I have almost enough in my cookie jar as of this month! And, I don’t want a gas eating car like my neighbor’s Lexus–too much of a carbon footprint–something like Obama and Al Gore’s private planes. “Do as I say, dummies–not as I do, fools.”

Posted by: janey | February 26, 2009, 10:45 am 10:45 am

it is time to get together and put a stop to this Socialist government. Elections are in 2010 and Congress needs to be in a position to stop Obama before he totally destroys the US economy. He has spent more money in 1 month and any other human in the history of the world. He must be stopped.

Posted by: brian | February 26, 2009, 10:46 am 10:46 am

Citigroup Inc.’s bid to boost its equity capital could result in the federal government raising its stake in the troubled bank this week to as much as 40 percent, a person familiar with the talks said. WHY DOES EVEN ONE AMERICAN STILL HAVE AN ACCOUNT IN THESE BAILED-OUT BLIMPS?

Posted by: Geo | February 26, 2009, 10:47 am 10:47 am

edlaw–it is becoming more prudent for people to get divorced with the Obama plan. I recommend it. We could probably afford 2 homes side by side with the tax savings we will get. It will be good for the economy and keep the “rich” lawyers in business as well! Good Idea!

Posted by: janey | February 26, 2009, 10:50 am 10:50 am

scentsofroses …
I see … IT IS SOMEONE ELSE’S FAULT … I am NOT responsible for MY actions. I am not responsible for that piece of paper I put my signature to, I have no reason to read it, to understand it. All I need do is get my butt moved into that house I KNOW I cannot afford, activate the home equity provision of the loan and buy $50,000 worth of furniture I also cannot afford. How in the hell can you have $50,000 worth of equity on a house you just bought when you put no upfront money into it. Just buy the damn thing, sign on the dotted line, to hell with the details. Well, the details are now revealed … YOU COULD NOT AFFORD THE LOAN … and you knew it when you signed the paper. But not to worry, I … ME … I will not be required by my government to bale you out!

Posted by: wizard | February 26, 2009, 10:51 am 10:51 am

I find it laughable to witness staunch conservative critics twist themselves in contortion as they attempt to make arguments (albeit aged old arguments) to counter Obama’s agenda. The tax and spend rhetoric doesn’t work, big government rhetoric doesn’t carry much weight with the majority of the population. However, the funniest by far is witnessing them conjure an argument about the President’s intention to spend a lot of money all the while cutting the deficit. Yes, our President can have it both ways…spend big money and save big money…just like walking and chewing gum. Many wanna be leaders can not multi-task and if a label can not be placed on it, then it can’t be done. That’s why they are all on the sidelines watching President Obama play and win the big game.

Posted by: Nik | February 26, 2009, 10:51 am 10:51 am

“It would not hurt to increase tax on liquor, as well”
Let’s not get carried away!

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 10:52 am 10:52 am

I think how our taxes are determined are unfair. When I found out that a female who only made 25K for the year received 9K back in Fed taxes….I wanted to scream. I paid over 20K in Federal taxes last year and received 4K back claiming head of household, one child, over 30K in deductions and I paid 9100 for child care which I received a 400 dollar credit (big deal). I am all for giving back someone’s federal tax that THEY PAID IN if they are low income but I do not believe the GOVERNMENT SHOULD GIVE THEM MORE than they pay in….sounds like SOCIALISM…..system is broke!

Posted by: dfesta | February 26, 2009, 10:53 am 10:53 am

What do people want Obama to do? I don’t see any suggestions here that are BETTER than the tried and true way of printing more money. I don’t.

Posted by: Mister X | February 26, 2009, 10:53 am 10:53 am

edlaw
Most of the people serving in the military come from middle to low income families. They risk their lives contributing to this great country, but you will divorce your wife to avoid paying higher taxes? OK.

Posted by: Amy | February 26, 2009, 10:53 am 10:53 am

We need to stop Obama like we stopped Carter afer 1 term. This has gone beyond whether we supported Obama or McCain during the tainted election. America as we know it is at risk. We have to rise up and do something!

Posted by: janey | February 26, 2009, 10:53 am 10:53 am

Well he said he was going to spread the wealth. So why is everyone so upset. It is time for all of the taxpayers to pay for all the tax dodgers. So suck it up and go on.
I voted for a Hero, not the handout king of community orginizers.

Posted by: platteman | February 26, 2009, 10:54 am 10:54 am

Natale what are you talking about? Here’s the deal . At one point in my life I listened to and agreed with Rush Limbaugh. This was the time in life when I was arrogant,immature and selfish. Did you see the republican national convention? Count the color. I saw a see of white men with cowboy hats. You are choosing to be blind if you didnt and cant see what they are doing. You could count on one hand people of color there. Jindal was used as a ploy to expand the republican base by his race.Bottom line! He was a puppet.His words are the words we normally hear from Rush Limbaugh or Newt Gingrich( two fat white republicans)I know our president is African American. I didnt need Jindal to remind me of the historic victories we’ve as Americans had over time so Obama could have the opportunity he has now.Right now Obama has a job to do and his race is not important.I want Obama to be more recognized for what is more important than his race. He is the AMERICAN president.Jindal’s speech was laced with the typical out of touch predominatley white and rich failed polices of the pass that ignore the needs, wishes and dreams of the less fortunate and reward and keep in power the greed and selfishness of the priveledged class.The two conventions show you were the parties want this country to go and who would be included in the success.I like the America I saw represented at the Democratic National.Maybe because I saw myself represented there truthfully and not as a token puppet as Jindal was.

Posted by: TV | February 26, 2009, 10:55 am 10:55 am

“Silky; All government spending is approved by the legislative body, all budgets are approved by the same and oversight of all private and government business is their responsibility. How is it they’re not to blame for any and all financial mishaps that occurred on their watch?”
“The economy” is a organism that far exceeds the reaches of government spending legislation. Two years of oversight does not translate to responsibility for the state of the economy over those two years. That’s ridiculous.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 10:55 am 10:55 am

It amazes me how many can’t see the forest for the trees. How can you be so vehement that we need to tax the rich. Don’t you people want to better yourself and earn $250,000 one day. I know I do, which is why I don’t want to see taxes raised on anyone. Furthermore if we keep heaping more and more taxes on the successful people and keep giving handouts to the poor and the unemployed eventually this country will be controlled and run by the non-achivers because they will outnumber the achievers and keep voting for the people giving them handouts. Is that the country you want. One where homeless, illegal aliens, and the unemployed control elections. Sounds like the way to keep this country great. Good job democrats.

