GayPatriot

Comments

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://www.gaypatriot.net/2012/11/09/conservatives-from-despair-to-resolution-in-three-days/trackback/

Forward. . .there goes Jimmy

http://live.wsj.com/video/opinion-republicans-and-same-sex-marriage/A9BDF4C1-24C8-4334-ABF8-A5A6D504A37F.html#!A9BDF4C1-24C8-4334-ABF8-A5A6D504A37F

Comment by rusty — November 9, 2012 @ 1:45 pm - November 9, 2012
There’s a lot of reason the hurt was more acute this time. Part of it was watching Mitt Romney… a good, patriotic, and decent man… be torn apart by lies and smears: He gave a woman cancer. He was pro-rape. He hated people on welfare and wanted them to starve. He wanted to outlaw tampons. And the people spreading the lies and hate were rewarded with victories.

Also, many believed this was the last exit before the abyss; our last chance to avoid becoming a Marxist sh-thole like Greece, Zinbabwe, Venezuela, or California.

Some will get over it and press on, but I think a lot never will. I think this was the end of the line for a lot of people.

Comment by V the K — November 9, 2012 @ 1:51 pm - November 9, 2012
I had to “de-friend” Jimmy LaSalvia AND Chris Barron over their post-election foolishness. According to them, we should all simply become Democrats.

Comment by Bastiat Fan — November 9, 2012 @ 1:56 pm - November 9, 2012
This election has motivated me to get more connected with my local party organization. What clinched the decision was the flyer for soliciting GOTV help arriving two days AFTER the election. But more importantly I have been thinking about a way forward for Republicans and I have a suggestion. I tried to send it to a local radio personality but it bounced. I’d like to post it here in the comments and see what people think:

American isn’t really a “conservative” or a “liberal” country. We have many different regions and the culture of this country varies greatly by region. What works in Oklahoma probably won’t work in Connecticut and vice versa. More moderate Republicans will likely get more traction in some regions and more conservative in others. What we are doing is attempting to create a “one size fits all” Republican where we can more-or-less use politics to enforce culture in a uniform way across the country out of Washington DC and that isn’t going to work.

What we need to do, I think, is to have a very clear distinction between federal policy for the Republican party and state/local policy. We should accept that Republican positions on issues in various regions are going to reflect the culture of that region. A region should be free to express its culture in its laws and if someone else doesn’t like it, they are free to mind their own business. At the national level we come to common ground with notions of the role of the federal government and fiscal responsibility. The notion would be to empower the states more and have more decentralized government on social issues. For example, on the question of contraceptive mandates for employers, particular religious groups, I feel that the Republican position at the national level should be something like “it isn’t the role of the federal government to mandate this. If a state government wants to mandate that requirement within their state, fine, if that is what the people of that state want”. Then LOCAL Republicans can campaign against that issue in their state if they want but at the national level, we need to take party politics out of cultural issues and allow the various regions to express their culture as they wish.

This means that a Republican running for national office is no longer a threat to more liberal people in California. The fundamental reason we have become so divided is that people of both parties believe the other party is going to try to shove their cultural issues down the throats of the rest of the country from DC. People in conservative regions are against mandates of liberal culture from Washington and liberal regions are against conservative values being shoved on them. Those arguments belong in the state capital, not the national capital.

The national platform of the Republican party should be about fiscal responsibility, respect for the taxpayer, creating a fertile field for economic growth, maintaining a strong defense, reducing regulation at the federal level and empowering the states to address their unique sets of problems with their unique array of resources. We have 50 states. Each one has different problems to varying degrees. One size fits all solutions out of DC don’t work because no state has the “average” degree of any given problem. A national regulation designed to address a problem may make no sense in a state that doesn’t have that problem or not be enough in one that has it really bad. The federal government should be about giving states resources they need to tackle their own problems. And, with 50 different states, we can try 50 different approaches to solving things. What works can be shared with other states. An absolutely disastrous idea sees its damage limited to only that state rather than walking an entire country off the cliff from DC with a poor policy decision.

