It’s Déjà vu All Over Again ……TARP and Blair House
by Dr. David Janda
As a surgeon, at least until ObamaCare goes into effect, I have been trained to dissect issues and results into their component parts. My current focus is on the similarities between the two biggest missed political opportunities over the past two years:
- Senator McCain’s suspension of his campaign to fly back to D.C. to work out a “Bipartisan” solution to the TARP fiasco. By compromising his fiscal principles and NOT drawing a line in the sand….he lost the Public. It was the beginning of the end of his Presidential bid and opened the door for the election of Barrack Obama.
- The attendance of Republican leadership ( the same leadership that supported the TARP fiasco above) at the recent” Bipartisan” Health Summit at Blair House. This smoke and mirrors event purported to compare Republican ideas with the dogma of Obama, Pelosi and Reid. The event confused and misled the public. By attending the event, Republicans snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in their opposition to the Obama’s use of our health care system to implement socialist reform.
Rather than being mesmerized by the “illusion” of Bipartisanship at Blair House, the GOP leadership should have walked past Blair House, marched to local clinics and hospitals, and listened to doctors, nurses and patients on the front line of health care. This could have sent a powerful message to every American and delivered a death blow to ObamaCare. The symbolism could have ended the debate once and for all. Picture this: the Democrats sequestered in a government building talking to themselves, versus The GOP hand in hand with The American People.
It should be noted that some Republicans opposed the Blair House meeting and were pushing for a grassroots frontal assault. Congressman Thad McCotter and a handful of other GOP members advocated for this action. I believe this approach would have brought victory to all who support Freedom and Liberty.
On March 14, 2009, New York Times published a profile of Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s Chief of Staff. Reporter Peter Baker quotes a “senior administration official” as stating that “Rahm thinks bipartisanship is a way to get what you want—to fake bipartisanship to get what you want.”
It is a formula which worked in September of 2008, when the Democrats sucked McCain into the fake “bipartisan” discussion, and then blamed the result on him, when he compromised his principles. This slight of hand led to Barrack Obama becoming President. It is the same formula which has led to passage of the most oppressive legislation in American history on March 21, 2010. As Yogi Berra said, “It is déjà vu all over again.” Hopefully, when The Obama Administration manufactures its next “bipartisan” event, the GOP leadership will meet it with sound principles and NOT bow to the “illusion of Bipartisanship.”
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
113 Comments
This is so true. The bogus bipartisan efforts are maddening. I especially like when obama says lets work together then in the next sentence slams conservatives. Work together, he has no intent.
http://www.PoliticalCentrist.com News and views for independent voters
I don't think Blair House was as bad a tactical decision as all that. The Reps were armed with facts and their own counter proposals. They stood firm against the Dems who only had a handful of bad anecdotes and clearly knew less about the legislation than their opponents.
I think it would have been a lose/lose either way. If they don't go, they look like simple, spiteful obstructionists (Democrats). If they do go, there is the risk of being seen as conciliatory.
The left loves to praise and acclaim "bipartisanship'' when it suits their needs.
The only true bipartisanship in the Obamacare bill was in it's opposition, then the left calls it obstruction.
The dems will lose in the next elections with bipartisan payback.
David,
You lost because the truth was not on your side. Period.
You should be proud and ashamed at the way your party behaved. Proud that they fought tooth and nail. Ashamed that they lied, obfuscated, and weren't working in the best interest of Americans.
I think you are absolutely right! The Republicans should have had NOTHING to do with this fiasco!! They should have never walked into the room, after being locked out of the talks all year!!!
The DemoSCAT's won due to lying, cheating and whore-like activities. You and your ilk are now in the minority…you just don't know or want to acknowledge it yet. As the Nanny-State evolves over the next few months and more and more people grow spines and realize the terrible turd they are now swallowing, they will gladly, (although perhaps secretly) vote the incumbent Dems and Rino Republicans out of office and usher into power a new style of Conservatives. One that upholds the Constitution and gives the power back to the people. This country will be snatched back from the brink of disaster despite O'Bumma's best efforts….