Posted by: trb | February 26, 2009, 10:55 am 10:55 am

I too believe that “continually characterizing those who disagree with him in a fundamentally dishonest way can be a sign of Pres. Obama that lacks confidence in the merits of his ideas”.
Kool-aid anyone?

Posted by: Correct247 | February 26, 2009, 10:56 am 10:56 am

“This has gone beyond whether we supported Obama or McCain during the tainted election.”
Eh?

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 10:57 am 10:57 am

Obama said he would half the deficit by 2013. HAHA! People knocked Bush for big spending, but this is ridiculous.

Posted by: d | February 26, 2009, 10:57 am 10:57 am

Amy–they risked their lives to make America better for you and me. Not to face a depression and a President who does not respect them–maybe you should talk to your liberal friends who are ruining the American Dream. Stop the nonsense about low-income families. There will be many more of them when Obama gets through–people who have worked hard to make a decent income.And, many of us came from lo-income families..so stop using that to push Obama on us.

Posted by: janey | February 26, 2009, 10:58 am 10:58 am

BAROBIN OBMAHOOD AND JOZO THE CLOWN. lol lol VERY FUNNY. GOOD ANALOGY.

Posted by: mj | February 26, 2009, 10:59 am 10:59 am

BUT SILKY – ITS’ NOT GETTING ANY BETTER. I THOUGHT IT WOULD ALL TURN AROUND MAGICALLY WHEN OBAMA WAS ELECTED. hmm. GUESS I WAS WRONG ABOUT THAT.

Posted by: MJ | February 26, 2009, 11:02 am 11:02 am

To Barb, Amy & Silentbob:(1) He does not have to CREATE jobs. Let him see to it that the 5 million GET THEIR JOBS BACK. (2) The real estate mess was started by Clinton. (3) The democrats: Roosevelt with his friend Churchill delivered Eastern European countries to Stalin on a silver platter. That was called “liberation.” Millions were tortured, murdered and died in concentration camps and prisons. The economies of those countries were totally destroyed by the Soviets and they have not managed to recover yet.

Posted by: Observer | February 26, 2009, 11:02 am 11:02 am

Obama’s big grin is getting annoying–doom and gloom, hope and change, doom and gloom. He is getting better at his act every day. He must spend hours in front of a mirror. Let’s see–what will I portray today–where’s Nancy–to tell me.

Posted by: janey | February 26, 2009, 11:02 am 11:02 am

Mr X
edlaw
Most of the people serving in the military come from middle to low income families. They risk their lives contributing to this great country, but you will divorce your wife to avoid paying higher taxes? OK.
What in gods name does serving in the military have to do with any of this. BTW I too served in the Army in the mid 70′s. What does that have to do with me paying an increased marriage tax.
get a grip man!

Posted by: edlaw | February 26, 2009, 11:03 am 11:03 am

“BUT SILKY – ITS’ NOT GETTING ANY BETTER. I THOUGHT IT WOULD ALL TURN AROUND MAGICALLY WHEN OBAMA WAS ELECTED.”
You did? Why would you think that?

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 11:04 am 11:04 am

HE IS ONLY POURING GASOLINE ON THE FIRE, SPEND SPEND SPEND IS THE DEMOCRATS WAY, IT DOESN’T SOLVE ANYTHING AND WILL DESTROY THIS COUNTRY.
HE IS ONLY IN OFFICE FOR 4 YEARS, DRAWS HIS 400K FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE SO HE DOESN’T CARE THAT OUR GRANDCHILDREN WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR ALL OF HIS MISTAKES!
WHO SAID THIS ALL HAS TO BE DONE IN SUCH A RUSH, ONE THING AT A TIME BUT THE GREED OF THE DEMOCRATS WILL PASS ANYTHING FULL OF PORK AND YOUR AMERICAN DREAM WILL BE NO MORE.

Posted by: HH | February 26, 2009, 11:06 am 11:06 am

I’m an Observant, Moderate Independent. And I once had High Regard for the intelligence of most Republicans. But since January 20, 2009 all they seem to be is “Analysts concluding Negative!”
The Republican Party appears to be “in lock step” – behaving as though they believe “a “Higher level of disagreement” will entice the party “clearly in charge” – to Cater to the opposition’s playbook. Sorry, but that doesn’t seem ‘real smart’ to me.
The Republican’s have been “invited to the party… to Socialize & Dance. But they want to dictate what music is played!”

Posted by: bobj72 | February 26, 2009, 11:06 am 11:06 am

FRAN – IT TOOK BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE TO GET US INTO THIS MESS. THES NITWITS IN CONGRESS AND THE SENATE NEED TO WORK TOGETHER. COMPROMISE IS NOT DO IT MY WAY OR NO WAY. SOME IN THIS CONGRESS (PELOSI AND REID) LIKE TO KEEP REMINDING PEOPLE THAT “WE WON”. THAT IS NO WAY TO WIN PEOPLE OVER TO YOUR SIDE.

Posted by: MJ | February 26, 2009, 11:07 am 11:07 am

janey
I suggest you stop bitching about paying taxes. The tax “hike” on people making over $250,000 is actually a roll back of the Bush tax cuts to the levels rich people paid during the Clinton years. Bush’s tax cuts cost our country a trillion dollars, at a time when we launched an invasion of two countries. Is it fiscally responsible to vacation in Disneyland when your water heater needs replacing?

Posted by: Amy | February 26, 2009, 11:07 am 11:07 am

There is something psychological wrong with a man who LIES so blantantly like Obama does…..I am going to fight lobbyist, then hires 2 of them…..I am going be fically responsible while still spend spend spending, There is no Pork in my Spending Bills……ETC.

Posted by: PresGov | February 26, 2009, 11:08 am 11:08 am

The more I read ABC the more I see it praising the GOP….
what happened to balanced reporting and news…
no wonder ABC is number three.

Posted by: MrSleepy | February 26, 2009, 11:08 am 11:08 am

Most of you on here have completely lost your minds. We have a big problem in this country called taxes…..FOR SOME. I think a FLAT tax system is the only fair way to tax the whole. Example…you make 10,000 you get taxed 1,000. You make 100,000 you get taxed 10,000. This way everyone contributes to the government and no one is given hand outs. I am sick to death with people telling me their refunds…..and they are more than they paid in….disgusting and unfair.