So … we can have more conservative Republicans in more conservative areas and more liberal Republicans in more liberal areas and both of these find common ground in the Republican notion for the national level. At the national level, BOTH of these groups would have the same policy ideas. When a journalist asks a candidate for Senate what their view on abortion is, that candidate should say something like “that is a question for a state legislative candidate, I am running for a federal office. I have my own PERSONAL views but this is a state question. My work in Washington will not be to change California’s (or any other state’s) abortion laws”. While a candidate for state office might be more detailed on this particular question. On things such as various welfare programs, again, states should be given more authority should be given to address those problems according to the degree of the problem in that state and the resources the state has to bring to bear. A setting of minimum federal standards combined with block grants to the states to address those issues should be our party’s national strategy.

The key is to configure the party so it isn’t a “Conservative” or a “Liberal” or a “Moderate” party at the federal level. At the federal level it should be the party of responsible governance, fiscal responsibility, and defending the nation. The states can sort out their own cultural issues. States that make poor decisions will see their populations decline and their Congressional influence wane. States that make good decisions will see jobs and population increase their their political influence increase. I see this as going back to first principles with the intention of the federal government.

Comment by crosspatch — November 9, 2012 @ 2:03 pm - November 9, 2012
If what I think is coming V comes to pass they are going to have to get over it. Next year will be the beginning of the next recession going into 2014 the interest rates will start to increase O’bama will be presented with a choice to keep paying interest on the debt or institute Obamacare he will choose to institute O’bamacare and stop paying interest on the debt. The coming crash is not going to be pretty or easy to survive. May God help us all.

Comment by Catseye — November 9, 2012 @ 2:09 pm - November 9, 2012
It is very encouraging to hear your intentions, crosspatch.

With the wake up call of GOTV activities, combined with a hopeful genuine interest by folk on the conservative side, I look for an increase in voter turnout. If more people get involved in GOTV activities from both sides of the aisle and even some nudgin’ of he indies, things will look better overall.

Comment by rusty — November 9, 2012 @ 2:12 pm - November 9, 2012
Rusty, the problem is why did my card with numbers to call come two days AFTER the election? Do we have partisans in the USPS that intentionally delayed it? Was it only sent at the last minute? I don’t know.

The point is, the Republican Party needs to shake off the lies that have been poured on it. How they are going to do that is beyond me but I think part of the answer also lies with the young. 2016′s new voters are 14 years old today. 2020′s voters are 10. Put kids in private schools. If you are well to do, maybe donate to a local private school for the purpose of making tuition affordable for someone who might want to go but can’t.

My son’s teacher told him last week that the Republican party is only for the rich and wanted to take advantage of the poor and that the Democrats are the good guys. We need to get our kids out of these schools.

Comment by crosspatch — November 9, 2012 @ 2:59 pm - November 9, 2012
My son’s teacher told him last week that the Republican party is only for the rich and wanted to take advantage of the poor and that the Democrats are the good guys. We need to get our kids out of these schools./

What we need to do is get these teachers of our schools.

Comment by David in New Orleans — November 9, 2012 @ 3:07 pm - November 9, 2012
David, that isn’t going to happen where I live. That teacher is also head of the union for the district.

Comment by crosspatch — November 9, 2012 @ 3:11 pm - November 9, 2012
I know it is much easier said than done and with a big dose of wishful thinking.

Comment by David in New Orleans — November 9, 2012 @ 3:21 pm - November 9, 2012
Private schools are an option, but many of them are requiring parent participation / volunteer hours in conjunction with tuition.

Maybe getting involved with your teachers is a solution.

I have a friend who is a lesbian mom and she volunteers in the school’s library. She has a great relationship with another volunteer who is conservative. The two of them really enjoy their time together and both are working to help the school.

Comment by rusty — November 9, 2012 @ 3:26 pm - November 9, 2012
GOTV works for Democrats, not for Republicans. Conservatives are more reliable and consistent voters than liberals, so increasing turnout isn’t going to be as much of a boost for Republicans as it is for Democrats.

Biggest problem with conservatism is the attitude problem. Romney shot himself in the face with that 47% rant, and lots of conservatives’ have been settling on a bogus explanation that people vote Democratic because they want free stuff. You’re not likely to convince people to vote for you if your starting point is bragging about how well-off and self-made you are while accusing tens of millions of people of being lazy and wanting handouts.