Obama&Co. lied, obfuscated, and worked in the best interest of biggovernment, unions and the redistribution of wealth.
The "truth" is coming out daily and it's ugly.
"Work together" is Democratese for STFU and submit.
Dr. Janda: The Republican Party would have had a better chance if it were a Palin/McCain ticket. Even though she doesn't have what it takes to be an American President, (and she has alot more of those qualities than Obama), she would have served our country better than McCain, Obama or Biden.
McCain lacks the qualities that America desperately needs. It will come in the form of someone like Paul Ryan or Colonel West. I just hope we can get it sorted out before we all fall off of the proverbail cliff….
Hindsite is always 20/20 and we need to focus on looking forward.
"It is a formula which worked in September of 2008, when the Democrats sucked McCain into the fake “bipartisan” discussion, and then blamed the result on him, when he compromised his principles."
I tend to think this is more complex than McCain getting sucked in. McCain was up to his eyeballs in the Mortgage Racket – subprime and all. EVERYONE IS. Otherwise explain to me why there are no arrests. No prosecutions. Because they would all be prosecuting each other. AIN'T gonna happen until the tea party is successful in November.
If Sarah Palin is putting her reputation on the line (and believe me it is on a tightrope with McCain for me) because ultimately McCain will become a 'rubber stamp' for the tea party then I salute her for turning the tables. Hayworth is no tea party friend. He is establishment.
Again we have another election of bad and worse. Mrs. Palin. I sure hope you know what you are doing on THIS one. 'Rubber Stamp McCain' for the tea party is the ONLY way I see this is anything other extremely counter-intuitive.
So we finally agree. The GOP is bought and paid for and the DNC is bought and paid for.
Every nook and cranny is control by cartels. This is why I can not understand how you can drink from the RahmObama trough and tell me that anything has changed.
Destroy Middle America and get rich doing it. It goes back to before 1998 yes. Concur. But in 1998 they switched from a musket to an ICBM. And it will not stop until we take a fire hose to the entire Congress.
RNC & DNC be DAMNED to hell.
anon,………you are indeed amazing,….if only you had the ability to be coherent,……….anyway,……..
"………..working in the best interest of Americans"……………….If you are indeed correct,………then please,………
tell us how did Pelosi / Reid / Obama determine this,……."best interest"….????????
You wouldn't know the truth if it walkd up and kicked you in the ass, troll.
anon you silly troll, did mommy forget to give you your meds today or has rationing started in your dungeon already?
The 2010 elections are the first ones that must result in two beneficial outcomes,……..
A.) A Republican takeover of either or both chambers of congress,……..and
B.) A takeover of the Republican Party by intelligent people.
These Liberals must think we're stupid or something. Let's run Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann in 2012! That will show them who the stupid one's are.
I'm so over navel gazing past Republican strategic errors. Really, could your intellectual efforts not be better used forging more positive actionable change? Americans need leadership right now not finger pointing – move on and get in the game for America's future.
Randyl2, why is it that the redistribution of wealth from the working and middle classes to the upper class is good, but the redistribution of wealth from the upper class to the middle and working classes is bad? This seems counter-intuitive to a hardworking American like myself.
Independent voters — The phrase has a nice ring to it. Unfortunately, most independent voters are uninformed, uninvolved and are prone to listen to a demagogue, then elect that demagogue (think Barack). The "independent" voters carried the day, and swept Dear Leader to victory.
You exhibit the opinion of someone who is well informed and followed the actual proceedings all the way from start to finish as I did. Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans do not fit in this category. They rely upon nothing more than headlines and sound bites to form their opinions. To them, and FOR them, perception IS king.
When dealing with sheeple, it is possible to construct a "reality" out of nothing more than appearances and perception…a fact which the ProgLib Socialist Democrats know all too well.
The sad fact is that I see evidence that far too many of these sheeple are STILL asleep and not getting it. We have to consider the possibility that they may NEVER come around. But, the house is on fire and we have little choice but to keep trying to wake people up and get them out before the roof collapses on us all. There will come a point when we have to think about self-preservation though. We might have to abandon some of them to their fate in order to save ourselves.