Posted by: dfesta | February 26, 2009, 11:09 am 11:09 am

Janey having our stimulating conversations today, remind me of having conversations with my three 20-something daughters occassionally. Challenging, but after all they are young and naive.
I hope you get your 60″ t.v. It does lead to a road of great fulfillment. Eeeeeew. Those dumb kids.. LOL

Posted by: scentsofroses | February 26, 2009, 11:17 am 11:17 am

“and they are more than they paid in….disgusting and unfair.”
I’ve never heard anybody say this was the case for them.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 11:17 am 11:17 am

edlaw
My point, (and I do have one),is that it irks me you would divorce your wife to avoid paying higher taxes on your $400,000 income, while other people, who have less income, make personal sacrifices to keep our country strong.
You live in a country, protected by the most powerful military, with the most effective police force and fire department a three digit phone call away, with decent roads to drive on, a safe food and drug system, a free public education for your children if you choose it, and you are so outraged someone is asking you to pay for it, you would divorce your spouse. Frankly, I’d divorce you too, and not just to save money.

Posted by: Amy | February 26, 2009, 11:20 am 11:20 am

Oh and make sure you get a LED t.v. Have you checked out the old ones? Talk about carbon footprints.

Posted by: scentsofroses | February 26, 2009, 11:20 am 11:20 am

Back to the old SPEND & SPEND! Didn’t wait long at all did they? Nothing much in there to create jobs either. Not only that, I am very surprised that ABC News has not said anything about this. But I have real problems with this new Attorney General and his racist remarks. He should be forced out immediately. This is what I THOUGHT was going to be not tolerated in Obama’s picks. Very disappointed in him. If this guy was different he would have been gone an hour after his remarks.

Posted by: Frustrated | February 26, 2009, 11:21 am 11:21 am

Fran wake up!@#$ Obama has spent more in his first two months of Presidency than the Iraq and Afgan wars.
You like all other comy liberals think they are so much better and know so much more than the rest of us that they should have the right to STEAL the guns from law abiding citizens who only want to protect themselves, STEAL our money and give it to those who did not work for it, tell us how to raise our children, kill those children that inconvenience you (abortion), on and on the list goes. Besides being too stupid to see that this economic crash was caused by democratic manipulation of financial institutions in the first place.

Posted by: skinny | February 26, 2009, 11:22 am 11:22 am

Posted by: scentsofroses | February 26, 2009, 11:23 am 11:23 am

WOW!!! I knew it was huge, but @2.7 Trillion UNREPORTED in the Last Federal Budget. That’s… should I say it? That’s a “Second Set Of Books”, that’s Criminal.

Posted by: bobj72 | February 26, 2009, 11:24 am 11:24 am

Janey–you are right. The stage is being set each day as Americans drop their political labels and clearly see that what is being said and what is being done are polar opposites. Cantor is on track by asking Obama to get his side of the aisle to comply with Obama’s stated plan of “restraint”. Is he a leader or a puppet of Pelosi? MJ–I agree–you’d think the GOP had the Dems hog-tied for the past 8 years and had forced them into deficit spending. Now we’re hog-tied. If deregulation caused this, why hasn’t the party in power placed that regulation back in place 2 years ago?

Posted by: Mia | February 26, 2009, 11:25 am 11:25 am

Silky there are many who get more than they pay in with all the earned income tax credits, low income deductions….completely ridiculous. How come I received no stimulus last year?? I have three kids? I made over 75K and I am divorced so technically I didn’t qualify. However my co-worker who makes what I make is married with four kids and received $2,400. Because I am not married I am taxed more. why I still have kids to support and I have to pay daycare in order to go to work and receive minimal credit because of my payscale. I can not claim my interest on my college loans for my Masters degree why…..because of my payscale. Taxes are unfair.

Posted by: dfesta | February 26, 2009, 11:25 am 11:25 am

Silky is a paid Marxist Socialist Obama blogger.
What happened to 48 hours and five days, Silky?
No lobbyists?
Has he found a cabinet pick who has paid taxes yet?
How much for Salt Marsh Mice again Silky? 650 million I believe
“Not one earmark”
I think your hero went a little nuts on that one, don’t you think Silky?

Posted by: Sam Adams | February 26, 2009, 11:26 am 11:26 am

“Fran wake up!@#$ Obama has spent more in his first two months of Presidency than the Iraq and Afgan wars.”
Okay, but the money Bush spent is gone. Into thin air. The money Obama is spending is going to you and me and back into the economy.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 11:27 am 11:27 am

Yes, please explain the SALT MARSH MICE, Silky, you paid OBAMA SOCIALIST MARXIST blogger.
What about 48 hours, bro. And five days?
It seems as if Obama is unwraveling faster than you thought, say!
He’ll be broke soon. No rich people to tax. Ha Ha.

Posted by: John Hancock | February 26, 2009, 11:27 am 11:27 am

McSleepy? Are you serious…you see printing an article about what Obama is really up to as praising the GOP? It’s a horror story about the fascist socialist is doing to destroy the country.

Posted by: PresGov | February 26, 2009, 11:28 am 11:28 am

Silky; In the interest of bi-partisan politics I must point out that the Democrats don’t want to accept any blame for the mess we’re in any more than the Republicans want to accept any blame for the mess this administration is making. And that accusation is only related to financial matters. Can we talk about infringements on our constitutional rights, two faced politics concerning Gitmo detainment vs the Obama approved Afghan detainment camps. What’s the difference between detaining accused/suspected terrorists in Cuba or Afghanistan? You don’t want guns for yourself but what about those who do value gun ownership that’s protected by the constitution. Should guns be banned because you don’t like them? What if you decide you want or need a gun? Better wake up young man. Your rights are dwindling. The only one from the original bill of rights that remains fully intact is our right to vote.

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 26, 2009, 11:29 am 11:29 am

Silky, the money is not going back to you and me. It might be going to you….one never knows for sure since Obama lies so much. Obama is redistributing wealth of the working class, the useful idiots on the bottom that support Obama may get some of the stolen funds from the working class, but my guess is that the ubber rich corrupt friends and allies of Obama will get most of this spending nonsense.

Posted by: PresGov | February 26, 2009, 11:30 am 11:30 am

Our fearless leader is almost as fiscally responsible as a first year college student. “Dad I’ve maxed out my credit card and I really need more money”. “I know your disappointed now with my grades, but I should be able to bring them up to near C’s next semester.”