Case in point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ik4f1dRbP8&feature=bf_next&list=PLZRf3c8PnkGdCcqMbkVvxqJLeSiVV69rA

This is counterproductive for your electoral success not only because it’s condescending and mean-spirited (and usually comes down hardest on all of the most rapidly growing demographics), but because it’s plainly not true. Traipsing around the country screaming “We Built It!” at anyone who mentioned public services makes you seem selfish, arrogant, proud, and profoundly, profoundly stupid. The American taxpayer was compelled to bailout the financial industry by handing over more than twice the annual federal budget to a bunch of irresponsible companies that used the cash to to pay million dollar executive bonuses, and this is the caste of our society that expresses the attitude most vociferously! Romney himself orchestrated a bailout from the government when Bain was in trouble in the early 90′s. These assholes are out buying yachts with public money and scolding poor people with inadequate healthcare and few job opportunities for being worthless mooches who are only interested in what freebies their politicians get them. You rank-and-filers gobble this crap right up, but most people can see it for the blatant scam that it is.

Further, all of these airtight conservative policy ideas and proposals that you guys think are oh-so appealing and popular and require no revision or consideration reflect this smug, arrogant, hypocritical point of view. Minorities in particular understand the value of public services like education and affordable healthcare, and are understandably repelled by a political party that insists that all of these things are enormous wastes of money. Virtually every recommendation by conservatives exclusively serves the interests of the wealthiest people in the country, and people can sniff that crap out. Almost all of the economic growth in the past few decades has gone to a smaller and smaller percentage of the population, and those peoples’ taxes have plummeted at the same time. Still, we’re told we can’t do anything about climate change, we can’t do anything about healthcare costs, we can’t do anything about education, because these rich people need more tax cuts.

Conservatives spent the last few weeks lying to each other about the polling and the mood and the momentum to make themselves feel better about an election that they ended up losing conclusively. Instead of learning from this lesson, you guys are right back at it, soothing yourselves by choosing to believe, despite evidence to the contrary, that no, no, no, it’s actually conservatism that has the wind at its back. Feel free, I guess, to double down on this nonsense. We’ll see it works out for you.

Comment by Levi — November 9, 2012 @ 4:02 pm - November 9, 2012
The GOP must not cave on Immigration. It will be a mistake. Any Immigration bill cannot include Amnesty.

The future is bringing more groups into the Republican fold. This means the 47% that Romney discounted must be included. You cannot win an election by ignoring people. I felt social conservatives were ignored. That was what cause a decrease in the White vote. Romney needed the vote of every demographic. He left many votes on the table.

Comment by anon322531 — November 9, 2012 @ 4:07 pm - November 9, 2012
Conservatives spent the last few weeks lying to each other about the polling and the mood and the momentum to make themselves feel better about an election that they ended up losing conclusively.

Coming from a serial liar like Levi, this is the height of hilarity.

Notice how he’s ran away (again) when called out on his lies on Beghanzi and the cover-up. (Not mentioning his belief that President Bush was culpable in 9/11, but he’ll let this President get away with a cover-up).

Now hush Levi, the adults are talking.

Comment by The_Livewire — November 9, 2012 @ 4:16 pm - November 9, 2012
The American taxpayer was compelled to bailout the financial industry by handing over more than twice the annual federal budget to a bunch of irresponsible companies that used the cash to to pay million dollar executive bonuses, and this is the caste of our society that expresses the attitude most vociferously!

Comment by Levi — November 9, 2012 @ 4:02 pm – November 9, 2012

Suck dick, Levi.

Under terms of the February loan restructuring, two private investors — Argonaut Ventures I LLC and Madrone Partners LP — stand to be repaid before the U.S. government if the solar company is liquidated. The two firms gave the company a total of $69 million in emergency loans. Argonaut is an investment vehicle of the George Kaiser Family Foundation — headed by billionaire George Kaiser, a major Obama campaign contributor and a frequent visitor to the White House. Kaiser raised between $50,000 and $100,000 for Obama’s 2008 campaign, federal election records show.

Not to mention the bonuses received by Solyndra executives who inexplicably had donated to the Obama campaign.

And what was moocher and looter Levi’s response?

Because a half billion dollar loan to Solyndra got wasted? That sucks, but that amount of money is a pittance in the grand scheme

Comment by Levi — November 8, 2012 @ 3:10 pm – November 8, 2012

So you’re a liar, Levi. You’re a flat-out mendacious hypocrite and LIAR who supports and endorses exactly that which you are attempting to denounce.

The facts prove that you are a liar. I have provided referenced and linked facts showing that you openly endorse and support the behavior that you are trying to condemn.