You work…??
News to us…
Got your last job from the bum with the sign at the freeway off ramp; he had to have his grocery cart organized…???
We cannot let them frame the debate or define the premise. We cannot always be playing 'away' games. We have the issues, we have the silent majority finding their voice.
We cannot battle them on the emotional front we need to address the issues factually and rationally, because at some point everyone, including the rosy eyed idealogues, have to come to grips with reality.
We can either do our best for the most or suffer mediocrity for all.
Reality says that a life boat will only hold so many, if you add that one extra person, then all fail.
But if we let them off with their talking points and let them get away with their platitudinous lies, we will always be a step behind.
Could someone explain to me what the redistribution of wealth is? Thanks.
If it was really in "best interest", wouldn't they WANT to be included in this…???
Somehow these ignorant hicks think giving tax cuts to the rich somehow benefits them.
Rush Limbaugh said so so it has to be true.
They are you moron.
So what part of the bill displeases you? Be specific.
Is it the part that children can no longer be denied coverage due to a pre existing condition? Why do you hare children?
That "best interest" thing…
anon, IF this was in the American "best interest", the Congress would have INCLUDED THEMSELVES IN THE BILL…!!!!!!!
Instead, they SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED THEMSELVES AND OTHER FEDERAL EMPLOYEES… thereby, I suppose, insured their own plan's non-competitiveness and excess costs for perpetuity…
So, go get your new points from whatever masters you service…because I intend to speak to every business and group I can find as to just how "best interest" they were…THEIR "BEST INTEREST"…
Obfuscate that…
You need to put down the crack pipe dude.
"So we finally agree. The GOP is bought and paid for and the DNC is bought and paid for."
GOP = 100%
DNC about 30%
Now help us elect better democrats. The GOP is lost.
Game plan…
Everyone, talk up to everyone you meet just how the Congress and certain Federal workers are specifically excluded from this "health-care reform"…
If this is so hot-sh!t wonderful for all of America, why aren't they subjecting themselves to all the wonderful benefits and health-care savings that this provides…?????
Two words…IT ISN'T…
It isn't good for anyone; Americans, companies, jobs, the ill, the uninsured, EVERYONE…except a Congress that says, "Look at the wonderful thing we did"…while not including themselves in it….!!!!
Try reading, it is a fun and useful activity and much better than having someone tell you. Arrive at your own conclusions but do so with independent, OBJECTIVE research. Simply put, for your benefit, Re-distribution is taking from one person the result of their work and giving it to somone else.
Human nature does not allow or support "EQUAL OUTCOMES" but the Constitution and our Bill of Rights provides for "EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES"
Did your parents teach you nothing?
Bob, the top 5% of earners pay 54.1% of income taxes collected, while the bottom 50% pay 3.5%.
I pay over 37% of my income to the goverment. Now they want even more.
Redistribution is: taking from one to 'give' to another – it is not purchasing a product with your earned money.
Where do you think most jobs come from, the upper class or the lower and middle class?
I was lower class when I began work at a manufacturing company at slightly above minimum wage, after 20 years of hard work, I became the highest paid hourly employee there. In the only country in the world where anything is possible for anyone willing to put enough hard work and effort into it, we now have increasing numbers of those who feel something is owed to them merely for existing.
A crime?
Unethical?
UnAmerican?
Socialism?
Communism?
If people can protect their copyrights for the music/movies they produce, because they produced their product, then why should anyone be entitled to the money I earned from the work that I produced?
Wise words, indeed, StoryKeeper, but I've come to expect that from you.
I hope others will read and take note.
Randyl2,
Warren Buffett earned 46 million last and paid 17% in taxes. And you paid 37%.
Do you honesty think this is in your best interest?
Wake the hell up.
"anon, IF this was in the American "best interest", the Congress would have INCLUDED THEMSELVES IN THE BILL…!!!!!!! "
They did you dumbass.
Now you can buy the same insurance that the Congress has.
God you people are stupid.