Posted by: AmericanPie | February 26, 2009, 11:33 am 11:33 am

Posted by: Sam Adams | Feb 26, 2009 11:26:00 AM
Sam, do you REALLY find this young guy “silky” that THREATENING?

Posted by: bobj72 | February 26, 2009, 11:33 am 11:33 am

Obama is lying AGAIN PEOPLE saying that he is only going to raise taxes on those making $250,000 or more. IT’S A LIE…….socialists always say they are only going to tax the rich, but instead hit the whole working class. I can’t say this enough—this is a lie. He is going to jack up the taxes on the entire working class.

Posted by: PresGov | February 26, 2009, 11:34 am 11:34 am

PresGov I agree with you on taxes being raised on ALL the working class.

Posted by: dfesta | February 26, 2009, 11:35 am 11:35 am

Astute observation Bobj. I said along time back Obama is a good song and dance man. Problem is not everyone appreciates his style of music. Invitation rejected.

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 26, 2009, 11:36 am 11:36 am

Teaparty…..

Posted by: PresGov | February 26, 2009, 11:37 am 11:37 am

Thanks Defesta…

Posted by: PresGov | February 26, 2009, 11:38 am 11:38 am

ALL Socialist Marxists like Silky are threatening. Threatening freedom and liberty by promoting laziness, government reliance, and a hand-out mentality.
The govt doesn’t owe anybody a house, a job, a car. Obama and Silky think they do…
Silky and Obama marginalize America with their socialist marxist garbage.
What happened to 48 hours and five days?
Afraid somebody might see something?
Salt Marsh Mice in the dark, perhaps?

Posted by: Sam Adams | February 26, 2009, 11:38 am 11:38 am

As an accountant I have examine the budget’s outline and I say the budget that the administration is proposing is generally the same $3.1trillion budget the Bush admin submitted last year. However the difference between B.O.’s budget and GWB’s is the inclusion of the proposed war funding, $63.4 bil for healthcare reserve fund, and funding for the financial stability plan (which might not be spent). So they are virtually the same. At least the war spending isn’t soaring out of control and being hidden in subsequent budget spread all over the place. A smart accountant/ business mind would look at the details versus other budgets before opening their mouths. My taxes will rise next year but in business the reality is when the consumer puts more into the economy the more I take home. The reason companies are failing is because middle and low income individuals are putting money into the economy. When 116 million Americans make less than $250k but they put money into the economy the economy grows and I make more, so I’m not going to leave the country over a 4% tax increase!!!

Posted by: Micheal | February 26, 2009, 11:40 am 11:40 am

For those of you who thing it’s OK to ban bullets and ‘Assault Weapons’. What part of ‘shall not be infringed’ do you NOT understand???? The Heller case, at the Supreme Court, affirmed that we (all of us) have this right, and it shall not be infringed!

Posted by: NObama | February 26, 2009, 11:41 am 11:41 am

Obama is going to have a whole lot of hidden taxes worked in that affect everyone. You know like his Tax on CO2 that will force business to jack up the price of productst that we must have, or my favorite the tax increase of $.50 to start more a gallon for gas…which hits the working class the hardest. Money doesn’t grow on trees, and someone will have to pay for Obama’s spending. The rich hire lawyers, accountants, and lobbyists to hide from the taxman. We in the working class will be the ones to pay for Obama’s ubber rich and useful idiot supporters.

Posted by: PresGov | February 26, 2009, 11:41 am 11:41 am

…..don’t you just love a President who eloquently turns down pork…threatens congressional members who suggest it…and tries to get it banned forever…..so at least we are told. Has our leader said anything about the “no discussion” omnibus bill ok’d by Congress while our leader was playing Slumdog Millionaire? I hope he learns that politicians….even if they are from Illinois…sooner or later learn it is MY money he is spending…or ink up the printing presses again. God forbid if one of our “friends” decides to call in this country’s loans! “Whoa” is a good word for a horse riding cowboy to learn….and for a President, too.

Posted by: justj joey | February 26, 2009, 11:41 am 11:41 am

Amy!
edlaw
My point, (and I do have one),is that it irks me you would divorce your wife to avoid paying higher taxes on your $400,000 income, while other people, who have less income, make personal sacrifices to keep our country strong.
You live in a country, protected by the most powerful military, with the most effective police force and fire department a three digit phone call away, with decent roads to drive on, a safe food and drug system, a free public education for your children if you choose it, and you are so outraged someone is asking you to pay for it, you would divorce your spouse. Frankly, I’d divorce you too, and not just to save money.
I also have a point to make. First I paid my dues by serving like many did not. Second I too struggled early in my career but didn’t whine about it. Third my wife an I already do pay MOST of the taxes in this country already. I see no reason why we should pay more simply because we are married.

Posted by: edlaw | February 26, 2009, 11:45 am 11:45 am

scentsofroses …
My apologies. I mistakenly posted my reply to you when it should have been to ORDERMONGER regarding the FBI report that they were aware of fraud in the mortgage lending business! My point was and is, that one is required to read, understand and is ultimately responsible for what they sign and agree to. Again … my apology.

Posted by: wizard | February 26, 2009, 11:47 am 11:47 am

Barb said: When are people going to realize the Dems were not in charge for the past two years? Yes they had a majority, of ONE. And everytime they wanted something passed, Bush would reject it. Do you understand Bush was the president for the last eight years?
_________________________
President Bush veto’d any pork spending (i.e. giving farmers huge subsidies that werent needed) that the Dem controlled house and senate wanted pushed through.
You also forget that Nancy hitler Pelosi made sure she got a rejection of any kind of help that bush wanted to put through, so he got no credit for fixing the economy. Bush wanted to regulate fannie and freddie but was told NO.
So, you can spread lies about bush doing all the damage over the past 8 years, but your beloved DEMS also ahd their hands in the basket for dooming this economy.
Your so blind by love for Obama that you cant ever think outside the box. I can at least admit that the Bush administration did damage, now its your turn!!!!!

Posted by: Louisa | February 26, 2009, 11:48 am 11:48 am

If we want universal access to good health care, we need to be willing to pay for it. The current batch of Republican legislators who claim to be economic conservatives are a fraud. A legislator who is a genuine economic conservative, expects to pay for whatever amount of government he legislates.
Republican legislators for the most part are nothing more than paid lobbyists who represent the interests of the economic elite who want their taxes reduced. It’s absurd that those who wring their hands and pretend to represent economic conservatism are the very individuals who have increased government spending and reduced revenue. Why does anyone continue to believe their propaganda?