You are a moocher, a looter, and a taker. And as you proved when you ran screaming away from that thread, you are a coward.

Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 9, 2012 @ 4:25 pm - November 9, 2012
Almost all of the economic growth in the past few decades has gone to a smaller and smaller percentage of the population, and those peoples’ taxes have plummeted at the same time.

Comment by Levi — November 9, 2012 @ 4:02 pm – November 9, 2012

Suck dick, liar Levi.

Between 1979 and 2009, a period which includes both the Reagan and Bush eras, the notorious top 1 percent of income earners did see their average tax rates fall, according to the CBO, from 35.1 percent to 28.9 percent. But the bottom 20 percent of income earners saw an even steeper decline in their average tax rates — from 7.5 percent in 1979 to just 1 percent in 2009.

The disproportionate amount of taxes paid by those with higher incomes becomes more apparent when looking at their share of the nation’s federal tax liability. The top 1 percent paid 38.7 percent of income taxes in 2009, and the top 20 percent paid 94.1 percent of income taxes.

Many Americans with lower incomes do pay various excise taxes, as well as payroll taxes toward Social Security and Medicare. But that fact doesn’t change the overall pattern. When all federal taxes are included, the top 1 percent paid 22.3 percent of taxes in 2009, compared to the bottom 20 percent, who paid only 0.3 percent of the taxes. That means that the proportion of taxes paid by the top 1 percent is 74 times the amount paid by bottom 20 percent. In 1979, the top 1 percent was only paying seven times as much in taxes as a share of all taxes collected.

Some may counter that the rich pay a lot more because they earn a lot more. But even factoring in income inequality, wealthier Americans still pay a disproportionate amount in taxes. The top 1 percent, who as we see above paid 22.3 percent of all federal taxes in 2009, earned only 13.4 percent of income in the U.S. that year. The top 20 percent, who earned 50.8 percent of income, paid 67.9 percent of taxes. In contrast, every other income group paid a lower share of taxes than they earned in income.

Levi is completely insane and mentally unhinged. He literally cannot tell the truth about anything. He is a desperate sociopath and fascist, ignorant and uninformed, screaming “SIEG HEIL, OBAMA!” at the top of his lungs.

Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 9, 2012 @ 4:30 pm - November 9, 2012
Oh, catseye, as long as TIM Geithner is running the printing presses, Obama will have plenty of money for Obamacare AND interest on the debt And free contraception and Big Bird and everything else except national defense, which we can dismantle because we have no enemies.

Comment by V the K — November 9, 2012 @ 4:35 pm - November 9, 2012
These assholes are out buying yachts with public money and scolding poor people with inadequate healthcare and few job opportunities for being worthless mooches who are only interested in what freebies their politicians get them.

Suck dick, mendacious hypocrite and liar Levi.

Sen. John Kerry, who has repeatedly voted to raise taxes while in Congress, dodged a whopping six-figure state tax bill on his new multimillion-dollar yacht by mooring her in Newport, R.I.

Look what else the Moocher Obama Party endorsed.

Missouri Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill admitted Monday that she had failed to pay about $287,000 in back taxes and will sell a private plane that has created considerable controversy as she prepares to run for a second term in 2012….

In the wake of a Politico report that had billed the government for her travel on the aircraft, she quickly reimbursed taxpayers for the trips, hoping to avoid a protracted political problem.

But, it was then revealed that she had billed taxpayers for a purely political trip — deepening her potential exposure on the issue.

And of course, this is what the moocher and thief Barack Obama and the leadership of the Barack Obama Party do:

Besides not paying those pesky taxes, Mr. Rangel had other reasons for wanting to hide income. As the tenant of four rent-stabilized apartments in Harlem, the Congressman needed to keep his annual reported income below $175,000, lest he be ineligible as a hardship case for rent control. (He also used one of the apartments as an office in violation of rent-control rules, but that’s another story.)

Mr. Rangel said last fall that “I never had any idea that I got any income’’ from the villa. Try using that one the next time the IRS comes after you. Equally interesting is his claim that he didn’t know that the developer of the Dominican Republic villa had converted his $52,000 mortgage to an interest-free loan in 1990. That would seem to violate House rules on gifts, which say Members may only accept loans on “terms that are generally available to the public.” Try getting an interest-free loan from your banker.