Red Rooster
FYI: From 1960 to 2008, no Senator was elected POTUS. The reason is: everyone that made it past the 6th grade knows that Governors DO HAVE the experience to be POTUS. Palin was the BEST & most Popular Governor in the United States. That made her the MOST Qualified candidate. She is still the most qualified candidate in the U.S. if she should choose to run.
It's not easy to run ALL ASPECTS & all agencies of a states Government, & do it better than anyone else.
What the hell do you mean by "wake the hell up?"
Do I think it's right that someone with more income than I should pay a lower % in taxes? No.
Do you anon, think that I should pay less than 37% in taxes?
Do you anon, think that millions that pay NO income tax should be able to vote to elect those that would take even more from me?
Mjolnir, I think anon just called you nancy.
I think Blair worked out well it made the president look trite and silly there are few soundbites for the left to use For those who cared to watch even to see the Right get theirs walked away knowing their president was an empty suit. I would in no circumstances do this again let them stew let the Republicans become the party of HELL NO america of all walks appreciate dissent, it makes people take a look at what all the fuse is about. That is why the left uses it .
LOL The DNC is owned by Move On .Org dont you remeber last election they said so They siad they bought and paid for it and the Dems nodded their heads and bowed in agreement, I beleive some might have hit there heads hard when they bowed it was a sight to see.
LOL They left that out of the bill dont you read ?,, sorry silly question
I take your money and keep it
"Do I think it's right that someone with more income than I should pay a lower % in taxes? No."
The vote democrat.
"Do you anon, think that I should pay less than 37% in taxes?"
I don't know but it seems fair enough to me. We are one of the lowest taxed modern countries on the earth.
"Do you anon, think that millions that pay NO income tax should be able to vote to elect those that would take even more from me?"
Yes. It says so in the Constitution. The Constitution you pretend to defend.
"Do you anon, think that millions that pay NO income tax should be able to vote to elect those that would take even more from me? "
So sad, Randyl2. They really have you convinced it's all the poor peoples fault.
It's not.
Mr. StoryKeeper, thank you for your response. I certainly benefited from it. So when the federal government taxes our hard work and gives 54% of the tax dollars it collects to the military it is a form of redistribution of wealth, right?
http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm
Circular reasoning with tangential answers.
You must use Dramamine, I'm all out.
Goodbye
McCain is a RHINO!!! He would have been as bad as Obama! …And I'm NOT a democrat…didn't vote for Obama…voted for McCain JUST because Palin was on the ticket!!
Ralph – I really worry this administration will do something so that we won't be allowed to vote in 2010-2012 – I pray they're not that evil ….could something like that be possible ?
Yes. I am aware of that.
He would have been bad but not nearly as bad.
I voted for the losers as well.
We need a winner. Ryan, Thune etc…
Palin will serve her country by being a conservative cheerleader. She won't be able to take the swing independents away from whomever challenges Obama in the Primaries…yes, there will be several and they will be ripped to shreds by the obama/chicago machine…
Thanks, MiPain. So when the government taxes you they are taking your money and keeping it. That must be a form of redistribution wealth. I think I have another example. Say a capitalist gives me money in exchange for my labor but the amount of money given to me is much less than the surplus value generated from my labor. This would also be a form of redistribution of wealth, in this case from the worker to the capitalist, would it not?
And so it begins,…CIVIL WAR II 2010
WE THE PEOPLE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVAhr4hZDJE&fe...
The Barry Soetoro Dossier2.MP4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64b_pwlrY7A&fe...
It's middle America that dropped the ball, both in 2008 and just last week. It's middle America than can take this country back. Let's START by eliminating the electoral college. Let's remember that the majority of VOTERS ( not special interest voters ) are the ones who ALLOWED this buffoon to get elected in the first place. Let's try and focus on what the MAJORITY of voters can do – they can take back the House, Senate AND the White House all in the next couple of years, and they will. THEN it's time to show our stuff – to not go for retribution but to TRULY show what it means to be bipartisan. AFTER WE KICK THEIR ASS………
Your numbers are incorrect. How could over $100 billion more be spent on health and human services than was spend on defense and you deduct that 54% was spent on defense? Also, the same amount that was spent on defense was spent on interest on debt. You obviously do not know the facts.