Posted by: bonobo | February 26, 2009, 11:51 am 11:51 am

Those making over $250,000 should pay more. It’s as simple as that. We’re talking about the same tax rate as when Bill Clinton was president, and if I remember correctly, the rich did pretty well when he was in office. I already saw a Republican Congressman from Texas saying that now’s not the time for higher taxes when so many people are “struggling” in this economy. Don’t tell me that someone who makes $250,000 or more is struggling. Only 5% of all Americans make that much! So I would encourage the rest of us to support the President Obama’s plan.

Posted by: bonobo | February 26, 2009, 11:53 am 11:53 am

edlaw …
“… I see no reason why we should pay more simply because we are married.”
Simple … it’s called socialism. It’s an interesting concept that goes something like this … those that work hard and accomplish something pay for those that sit on their ass and do nothing.

Posted by: wizard | February 26, 2009, 11:54 am 11:54 am

Posted by: AmericanPie | Feb 26, 2009 11:33:27 AM
Our fearless leader is almost as fiscally responsible as a first year college student. “Dad I’ve maxed out my credit card and I really need more money”. “I know your disappointed now with my grades, but I should be able to bring them up to near C’s next semester.”
________________________________
The Credit Card was Max’d-Out by a previous student. This “New Guy” has only been on the job 35 days (of 1,460 for 1 Term and 2,920 if he goes two) and he’s Clearly earned a Grade of “B” or maybe a “B+.”

Posted by: bobj72 | February 26, 2009, 11:55 am 11:55 am

bonobo – if this country could afford to switch to universal healthcare, then we should. The fact is we absolutely can not. There is not enough money to do this whithout taxing the hard working citizens who pay taxes TO THE EYEBALLS.
Its just not something thats affordable for us now, maybe if there is another bubble that gets rid of some debt and free’s up something in the government budget, then yes. You need to stop blaming republicans for thinking sensibly right now, the amounts of money BO is throwing around is scary. And did you hear Hillary had to basically grovel to the chinese to keep buying our ‘worthless’ govt bonds, as a way to pay for some of this spending.

Posted by: Louisa | February 26, 2009, 11:56 am 11:56 am

It’s about time. The working poor and middle classes have been paying for the medical care of the poor for a long time. Re-redistributing the value of ill-gained surplus labor is fair, democratic, moral and just.
Redistribution of the wealth of the nation into the ownership and control of 5% of the population is unfair, undemocratic, immoral and unjust.
America is not here to serve the psychopathic needs of the few that have driven out culture, ethics, social economic and political values and actions. America is here to provide for the welfare of a free people.
The people have used terms like entrepreneur, competition, capitalism, free trade to win tax breaks and deregulation of efforts to control their greed and unpatriotic efforts.
Expect them to raise all the old red herrings and new ones to subvert democracy, fairness, equality, morality, proper and human ethics and democracry.

Posted by: bonobo | February 26, 2009, 11:56 am 11:56 am

“Should guns be banned because you don’t like them?”
No. I said if it was up to me. It’s not up to me.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 11:57 am 11:57 am

Some of the wealthy seem to think that they became wealthy entirely through their own efforts, with no help from any taxpayer supported infrastructure or programs, without the system that allows and even encourages them to become wealthy. They fail to recognize that they really didn’t get there by themselves, that they are at or near the top of a pyramid that is held up by all of the building blocks below. If they don’t help support those building blocks (their workers, other workers, schools, and yes, health care for those in the lower building blocks) they may find those building blocks crumbling – and then what will provide their foundational base?

Posted by: bonobo | February 26, 2009, 11:58 am 11:58 am

You want to ban guns Silky so no one could stop your MARXIST TAKEOVER OF THE GOVERNMENT.
People will get sick of Spend, Spend, Spend. And then how will Obama stay in power?
Easy. Civilian Para-Military Defense Force (ACORN)
You and Obama ARE transparent

Posted by: Sam Adams | February 26, 2009, 12:01 pm 12:01 pm

Health care simply must be addressed. So must the excesses of compensation and tax policy favoring the super rich that have developed over time.
The idea of making tax deductions apply more fairly between middle income people and the very wealthy is refreshing news and sounds incredibly promising.
This is the type of Change we voted for and worth waiting for. I don’t see how anyone can in good conscience oppose these goals—unless one is very affluent or misinformed by very rich conservative talk radio hosts.

Posted by: bonob | February 26, 2009, 12:02 pm 12:02 pm

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 12:02 pm 12:02 pm

For the last 28 years, our tax laws have been rewritten to help the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. It’s time to reverse this. The Rich should pay at least the same percentage of their income to the federal government as do the Middle Class.

Posted by: bonobo | February 26, 2009, 12:04 pm 12:04 pm

The wealthiest 5% making more than $250K a year truly believe that they are more important than 95% of America, and that they are absolutely entitled to lower taxes, great healthcare, private jets, etc. They believe they EARNED their money and lifestyle fair and square without help from anyone, believe their businesses would be just as successful without a healthy and strong middle class with money to spend to buy their products and services or a strong economy and government tax policy that maintains a solvent middle class. And look where we are now. The middle class is disappearing, unemployment is rising, and incomes for 95% of us have remained flat or even declined. Can’t any of you top 5%’ers understand? Can’t any of you poor Rush followers understand?

Posted by: bonobo | February 26, 2009, 12:07 pm 12:07 pm

“The Rich should pay at least the same percentage of their income to the federal government as do the Middle Class.”
They pay more.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 12:08 pm 12:08 pm

Louisa …
” … if this country could afford to switch to universal healthcare, then we should. The fact is we absolutely can not. There is not enough money to do this whithout taxing the hard working citizens who pay taxes TO THE EYEBALLS.”
You are so RIGHT! Every country on the planet that attempts to provide universal healthcare is in trouble trying to pay for it. Even if a plan that works NOW can be devised, it falls apart in just a few years because there is no control over the cost of healthcare. And … PLEASE do not tell me that our neighbors to the north, Canada, has universal healthcare that works. It is NOT universal, cost a fortune, and the only universal thing about it is that EVERYONE is taxed to the limit to pay for what little they have and the program is still in trouble. In order to keep from continually raising taxes to pay for it, they simple continually reduce services and Canadians that can afford it come to the USA for medical services. That is not a plan I would embrace.