The National Legal and Policy Center also says it has confirmed that Mr. Rangel owned a home in Washington from 1971-2000 and during that time claimed a “homestead” exemption that allowed him to save on his District of Columbia property taxes. However, the homestead exemption only applies to a principal residence, and the Washington home could not have qualified as such since Mr. Rangel’s rent-stabilized apartments in New York have the same requirement.

So let’s see, we have Barack Obama and the leaders of the Barack Obama Party buying yachts with public money, buying planes with public money, buying villas with public money — AND then turning around and using welfare funds and taxpayer dollars to live in and maintain them.

But of course, stupid and malicious liar Levi doesn’t know that, because Levi only repeats what the Obama Party tells him and is too stoned to do his own research — plus he’ll never get the Goebbels Award he so desperately craves if he were to actually tell the truth about his Obama Party.

Moocher and looter Levi is looking for a high ride at everyone else’s expense, just like the rest of the Obama voters. They are all moochers and thieves, as shown by these people who they elect.

Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 9, 2012 @ 4:39 pm - November 9, 2012
Levi is completely insane and mentally unhinged. He literally cannot tell the truth about anything. He is a desperate sociopath and fascist, ignorant and uninformed, screaming “SIEG HEIL, OBAMA!” at the top of his lungs.

The percentage of the country’s overall tax bill that the rich pay could not be less relevant. It goes without saying that as a group, they are paying the lion’s share, but on an individual basis, they are paying 1/2 to 1/3 the rate that the middle class is paying. This does more to drive the deficit than all the welfare abuse in the country put together.

When you talk about what constitutes a fair share, you’re talking about a percentage of what one person pays in relation to a percentage that another person pays. If Mitt Romney is paying less than half of my effective tax rate, then he is not paying his fair share. He has a tremendous advantage because he keeps more of every dollar he earns. Without doing any extra work, without getting a promotion or a raise, my wife and I would be millionaires in a decade if we were paying Mitt’s tax rate off of the tax cuts alone. We could start a business, buy a house, otherwise stimulate the economy, but nope – those are perks that Mitt Romney gets, because rich people wrote the tax code to favor themselves at the expense of everyone else.

Zooming out and looking at what all of the rich people are paying is clearly a trick, and it’s one you’ve fallen for. Individual wealthy people to enjoy some of the lowest tax rates of all taxpayers, but then they get to complain about how burdened they are because as a group they’re paying most of the taxes. You’re just stupid if you don’t understand that this is a comparison of two completely unrelated things.

Comment by Levi — November 9, 2012 @ 4:59 pm - November 9, 2012
The kind of stuff I would like to do involves a lot of data mining and time spent with people face to face. For example, I would like to go through voter registration records in my home state of California. Find people who used to be registered Republican but are now “decline to state”. DTS voters now outnumber Republicans in my county by about 50% (DTS registration is in the 32.6% of the electorate in my county, Republicans are 21.8%). Once these people are identified, knock on doors. Find ones who will be willing to talk. Don’t “evangelize” the Republican Party to them, LISTEN to what they have to say. Find out why they left. Find out what their perceptions are. Find out what is important to them. Let them do the talking. Talking to a few hundred of these people should reveal some fairly consistent patterns. We can speculate until the cows come home about things, but until we sit down face to face with people and listen to them, we aren’t likely to make much progress.

Once that is done, some navel gazing over the results would be required if for no other reason than to allow these patterns to sink in a little and decide what can be done to bring these people home. Then a course of action and a PR campaign needs to be waged AFTER some changes in philosophy are made with the party. And again, this all hinges on allowing local politics to be local and keeping federal politics out of local culture. It means having local Republicans able to accept national Republicans who might have different LOCAL politics but share the same vision for NATIONAL politics.

Comment by crosspatch — November 9, 2012 @ 5:14 pm - November 9, 2012
“… is completely insane and mentally unhinged. He literally cannot tell the truth about anything. He is a desperate sociopath and fascist, ignorant and uninformed, screaming “SIEG HEIL!” at the top of his lungs.”

Comment by Passing By — November 9, 2012 @ 5:16 pm - November 9, 2012
If Mitt Romney is paying less than half of my effective tax rate, then he is not paying his fair share. He has a tremendous advantage because he keeps more of every dollar he earns.

Suck dick, Levi.

There are two reasons that the Romneys’ tax bill is below 15%. According to their 2010 tax return (the latest available), Mr. and Mrs. Romney reduced their taxable income by the $3 million they gave to charities.