Mr. 4arepublic, the numbers are rather straightforward. Please examine the pie chart (referenced above) more closely. Current military spending by the federal government exceeds the spending on health and human services. Moreover, if Big Government wouldn't spend so wastefully on the military, then more resources could be applied to paying down the federal debt that was run up during the Bush Jr. regime.
You raise an intriguing question, Mr. BigDadio, i.e., "why should anyone be entitled to the money I earned from the work that I produced?" But I have another intriguing question that you may want to ponder: Why do capitalists keep the surplus value generated by the work that I do (above and beyond, of course, the investment in the means of production, costs of resources, and a reasonable amount for reinvestment)? Like the federal government taking money from us after we received money in exchange for our labor, the capitalist is taking away from us an exorbitant amount of the surplus value generated by our hard work.
Exempt is NOT included…the terms are mutually exclusive…
Try again…one more time…
Bob. Straight from the Dept. of the Treasury for FY 2009:
http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/tg322.htm
Department of Defense — Outlays for the Department of Defense (DOD) were $637 billion
Department of Health and Human Services — Outlays for the Department of Health and Human Services were $796 billion
Department of the Treasury — Outlays for the Department of Treasury totaled $703 billion
But it is the rich people fault that the poor people are poor, there anon,……???
well maybe so,…..in your warped mind,…………so let us tax the rich people 100%,………..
then what pray God,….what will the poor people do the following year????????????
anon, the bill specifically excludes congress, the senate, their senior staff, and the president, vice president, and others from being forced into this plan.
Try something truly radical, like reading it….
This is why I have, for the first time in 35 years, decided to become a Republican election judge,…………
on the south side of Chicago,………in the meantime,…………
See ya out in the streets on April 15 Tea Party time.
GRN dude:
I am aware of the fact that Governors are typically chosen for that reason…But, reason went right out the window in 2008 as we all are acutely aware. You remember; Sen Barry Sotero….
Palin has good qualities and served well as a Governor but, she doesn't exude PRESIDENT of The USA. There are very few Governors at the moment that could take the reins of the POTUS and be successful. That job requires more than a little experience. Americans have proven that the Personna will win. that is why we must look beyond Governors with some experience to Senators that have business backgrounds or hell just about anyone other than the established political machine.
"anon, the bill specifically excludes congress, the senate, their senior staff, and the president, vice president, and others from being forced into this plan. "
Citation. You are a liar. The bill does no such thing.
Try this. From White House.gov
http://www.whitehouse.gov/health-care-meeting/pro...
"It sets up a new competitive health insurance market giving millions of Americans the same choices of insurance that members of Congress will have."
How's them apples?
The Criminally insane have usurped [u·surp (y-sûrp, -zûrp)
v. u·surped, u·surp·ing, u·surps
v.tr.
1. To seize and hold (the power or rights of another, for example) by force or without legal authority. See Synonyms at appropriate.
2. To take over or occupy without right: usurp a neighbor's land.
3. To take the place of (another) without legal authority; supplant.
v.intr.
To seize another's place, authority, or possession wrongfully.], ANNEXING [an·nex (-nks, nks)
tr.v. an·nexed, an·nex·ing, an·nex·es
1. To append or attach, especially to a larger or more significant thing.
2. To incorporate (territory) into an existing political unit such as a country, state, county, or city.
3. To add or attach, as an attribute, condition, or consequence.
n. (nks, nks)
1. A building added on to a larger one or an auxiliary building situated near a main one.
2. An addition, such as an appendix, that is made to a record or other document.] the Sovereign States and their inhabitants (Citizenry) into the Central Control of the Federal government, something the states themselves created!! The "Frankenstein" has Risen to power, it has USURPED IT'S MASTER!!!
