Good bye and good riddance Obama

[Laurie]

The Obama agenda has in many ways been an extraordinary and unprecedented assault on the free enterprise system that made the United States the most powerful nation the world has ever seen. It has succeeded not only in making America weaker, poorer and gravely more indebted, but also in eroding the very principles of liberty and freedom upon which it is based. The backlash will be huge.

So true....and sad

[ernieB]

I wish I had said that

[ragman]

Charles Krauthammer can say it best. 

When liberals attack: Sticks, stones and stereotypes
By Charles Krauthammer  |   Sunday, August 29, 2010  |  http://www.bostonherald.com  |  Op-Ed
WASHINGTON - Liberalism under siege is an ugly sight indeed. Just yesterday it was all hope and change and returning power to the people. But the people have proved so disappointing. Their recalcitrance has, in only 19 months, turned the predicted 40-year liberal ascendancy (James Carville) into a full retreat. Ah, the people, the little people, the small-town people, the “bitter” people, as Barack Obama in an unguarded moment once memorably called them, clinging “to guns or religion or” - this part is less remembered - “antipathy toward people who aren’t like them.”

That’s a polite way of saying: clinging to bigotry. And promiscuous charges of bigotry are precisely how our current rulers and their vast media auxiliary react to an obstreperous citizenry that insists on incorrect thinking.

- Resistance to the vast expansion of government power, intrusiveness and debt, as represented by the Tea Party movement? Why, racist resentment toward a black president.

- Disgust and alarm with the federal government’s unwillingness to curb illegal immigration, as crystallized in the Arizona law? Nativism.

- Opposition to the most radical redefinition of marriage in human history, as expressed in Proposition 8 in California? Homophobia.

- Opposition to a 15-story Islamic center and mosque near Ground Zero? Islamophobia.

Now we know why the country has become “ungovernable,” last year’s excuse for the Democrats’ failure of governance: Who can possibly govern a nation of racist, nativist, homophobic Islamophobes?

Note what connects these issues. In every one, liberals have lost the argument in the court of public opinion. Majorities - often lopsided majorities - oppose President Obama’s social-democratic agenda (e.g., the stimulus, Obamacare), support the Arizona law, oppose gay marriage and reject a Ground Zero mosque.

What’s a liberal to do? Pull out the bigotry charge, the trump that pre-empts debate and gives no credit to the seriousness and substance of the contrary argument. The most venerable of these trumps is, of course, the race card. When the Tea Party arose, a spontaneous, leaderless and perfectly natural (and traditionally American) reaction to the vast expansion of government intrinsic to the president’s proudly proclaimed transformational agenda, the liberal commentariat cast it as a mob of angry white yahoos disguising their antipathy to a black president by cleverly speaking in economic terms.

[martinbsmithjr]

Amen!

[rykat]

Charles Krauthammer can say it best.

Yes he can!

[clover]

Krauthammer needs to make a trip to Berkeley so he knows the difference between a liberal and a democrat.  Granted, most liberals probably vote for democrats, as most libertarians probably vote for Republicans, but it is obvious the liberal agenda is not being satisifed by the President.

http://blog.nj.com/njv_john_farmer/2010/08/attacks_from_the_left_hurt_dem.html

[ragman]

clover,  I read both posts again but I don't understand what it is that you don't agree with concerning Krauthammer's post.  After about 6 months in office, democrats yourself included who posted on this board and the other, when they had USA chat, accused anyone who disagreed with OTO, as racist, homophobic, ect.  There where many posts talking about this. 

Now that the Dem's are in trouble they have stepped up the accusations to a higher pace.  Same MO  Little substance to their arguments and no agreement that any part of the Republican or Conservative arguments could have merit.   

We where in the minority then but now after the rational people who where caught up in the Obama utopia have taken a second look at hope and change, it doesn't look so good anymore. 

[clover]

Charles Krauthammer can say it best.  

When liberals attack: Sticks, stones and stereotypes
By Charles Krauthammer  |   Sunday, August 29, 2010  |  http://www.bostonherald.com  |  Op-Ed
WASHINGTON - Liberalism under siege is an ugly sight indeed. Just yesterday it was all hope and change and returning power to the people. But the people have proved so disappointing. Their recalcitrance has, in only 19 months, turned the predicted 40-year liberal ascendancy (James Carville) into a full retreat. Ah, the people, the little people, the small-town people, the “bitter” people, as Barack Obama in an unguarded moment once memorably called them, clinging “to guns or religion or” - this part is less remembered - “antipathy toward people who aren’t like them.”