Posted by: wizard | February 26, 2009, 12:09 pm 12:09 pm

I just want to say, I am one of those people that the stimulas should help. I bought my house could afford it, then got laid off. At the same time my tenents lost their jobs. I got behind and now I need the GOVERMENT to Help ME and GIVE me SOME of MY Tax money back. Remember I worked hard everyday paid my taxes all of them, so i just see it as the Gov is giving me some of my money back. NOT A HAND OUT- it was mine in the first place. I helped the banks now I must help my self. If you need pls do the same. STIMULUS NOT NOT WELFARE BUT PART OF MY PAYCHECK.

Posted by: jah | February 26, 2009, 12:09 pm 12:09 pm

The 500 wealthest people in the country are worth over one trillion dollars. That’s an average of two billion dollars each. That does not consider the asset value of the top 400 corporations. It seems like an awful lot of money has been redistributed to a very few people at the top.

Posted by: bonobo | February 26, 2009, 12:10 pm 12:10 pm

When Eisenhower was president, and Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, the top federal tax bracket was set to 91%. All told, the wealthiest Americans paid about 50% in federal taxes back then, while the Middle Class paid well under 20%. And the Middle Class prospered and our country fared well under what would now be called a fringe-left socialistic tax system.
Today, the tax burden has flipped. The wealthiest Americans pay less than 18% in federal taxes, while the Middle Class pays 30%+. No wonder most families now need two wage earners to lead a middle class existence, vs. one wage earner in the 1970s.
For the last 28 years, our tax laws have been rewritten to help the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. It’s time to reverse this. The Rich should pay at least the same percentage of their income to the federal government as do the Middle Class. You are heading the right direction President Obama.

Posted by: bonobo | February 26, 2009, 12:15 pm 12:15 pm

bonobo …
“The 500 wealthest people in the country are worth over one trillion dollars. That’s an average of two billion dollars each. That does not consider the asset value of the top 400 corporations. …”
Interesting post … but fails to tell the whole picture. What about the number of jobs those 500 people’s one trillion dollars generate?

Posted by: wizard | February 26, 2009, 12:16 pm 12:16 pm

Silky and Obama’s ultimate goals are CLASS WARFARE, destruction of bourgeois, and permanent theft of liberty and freedom.
Classic power grab from within. Why must you wreck America, Silky?
Government is not the answer to your problems, son.
Hard work. Self determination. That’s what makes an American an American.
Paying somebody else’s mortgage IS NOT American. Go tell your hero Obama.
By the way, Silky, how do you like your $13? I hear the check is in the mail!

Posted by: Sam Adams | February 26, 2009, 12:18 pm 12:18 pm

In western European countries taxes have supported national health systems for fifty years. That means the rich pay more (taxes) and the poor pay less (taxes) but all have access to free health care and medicines. You might say just as all have access to public schools. Doctors earn well, but are not over the top rich, and just about no one has health insurance. In Italy there is a very small charge for tests such as CAT scans, but the charge is about$30 and only for those on a salary. This is called ‘solidarity’ – the rich of course pay more and others less, but all have a right to health care. They chose my family doctor who comes to the house to see the ill when needed or sees them in their office for a regular visit. It is very difficult to understand why Americans think it’s fine to use taxes to pay for schools, police, public works, and not for health. In Italy there is no deductable to pay and no one hesitates to use the system. In addition the European Union systems are integrated, so if you go to France or England you don’t have to worry about health insurance either.

Posted by: bonobo | February 26, 2009, 12:20 pm 12:20 pm

Sam Adams …
“Hard work. Self determination.”
WOW!!! What an interesting concept!!!! Perhaps someone should start a country based on that … perhaps they can call it America! :-)

Posted by: wizard | February 26, 2009, 12:21 pm 12:21 pm

Get informed.

Posted by: bonobo | February 26, 2009, 12:23 pm 12:23 pm

Wizard —
Which jobs generated, the jobs overseas?

Posted by: bonobo | February 26, 2009, 12:25 pm 12:25 pm

I love how people seemingly make their entire existence (the outrage is disproportional to the reality) about the fact that people not even in their tax bracket are going to see a marginal increase in their tax rate.
______________________
how do you know i’m not in this tax bracket??? And do you realise how many small business are in this tax bracket???

Posted by: Louisa | February 26, 2009, 12:26 pm 12:26 pm

Watch and observe the howls of protest as the affluent are asked to bear a slightly fairer share of the burden …

Posted by: barbara | February 26, 2009, 12:26 pm 12:26 pm

bonobo …
Silly post that lends nothing to the discussion. You know very well ALL that trillion dollars does not leave the country. Get real or get lost!

Posted by: wizard | February 26, 2009, 12:27 pm 12:27 pm

bonobo – In western European countries taxes have supported national health systems for fifty years.
_____________________
I see i need to share some info with you. I lived in England and free healthcare comes at a cost, HUGE amounts per month taken out of my pay packet ON TOP OF THE GOVT TAX, called national insurance tax. You also cant get any treatment on the NHS because they are so overrun. Nurses and doctors are so overstretched that their job is now one of the most stressful. I had a friend lie on a hospital bed in a corridor with appendicitis for 2 days, only got seen after it burst and it became an emergency.

Posted by: Louisa | February 26, 2009, 12:32 pm 12:32 pm

Most on the left think that raising tax rates solely lead to more revenue to the government – because personal income is static (i.e., individual receiving income solely via salary).
The left then carries this argument to the impact of lowering tax rates: less revenue to government.
For this reason, the left (and others) believe that the Bush tax cuts led to lower government revenues. They also add Reagan’s tax cuts, too.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200
The link above, however, shows that tax revenues GREW quite a bit AFTER the Bush and Reagan tax cuts.
Therefore, when individuals write nonsense of “how the Bush tax cuts led to a $1Trillion loss in government revenues” – they are guilty of thinking that income is unaffected by either tax cuts or tax increases.
Argue all you wish about Bush – he and the Republicans became atrocious regarding fiscal discipline (and the ONLY criticism from the Democrats was that the Republicans didn’t spend enough).
Today? The Democrats in Congress are using the “crisis” as a pretense to take governmental spending to a level that is simply undreamed of.
And all you that support EVERYTHING that Obama and the Democrats are doing could be described by some as “useful idiots.”
For, logically, if the deficit is only $1.75 trillion – and you consider this a good thing – why not double down and make it $3.5 trillion?
You can’t blame Bush & Company for this – unless you can point out that during the Bush administration that Obama and the Democrats were critical of the fiscal nightmare that was being created.
In the end, the only “complaint” from the Democrats was that Bush wasn’t spending enough.