The second and most important reason is the majority of the Romneys’ income is taxed twice – first at the corporate level, and a second time when they report it on their personal income tax return.

Taxable interest income accounted for $3.3 million of their $21.7 million in total income. Since companies are able to reduce their income dollar for dollar with the interest they pay out, interest income is not taxed at the corporate level, but only once as personal income. In the case of the Romneys, it was taxed at 35%, the top marginal personal income tax rate.

The Romneys also reported $4.9 million in ordinary dividends, of which $3.3 million qualified for the 15% tax rate. Unlike interest payments, corporations may not deduct dividends from their income. Dividend income therefore is taxed twice, first at the corporate level, and then again when it is reported on an individual’s personal income tax return.

A precise calculation of this double tax is impossible to make because the tax rates paid by different corporations vary widely – from 0% by GE and General Motors to the top corporate tax rate of 35%. A rigorous economic analysis would use the top marginal tax rate because that is the rate that affects economic decisions. However, for the purpose of this analysis, a reasonable estimate would use the average U.S. corporate tax rate which, over longer periods of time, has been 25%.

Based on a 25% tax rate, for every $133 a corporation earned, it had to first pay $33 in federal income taxes before it could distribute $100 in dividends. Next, on every $100 of dividend income received, the Romneys paid an additional $15 in taxes. The combined tax of $48 totals out to a 36% rate on dividend income ($48/$133), which approximates the top personal income rate imposed on interest income.

You already tried this stunt this summer, and you got nuked when it was pointed out that Romney pays far more than you ever will in ANY respect.

You want “fair share”? Start paying your own bills instead of mooching and looting off welfare, liar.

Furthermore, Levi, suck more dick.

Now, back taxes have been a problem for the Obama-Biden administration. You may recall early on that Tom Daschle was the president’s top pick to run the Health and Human Services Department. But it turned out the former Democratic senator, who was un-elected from South Dakota in 2004, owed something like $120,000 to the IRS for things from his subsequent benefactor that he just forgot to pay taxes on. You know how that is. $120G’s here or there. So he dropped out.

And then we learned this guy Timothy Geithner owed something like $42,000 in back taxes and penalties to the IRS, which is one of the agencies that he’d be in charge of as secretary of the Treasury. The fine fellow who’s supposed to know about handling everyone else’s money. In the end this was excused by Washington’s bipartisan CYA culture as one of those inadvertent accidental oversights that somehow never seem to happen on the side of paying too much taxes.

And under Geithner’s expert guidance the U.S. economy has been, well, wow! Just look at it.

Privacy laws prevent release of individual tax delinquents’ names. But we do know that as of the end of 2009, 41 people inside Obama’s very own White House owe the government they’re allegedly running a total of $831,055 in back taxes. That would cover a lot of special chocolate desserts in the White House Mess.

You openly allow Obama supporters to cheat on their taxes. You have outright stated that Obama supporters should be allowed to cheat on their taxes and that Obama Party members who cheat on their taxes should be elected to high office.

Again. Levi is completely insane and mentally unhinged. He literally cannot tell the truth about anything. He is a desperate sociopath and fascist, ignorant and uninformed, screaming “SIEG HEIL, OBAMA!” at the top of his lungs.

Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 9, 2012 @ 5:26 pm - November 9, 2012
And this one was too funny.

Without doing any extra work, without getting a promotion or a raise, my wife and I would be millionaires in a decade if we were paying Mitt’s tax rate off of the tax cuts alone.

Comment by Levi — November 9, 2012 @ 4:59 pm – November 9, 2012

“Millionaires in a decade” would require an annual accretion of $100,000,or a reduction in your total taxes of $100,000 per year.

In the top bracket for married filing jointly, for you to be paying $100,000 annually, you would have to be earning approximately $400,000 annually in the first place.

So here we have $400k a year looter and moocher Levi screaming that his taxes are too high and he wants them reduced to zero so he can become a millionaire in a decade.

Again. Levi is completely insane and mentally unhinged. He literally cannot tell the truth about anything. He is a desperate sociopath and fascist, ignorant and uninformed, screaming “SIEG HEIL, OBAMA!” at the top of his lungs.

Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 9, 2012 @ 6:06 pm - November 9, 2012
I have more to say about this idiotic ‘the rich pay their fair share’ business. Nobody thinks of taxes and fairness in terms of the country’s total tax bill, and what percentage of that is paid by their tax bracket. What matters is the effective tax rates that someone pays on an individual level, and when millionaires and billionaires are paying less of a percent of their income than the middle class, it undermines our progressive tax system. All this does is erect barriers to mobility for the middle class and restrict economic growth and opportunity to the wealthier classes that have a bunch of extra money to burn. Essentially, you’re giving extra benefits and advantages to wealthy people because they already have extra benefits and advantages. And of course this is never enough – they still argue that the wealthy are slaving away under an unfair tax system and that they are entitled to even more extra benefits and advantages.

So pointing out how much of a percentage all of the rich people pay says nothing about fairness, and is an obvious line of self-serving bullshit that you’ve got to be pretty dim to buy into. It’s theoretically possible that the wealthiest 1% could pay an effective tax rate of 1% and still be responsible for the bulk of the total tax bill – would that be a fair set-up? Trillionaires get to keep 99 out of every 100 dollars while the rest of us get to keep 60 out of every 100? How anyone could consider that fair so long as the 1% was paying most of the country’s total tax bill is beyond me. You’re talking about two completely separate things, one of which has absolutely nothing to say about the fairness of the system..

Comment by Levi — November 9, 2012 @ 6:49 pm - November 9, 2012
So our serial liar goes back to arguing that the fact that 50% doesn’t pay tazes doesn’t matter, as long as the rich pay more.

Pretty clear that our little facist thinks ‘fair’ is no one else has more than him.

Comment by The_Livewire — November 9, 2012 @ 7:09 pm - November 9, 2012
You know what, Levi?

Suck dick, you supporter of tax cheats.

Suck dick, you supporter of government fraud and waste to benefit Obama donors.

Suck dick, you ignorant halfwit who can’t even do basic math.

All proven with facts and links.

Again. Levi is completely insane and mentally unhinged. He literally cannot tell the truth about anything. He is a desperate sociopath and fascist, ignorant and uninformed, screaming “SIEG HEIL, OBAMA!” at the top of his lungs.

Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 9, 2012 @ 7:21 pm - November 9, 2012
When asked in the same interview if the Republican Party is simply too old, too white, and too male, Boehner said, “What Republicans need to learn is: How do we speak to all Americans? You know, not just the people who look like us and act like us, but how do we speak to all Americans?” Presumably Republicans’ polling data will help them figure out how to express that sentiment without making it sound like minorities are totally alien to the party.

Comment by rusty — November 9, 2012 @ 8:31 pm - November 9, 2012
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/11/gop-tries-to-piece-together-what-went-wrong.html

Comment by rusty — November 9, 2012 @ 8:31 pm - November 9, 2012
Well, Levi, “the rich” in the US pay the largest share of the tax burden of any industrialized country. Now, granted, that *still* might not be enough to suit you, but it is important. Everyone making the median salary and less, that is 50% of wage earners in the country, pay 3% of the taxes. That means all of those people could lose their jobs tomorrow but the government would see only a 3% loss in tax revenue. The government has no incentive to see that those people have jobs. On the other hand, there WOULD be a huge increase in the outflow for various benefits if those people lost their jobs but since that is paid for by simply rolling the Federal Reserve printing press, there’s no problem there either. In other words, we have things in a configuration where there is really no incentive whatsoever for government to see that people are working. This is because we are setting the expectation in people that it is the role of government to “take care of them” rather for them to take care of themselves.

Taxing that “rich” person more doesn’t benefit the poor person more. In fact, it INCREASES the disparity between rich and poor. If you look at what the Democratic party SAYS and what the Democratic party DOES, they are generally polar opposites. The Democratic Party cries about the disparity of incomes and then implements policies that make that disparity worse. Any time someone loses their job and falls out of the middle class income range, the overall disparity gets worse. If you take a very rich billionaire and take half his stuff, he’s still a very rich billionaire.

The other thing Democrats don’t seem to look at is opportunity cost. For example, say they raise taxes in California and no business “left”. They mark that down as having increased revenue. But they can’t take into account the job that didn’t get created or the company that didn’t move to California or the business that didn’t get started because of the tax increase. They don’t take into account the impact of growth. I noticed that in every discussion of Romney’s economic plan. The Democrats would always do the math as if it was a static economy. Romney would point out that, no, when you put those things into place, businesses start hiring MORE employees so tax revenues increase.