Sure bob. try this. Send all of your assets to me. I want your momma's basement, (Tenant in Sufferance) your bag of Cheetos ("doctor, why is my peepee orange') and your porn filled computer (Let your imagination run wild). Cuz I wanna try your lifestyle for a change. This workin and paying taxes to support you and your ilk ain't workin so good anymore. LOL
So then Bobby the "capitalist" gives you a dollar for the widget you made for him and then,………
in order to for the planets to all remain aligned,…………
he must sell that widget for only a dollar,………….do you what follows next there bright boy,……..?
A pink slip for you,………
ah capitalism,………..the more the profit,………. the less the pink slips
Hmmmm….ugly picture, but true.
I have said, for some time, if the Republicans had done the "fixing" of the broken issues in Healthcare, there would not have been the support for the takeover now.
It's as you said – a game to them. At our expense. Figuratively and literally.
Mr. 4arerepublic, those are the numbers provided by BIG GOVERNMENT. Do you really believe that BIG GOVERNMENT wants you to know the truth?
Please refer to the pie chart that is referenced above. It explains how BIG GOVERNMENT is deceiving you.
Dear Chicago Ralph, of course the capitalist does not have to sell the widget for one dollar. The capitalist needs to be compensated for the investment in the means of production, costs of resources, and a reasonable amount for reinvestment. (As I stated above.) The problem has to do with what is a "reasonable" amount for reinvestment. Moreover, there is not a linear relationship between more profits and more jobs. From the 1990s until the Bush-Cheney induced recession of 2008-2010 (and beyond) corporations were making record profits, while the income going to workers declined and well-paying jobs declined.
The main point, is that my fellow citizens easily grasp that the government is taking money away from them with taxes, but there seems to be less of recognition of how they are not being adequately compensated for their labor by capitalists.
Why does the pie chart ignore all other government spending? It does not cover interest payments on debt. It does not cover entitlement spending. The pie chart is a joke.
anon, warren buffet's income isn't earned, it's returns realized on tax deferred investments. THAT is why he only pays 17%.
Warren buffet collects no paycheck that is subject to federal, state and local taxes.
That's the difference between the rest of us, and you – you blindly accept the pablum the media spoon feeds you – we research to fin out *why*
Section 3116. I await your apology.
(by the way, a white house press release isn't a highly credible source, since none of them have actually *read* the bill)
From the Wall Street Journal:
Last September Sen. Barack Obama promised that under his health-care proposal “you’ll be able to get the same kind of coverage that members of Congress give themselves.” On Monday, President Obama repeated that promise in a speech to the American Medical Association. It’s not true.
The president is barnstorming the nation, urging swift approval of legislation that is taking shape in Congress. This legislation — the Affordable Health Choices Act that’s being drafted by Sen. Edward Kennedy’s staff and the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee — will push Americans into stingy insurance plans with tight, HMO-style controls. It specifically exempts members of Congress (along with federal employees; the exemptions are in section 3116).
Members of Congress “enjoy the widest selection of health plans in the country,” according to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. They “can choose from among consumer-driven and high deductible plans that offer catastrophic risk protection with higher deductibles, health saving/reimbursable accounts and lower premiums, or fee-for-service (FFS) plans, and their preferred provider organizations (PPO), or health maintenance organizations (HMO).” These choices would be nice for all of us, but they’re not in the offing. Instead, if you don’t enroll in a “qualified” health plan and submit proof of enrollment to the federal government, you’ll be tracked down and fined (sections 3101 and 6055).
You are playing right into Bob's game! He KNOWS what it is…he just needed someone to argue with..he has asked this same question on several other posts, trying to get someone into an argument …Best to ignore the Huffington trolls…
I've seen this…its a summary… BUT…
Section 117, line 20 covers what abortions will be paid for by the Federal Government…I thought they weren't doing that…?
Section 156, line 4 is pertinent, but only for the Members of Congress after enactment of the bill, NOT BEFORE,and they can exempt as they wish by any Act they pass, or Exchange they establish…or stay on the current plan that they are already on…remember, we all can do that, as you like to try to nail home with your rubber hammer…
Thanks for the tip…question…were you trying to prove my point, though…??