Posted by: Chet21 | February 26, 2009, 12:33 pm 12:33 pm

Louisa, regarding small business tax brackets, cite your source.
p.s. realize is spelled with a z.

Posted by: barbara | February 26, 2009, 12:33 pm 12:33 pm

Louisa, regarding small business tax brackets, cite your source.
p.s. realize is spelled with a z
________________________
Darl – i lived in england for a very long time, they spell it realise…so dont bother giving me a spelling lesson.

Posted by: Louisa | February 26, 2009, 12:35 pm 12:35 pm

Have a great day Patriots & GOP spies..

Posted by: bonobo | February 26, 2009, 12:36 pm 12:36 pm

Nowhere on the ABCNews website have I seen it mentioned that Obama has dropped Bush’s trick of not including the Iraq and Afghanistan War costs in the budget. People are gasping because they have never been confronted before by how much it actually costs to govern this country. This is the most honest and transparent budget process we have seen in years. Obama has also included projected costs of a natural disaster on the order of another Katrina, and income lost by discontinuing the Alternative Minimum Tax. The only reason I know this is because I get my news from First Read on NBC.

Posted by: Amy | February 26, 2009, 12:38 pm 12:38 pm

Good luck with the English language, Lou. Don’t is a contraction for “do not”…Don’t forget the apostrophe. You must run a resume writing small business.

Posted by: barbara | February 26, 2009, 12:40 pm 12:40 pm

“By the way, Silky, how do you like your $13? I hear the check is in the mail!”
It’s $13 every two weeks, if I’m not mistaken, and I have direct deposit. And I will enjoy it. As will my friend who owns the bar where I will be spending it, as well he his distributor from whom he buys the Guinness. As will the Canadians who work the brewery where all Guinness consumed in the United States is brewed. As will the St. James Company, who own the brewery.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 12:44 pm 12:44 pm

“Good luck with the English language, Lou. Don’t is a contraction for “do not”…Don’t forget the apostrophe. You must run a resume writing small business.”
John Steinbeck said it best “… small minds have small thoughts …”
Correcting spelling errors on a computer thread is the ultimate in “small minds”. You definitely have too much time on your hands!

Posted by: wizard | February 26, 2009, 12:44 pm 12:44 pm

Mr.or Ms. Wizard,
The jobs contracted oversees by affluent businesses that have continued to make the very affluent rich here in the states. Thus helping the economic collapse here and the rest of the world & joblessness in this country. American industry has made huge profit from cheap labor overseas. We can thank unregulated Capitalism for that.

Posted by: warlock | February 26, 2009, 12:47 pm 12:47 pm

Good luck with the English language, Lou. Don’t is a contraction for “do not”…Don’t forget the apostrophe. You must run a resume writing small business.
___________________
ooh, we have an einstein on here.
No im a mum of 2 small children, with another on the way, so im tired and type pretty fast so dont check over what i’ve written.

Posted by: Louisa | February 26, 2009, 12:49 pm 12:49 pm

“smal mines resorrt two insutz”–Rush Limbaugh

Posted by: Questesia | February 26, 2009, 12:50 pm 12:50 pm

“Interesting post … but fails to tell the whole picture. What about the number of jobs those 500 people’s one trillion dollars generate?”
Most of those 500 people work for publicly-traded companies. That one trillion dollars doesn’t generate many jobs at all.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 12:50 pm 12:50 pm

Meant many, not most.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 12:54 pm 12:54 pm

Is it odd to ask what would be the point of our great nation collecting taxes revenues? Is the money supposed to pile high and grow mold in some obscure location simply for Americans to gawk at the amount of money collected that’s been collected into a big pile? Isn’t the point of collecting taxes is so that we SPEND it on the people’s business? I guess we wouldn’t hear a peep from the Obama bashers as long as the tax dollars are spent on invading soverign nations and buying missles. Conservatives are JEALOUS that these economic times lend themselves to Keynesian economics….their agenda is not fitting for these times….making lemonade out of lemons…..Go, President Obama!

Posted by: Nik | February 26, 2009, 12:54 pm 12:54 pm

silky …
Your last post defies all logic, is based on nothing, and thus also defies any comment that makes any sense. Translation … cannot comment on something that makes no sense to begin with … :-)

Posted by: wizard | February 26, 2009, 12:54 pm 12:54 pm

“Your last post defies all logic”
How so? Once the company is made public, they are merely shareholders. That companies jobs are no longer impacted by that individual’s own status financially.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 1:05 pm 1:05 pm

Conservatives are JEALOUS that these economic times lend themselves to Keynesian economics….their agenda is not fitting for these times….
_____________________
“Keynesian economics warns against the practice of too much saving (underconsumption) and not enough consumption (spending) in the economy, and it also supports considerable redistribution of wealth, when needed. Keynesian economics further concludes that there is a pragmatic reason for the massive redistribution of wealth: if the poorer segments of society are given sums of money, they will likely spend it, rather than save it, thus promoting economic growth.”
SO WE BASICALLY NEED TO GO BACK TO LIVING BEYOND OUR MEANS FOR THIS ECONOMY TO EVER BOUNCE BACK AND FOR OBAMA’S PLAN TO WORK. NOT VERY WISE.

Posted by: Louisa | February 26, 2009, 1:11 pm 1:11 pm

Just look at Forbes list of the wealthiest 400 Americans.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 1:11 pm 1:11 pm

“SO WE BASICALLY NEED TO GO BACK TO LIVING BEYOND OUR MEANS”
Isn’t that the American Dream?

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 1:12 pm 1:12 pm

silky …
Sooooo … the fact that people … wealthy or otherwise … invest in publicly held companies has no impact on jobs? Ummm … perhaps we need to just shut down the stock markets around the world as they serve no function … OR … perhaps we should encourage the poor to invest more in publicly held companies. ummmmm ????

Posted by: wizard | February 26, 2009, 1:22 pm 1:22 pm

“silky …
Sooooo … the fact that people … wealthy or otherwise … invest in publicly held companies has no impact on jobs?”
The initial comment was concerning the 500 wealthiest Americans and a direct 1 to 1 relationship between taxing them and the “jobs they generate.”