We have so many regulations already that take effect when you reach plateaus of 50 and 100 employees that, for example, we have about 2.5 times more companies with exactly 49 employees than we have with 50. Obamacare is now going to make that problem worse. That says there are a lot of companies that are capable of expanding, of hiring people, of reducing the disparity between the rich and the poor, but are prevented from doing so by government regulation. The very regulations that were put into place when sold as being to help people actually does the opposite.

Democrats do not want actually solve problems. Democrats simply want to manage the problem in perpetuity. To actually solve the problem means nobody needs their programs once they are up and on their own in the middle class. They are only dependent on Democrat programs when they are poor, so the Democrats have a political incentive to create as many poor as possible. Democrats want a system where we have a large under class managed by a rich elite of politically connected cronies and as small of a middle class as possible. The middle class are the complainers. Those are the ones who taxes actually take a meaningful chunk of their budget and directly impact their daily standard of living. The Democrats want to get rid of them. The very rich and the very poor vote Democrat. It’s the middle class that are the opposition and the Democrats want to destroy them or at least keep them to a political minority.

Comment by crosspatch — November 10, 2012 @ 12:55 pm - November 10, 2012
crosspatch,

None of what you’re saying makes any sense. The rich are currently paying the lowest tax rates they’ve ever paid, they have more loopholes to avoid taxes than they ever have before, and yet the economy is dealing with the biggest crisis in a generation. You can’t honestly say that the wealthy are being crushed by regulation and taxes when they’re paying historically low tax rates and while their businesses are posting unprecedented profits every quarter, can you?

Meanwhile, poor people and the middle class are seeing their wages remain the same. If you take into account the rising costs of healthcare and energy, then really their wages are declining. This shouldn’t be happening if what you’re saying is true. They should have opportunities and their bosses should be able to pay them more, because the rich have been getting all this extra money for the past decade. And therein lies the problem – if you give a billionaire a 10 million dollar tax break, they might invest in hiring more people are expanding their business. But what if they do that overseas? Nobody in this country is enjoying those perks. And what if they just buy a new house or some other luxury item? Of course there’s a marginal economic benefit for the builders and merchants involved, but it’s not directly creating jobs in the way they need to be created. If that 10 million stays in public hands, you can send people to school, you can build a new interchange, you can provide healthcare to poor people, all of which have a far broader positive impact on the economy than what a rich person may or may not do with money they don’t care or really take note of.

The rich argue that they’re paying too much because they want more money and they don’t want to do any additional work. This is a far more corrosive sense of entitlement than a mother who wants to collect food stamps and unemployment because she has 3 kids and nowhere to go.

Comment by Levi — November 11, 2012 @ 7:41 pm - November 11, 2012
Crosspatch,

Again, keep in mind that Levi is completely insane and mentally unhinged. He literally cannot tell the truth about anything. He is a desperate sociopath and fascist, ignorant and uninformed, screaming “SIEG HEIL, OBAMA!” at the top of his lungs.

As I have shown above, Levi endorses rich Obama supporters cheating on their taxes, insists that government waste that benefits Obama donors is perfectly acceptable; in addition, he is incapable of doing even basic math.

Notice that all of these are linked and referenced. Levi rants, but never provides facts or research. He just keeps screaming and crying, trying to win the argument by sheer volume of words instead of providing any type of rational or logical statement.

The reason why is easy. He is a lazy entitlement brat who thinks that, since he spouts his Obama Nazi lines, he should be given a six-figure income, a free house, and food stamps at everyone else’s expense. He is completely lazy, totally decrepit, and quite mentally unstable.

Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 11, 2012 @ 8:19 pm - November 11, 2012
The rich argue that they’re paying too much because they want more money and they don’t want to do any additional work. This is a far more corrosive sense of entitlement than a mother who wants to collect food stamps and unemployment because she has 3 kids and nowhere to go.

In the real world, from real people, I’d ask for a citation to back up such an outrageous statement.

Then I look and see it’s our resident liar, who when confronted by facts simply retreats to another thread to spout his lies.

Now hush Levi, the adults are talking.

Comment by The_Livewire — November 11, 2012 @ 8:24 pm - November 11, 2012

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Live preview of comment

Close this window.

Comments

Leave a comment

Live preview of comment