BECAUSE IT WORKED…
Ireland is one of the lowest taxed countries on the earth. The USA is taxed far higher than ireland, which is why many U.S. companies have relocated to Ireland – and taken the jobs with them
Also, if you read the Federalist Papers, the citizens were nearly all landowners at the time, and the framers never envisioned nearly half the population generationally addicted to the government teat, since they never intended for this country to be a socialist welfare state.
How much do YOU pay the IRS above and beyond your tax obligation? None? If you don't think you should pay more, you have no business saying anyone else should pay more, either – until you start ponying up more than the IRS demands…..
He doesn't like that…lots of repetitive words…
PDF's are great for searching, if you know how…and you definitely need to know how with this pile of excrement, because they try to hide the search function…
"warren buffet's income isn't earned, it's returns realized on tax deferred investments. THAT is why he only pays 17%.
Warren buffet collects no paycheck that is subject to federal, state and local taxes"
You are a moron and have no idea what you are talking about.
One, Warren Buffett collects a salary of $175,000 http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=BRK-A
Two, most Buffett's income is earned form capital gains, you retard. Taxed at 15%. A lesser rate than the guy at McDonalds flippin burgers.
And you idiots think this is in your best interest. God you people are stupid.
The one point that hasn't been mentioned is that the Constitution requires the government to maintain a national military, and to use that military in the ling term interest and proactive defense of this country. The Constitution didn't mandate the government to provide medical care, national retirement benefits, welfare, or any of hundreds of cash for votes entitlements that have corrupted our government from what was originally intended.
The labor they buy from you is combined with their further investment in marketing, distribution, and sales. If you want the whole pie, then you have to invest your money and labor into developing a product of your own, creating a market for it, producing it, distributing it, etc.
The beauty of the capitalist system is, that if you work hard enough, you can – and become one of the wealthy business owners so vilified by our current government.
By contrast, with socialism, you have no chance of doing so.
Page 367, line 7…
Make your care private, and you don't have to participate…right??
.
"Page 117, line 20 covers what abortions will be paid for by the Federal Government…"
No. It doesn't. You are a liar. As per the Hyde Amendment no federal tax dollars can be used to fund abortions. Period.
MystWlker.
Link? Let me guess. It's an op/ed.
It's nonsense. And the information is posted on whitehouse.gov for God's sake.
You've dug yourself into a hole. Quit digging. You will be able to buy the same insurance that the Congress has.
I had wondered what form of denial you'd fall back on….. the relevant sections of the bill are clearly listed there. You didn't look THEM up, did you?
And your own reference, from the propaganda wing of this administration at whitehouse.gov, is no more reliable a source. However, your post did not reference the section of the bill that requires congres, the senate, et al, to be covered under this bill, so you have not proved that they ARE. I would also point out that the republican amendment to the bill that DID require our elected representatives to be covered under the same mandate, and it was defeated by the same democrats who pushed this bastardization of one sixth of the economy.
If they were already under the mandate, why did they fight to defeat the amendment that specifically mandated that they themselves be subject to this socialized health care….? If it would only have reaffirmed what was already in the bill, allowing the amendment would have enabled them to proclaim far and wide that they had included another republican amendment, creating a curtain of "bipartisanship" to hide behind.
To pss up such an opportunity, there must be a very good reason, and that reason is….. that section 3116 exempts them from the government mandate.
Now, go read the bill for yourself.
Had to do it the long way around, folks…IntenseDebate was having a moment….
But there it is…
Read it, everyone…see how it all sounds SO REASONABLE…until you start thinking like a Proggie Liberal Dimocrat…and see how clever they are about manipulating the bill…
No wonder it went to so many pages…makes it hard to hunt stuff down…and easier to hide real intent…
Don't ever forget the buyouts and backdoor deals, either…the seven versions here, five there, and don't ever forget that bilious little "Executive Order" that is supposed to negate that little tidbit I just showed you…
And are you really so cognitively dysfunctional to think that he ammassed his fortune on that salary? Or that that salary is straight cash, not in deferred stock options? Additionally, how much of that does he live on? And how much is deposited into tax shelters so that even that amount is not fully taxed?