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 1:27 pm 1:27 pm

Silky,
Kindly take your $ 13 check and Obama and get the hell out of the country. We don’t need Marxist Socialists like you with a chip on their shoulder because daddy abandoned you and mommy never held you…Marxism ALWAYS fails!
Get off the Kool-Aid. Get off the welfare, man. Go to Cuba. You will love it. They have health care!!!

Posted by: John Hancock | February 26, 2009, 1:32 pm 1:32 pm

Silky; You’ve been promoted. You have arrived. You’re not just a paid blogger anymore. You have a title. Socialist Marxist paid blogger. Get to work Amy, you can do it too.

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 26, 2009, 1:36 pm 1:36 pm

“Kindly take your $ 13 check and Obama and get the hell out of the country.”
I’ll get right on that.
And I told you, I’m doing what I’m supposed to with my $13. Spending it.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 1:41 pm 1:41 pm

“Socialist Marxist”
Nah. Progressive taxation has been around forever.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 1:44 pm 1:44 pm

I think the American Dream is to be able to attain your dreams, even the wildest ones. Living beyond one’s means is what this administration calls the American Promise. We have to earn our dreams according to the old school route to success. The reward is equivalent to the risk and effort under old school thought. Obama says he’s going to see to it that everyone has it all. That means all won’t amount to much after “all” has been spread around.

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 26, 2009, 1:45 pm 1:45 pm

I thought the American Dream was a couple hookers and an 8-ball.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 1:49 pm 1:49 pm

mmonroeliveson
Obama’s budget retires the tax cuts bestowed on the top 1% by George Bush.
How do you get out of that that Obama is taking away the American Dream?
Obama is finally addressing the healthcare mess people have said is one of their top concerns for years – and Louisa tells us we are all going to lie around hospital corriders for days as a result. (I can tell you some horror stories of American healthcare, myself, Louisa.)
I mean, really, people get a grip. And please don’t join a hate group. (You know hate group membership has grown since the dittoheads started their “Obama is a socialist” campaign.)

Posted by: Amy | February 26, 2009, 2:28 pm 2:28 pm

Amy, I know you are as worried as I am over all of those ignorant people that are in those hate-groups. History keeps showing are ignorant those people are, over and over. But they just don’t ever get educated.

Posted by: scentsofroses | February 26, 2009, 3:04 pm 3:04 pm

showing How ignorant they are. I should really be wearing my glasses. LOL

Posted by: scentsofroses | February 26, 2009, 3:05 pm 3:05 pm

Silky; Is that your wildest dream? Why not buy a brothel and start up your own drug cartel. You think small.

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 26, 2009, 3:24 pm 3:24 pm

scentsofroses
Yes, I am worried. I saw on another site that hate group membership has jumped since 2000.
I understand the Obama budget is huge, and people are concerned we can’t afford universal healthcare, but I’m also concerned the media is whipping up controversy for the sake of their advertising dollars, and Republicans are whipping up fears of “socialism” to score future votes, and people in general are missing the facts, not to mention the fact that Obama is being honest about how much the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will cost, something BUsh left out of the budget.

Posted by: Amy | February 26, 2009, 3:32 pm 3:32 pm

Amy, I agree about all of it.
Some things, just don’t change, like stupidity. It only takes a very small number to cause damage. They are the ones that scream the loudest about terrorism. Some of these people that spout such hatred scare me more than Al Quaida. These are real people, and they already live here. If something stupid is done, the terrorist already did their job, without even leaving home.

Posted by: scentsofroses | February 26, 2009, 3:42 pm 3:42 pm

“Silky; Is that your wildest dream? Why not buy a brothel and start up your own drug cartel. You think small.”
Too much work. That’s what roadtrips to Puerta Vallarta are for.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm

I’m also in no hurry to get to the joint.

Posted by: silky | February 26, 2009, 3:58 pm 3:58 pm

Amy; 1) We’ll never have an efficient, quality, affordable healthcare system as long as insurors (for profit organizations) are part of the formula. Costs are the problem. 2) I’m a pacifist. No radical groups for me. But I will fight unto death if necessary to preserve the American Dream for future generations. 3)God created all men equal (in his sight). All souls have equal value to God. The constitution was written on the premise that all men are created equal, all entitled to a fair and speedy trial with legal representation, and to be judged by a jury of their peers, and innocent until proven guilty min a court of law. Enter those lawyers I despise so much. Keep them away from healthcare, too. Freedom and opportunity can be made equal without taking away the initiative to succeed which is success itself. In the real world people are not equal in their ability to make a meaningful contribution to society. Those who aspire to lead rise to leadership positions in the make believe society of which Obama paints such a pretty picture. So once again there is disparity between those in power and those who are designated to follow. We’re not given the same tools to work with such as physical strength, good health, sound minds, etc. Therefore it’s only natural that some would attain greater levels of achievement than others on a level playing field (fair). Obama wants to slant the playing field to make everyone equal(cheating). That’s the Obama concept of the American Promise. It’s not right to take away from the productive, intelligent, energetic achievers and give to the non-productive underachievers no matter how pitifully they may plea their case. I say we should each go out and earn our station in life and count our blessings rather than worrying about what the other guy has. It’s O.K. for the government to take what it needs to run the government. I’m not saying charity is a bad thing because it’s not. I just don’t think the U.S. Government was ever intended, by those who attempted to create a perfect government, to be an organization that provides charity to its citizens. If the government sticks to its role and the people stick to their roles everything works out to the favor of both the people and the government. It’s when the government oversteps its bounds that finances get out of kilter and civil unrest arises.

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 26, 2009, 4:05 pm 4:05 pm

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | Feb 26, 2009 4:05:56 PM
Monroe, you say; “It’s when the government oversteps its bounds that finances get out of kilter and civil unrest arises.”
____________________________
monroe, Why do you persist with weaving such things into your diatribes, “your Faulty Ideas” that you often state as facts, i.e., “That’s the Obama concept of the American Promise.” ???
Since you’re using the “Hard Right Edged” talking points causes me to envision you “In Bed, assuming the ‘fetal position’ between Dimbaugh & Hannuty!”

Posted by: bobj72 | February 26, 2009, 6:01 pm 6:01 pm

Posted by: f | February 26, 2009, 9:03 pm 9:03 pm

This budget is a terrible idea.You are going to set us back generarr

Posted by: Rita Firkus | February 27, 2009, 1:16 am 1:16 am

Top

The Note, 2/26/09: Taxing Tasks — Big new plans, and a very mixed message from Obama

Related Videos

Leave a Reply