God, you are an imbecile! (Just so there's one part of this post you can comprehend….)
I had to put it in further down, but its there now…
Without that little White House (404-File Not Found) that AMAZINGLY just now appeared…had a little hand in that, did you…???
And if the Feds were going against the Hyde Amendment, why did your Obama add a "Executive Order" banning it…to ban it even further, I suppose…???
You're well into schizophrenia, anon…time to go to the Health Clinic, and be ignored for being terminally anencephalic…
I have a solution for you Bob, If you do not like what you are paid or feel that your work is worth more than what you are being paid,,,,,,,, QUIT!
In a free market capitalistic economy, you are free to ply your trade anywhere you like, and if you don't like it you can find it somewhere else.
TAKE SOME PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND STOP BEING SUCH A PANSY.
You yourself said that buffet earned 46 million last year. Now you say he onnly collected a salary of $175k. You're being a little inconsistent, or are you just playing fast and loose with the facts…..?
How much of that salary is tax deferred through stock options, tax deferred investments, shelters, various deductions for business expenses?
You can't use fuzzy math with accounting….
and just so there's one line of ths post that speaks on a level you can conceptualize:
God, you are an imbecile!
I didn't think it would take him *this* long………..
I didn't think it would take him *this* long……..
You said he earned 46 billion and was taxed 17%….. noow, when it's convenient, you say he only made a salary of $175k and paid 17%.
Fuzzy math does not work with accounting.
Dios Mio, esta un idiot!
If the GOP had passed some sort of tort reform while they had power, it would also have taken a lot of the wind out of the democrat sails on this issue. The fact is, medical care has become incredibly expensive the the last couple of decades.
I have also come to utterly despise the word "bipartisanship." It basically means the republicans will bend you over and pin you down while the democrats sodomize you. You meaning the taxpaying American.
You certainly live to cry about people lying – yet you never offer the proff of your accusation, just leftist elitist rhetoric……
Since you contribute nothing to the discussion, why are you wasting bandwith that could go to some poor, underprivileged minority?
Wow…
That section isn't in the Prog Lib Dimocrat version of the bill that I have…
I wonder why…??????
MystWlker, if you have a better source that wasn't edited heavily like mine, PLEASE post it up, would you…?
Thanks…
Take it to the trolls….!!!
Ralph, the way I see it "A" will only happen if "B" is accomplished first. Most Republican voters will vote anti-democrat this year, while the swing vote independents will be voting on their pocketbook issues.
But BOTH of those groups will have their skepticism running high, so the Republicans had better choose the most principled candidates for every race. If they do, it will be a VERY good year to be a Republican. If they don't, the sleazy democrat machine will use every dirty trick they have to discredit everything the Tea Party and Patriot movement have accomplished over the past year.
That would be liberty StoryKeeper. I am thinking that does not fit in the statist theory. How can you go to another employer if the state runs everything? If you could find another employer, your wages would be set the same because the state runs everything. WOW sounds like utopia.
Warren voted for Obama SUCKKKERR But really Obama was going after big Pharma, Oh wait they got there current patents extended to 15 years, SUCKKERRR But Obama certainly stuck it to the Insurance execs, OOPs they get Millions of customers without hiring a salesman SUCKKERR. Now make sure you get that hole row hoed and the Dems might give you some moldy molasses on some stale bread
I tend to agree with eyes open the time for second guessing is over. I know the recent history and i have no intention of repeating it. The house republicans have got it they understand our anger and are serving us I am not intrested in condeming them for past acts the fact that they toe the line now is all i ask if they step out we will deal with that latter. Senate Republicans need some pruning we could talk about Mc Cain for one but there are others that need work as well. I think we can now begin to control the republican party their self intrest is with us not some imaginary moderate voter looking for a home. Let us co-op the republicans give the RNC a new leader with tea party roots a shoot first ask questions latter mentality (Sarah Palin comes to mind) (before the Sarah bash for her support of McCain remember loyalty is an important quality)
How about it Michael Steele will you please step down?
You must be logged in to post a comment.