That’s a polite way of saying: clinging to bigotry. And promiscuous charges of bigotry are precisely how our current rulers and their vast media auxiliary react to an obstreperous citizenry that insists on incorrect thinking.

Ragman-  This portion of Krauthammer's piece is called the straw man argument.  He has cleverly misrepresented his opponents position.  Everyone knows the liberals have left the Obama camp....as detailed in the article I posted.  that was my point.....nothing more...nothing less.

The fact that I voted for Obama (D) for President does not make me a democrat.  In the same election I chose Wally Herger (R) as my Congressional representative.  Ain't America grand....I can vote for whoever I think will do the best job irrespective of party.  (that makes me an independent)  The best part about being an independent is that I can swing a little left or right without impunity
 
I'll answer the rest of Mr K's remarks in a later post, and remember that whether I drink before, or during that post will effect that response

[martinbsmithjr]

Will this clown never stop?


Michelle Malkin

Arizona vs. the U.N. Human Rights Police

An indignant President Obama complained last week, "I can't spend all of my time with my birth certificate plastered on my forehead." Fine. How about plastering a copy of his presidential oath of office there instead? The kowtowing commander-in-chief is in dire need of a daily reminder that his job is to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" -- not international law or global diktats.

Case in point: Last week, Obama's State Department handed in America's first-ever report to the United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights in conjunction with something called the "Universal Periodic Review." In short, the 29-page document is a self-aggrandizing report card touting the administration's far-left domestic and foreign policy initiatives for the world's approval. The report boasts of racial- and gender-bean-counting in the executive branch; Justice Department outreach to Muslim grievance groups opposed to post-9/11 security measures; teachers' union payoffs in the federal stimulus law; continuing commitment to closing the Gitmo detention facility for enemy combatants; and the illusory lifesaving effects of Obamacare on minorities through "expanding community health centers" (which have yet to be built, but not that it matters in our Nobel Peace Prize-winning president's age of post-achievement).

The report also includes a section on "values and immigration," which essentially singles out Arizona's immigration enforcement law as a human rights deficiency "that is being addressed in a court action."

In response, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer rightly blasted Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration for succumbing to "internationalism run amok." Brewer pointed out in a letter to Clinton, "Human rights as guaranteed by the United States and Arizona Constitutions are expressly protected in S.B. 1070 and defended vigorously by my Administration. In fact, the Department of Justice has correctly not included these so-called 'human rights' issues in the current litigation against the State of Arizona." Somehow, that inconvenient detail escaped the Foggy Bottom bureaucrats' notice.

No one should be surprised, of course, that the Department of Blame America First is prostrating itself before the likes of repressive U.N. Human Rights Council members Libya, Cuba, Saudi Arabia and China. No one should be surprised that Obama's globalist panderers couldn't simply keep their mouths shut and refrain from trashing Americans with whom they disagree. In May, you'll recall, Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor Michael Posner preemptively trashed our country's human rights record to Chinese government officials and humiliated Arizonans -- and all Americans -- who support states' rights to protect their borders and enhance their security through strict immigration enforcement. An obsequious Posner called S.B. 1070 "a troubling trend in our society" in his bow-and-scrape conversations with the ChiComs.

The inclusion of Arizona in a politically correct catalogue of human rights and wrongs is more than "downright offensive," as Brewer put it. It's a national travesty. In the very same Obama administration document, the State Department praises the administration for its "robust protections for freedom of expression." The report notes sanctimoniously: "As a general matter, the government does not punish or penalize those who peacefully express their views in the public sphere, even when those views are critical of the government. Indeed, dissent is a valuable and valued part of our politics."

Yeah? Tell that to the Democratic members of Congress leading the punitive economic boycott and political demonization of Arizona. Or to Attorney General Eric Holder, who rushed to attack S.B. 1070 before he had even read it. Fresh off this U.N. mess, Holder's Social Justice Department has launched yet another vendetta against Arizona. On Monday, DOJ filed suit against Phoenix-area community colleges because they imposed strict citizenship screening of potential employees.

As Obama throws America under the bus for the cause of open borders, the shady U.N. human rights police must be laughing their jackboots off.

[rykat]

Perhaps this will come back to bite Little Miss Hilary in the ass one day!
Appeaser-in-Chief approved, of course!

[clover]

Hillary has 2 l's Ry

[martinbsmithjr]

Thanks to those who wanted Obama's "CHANGE".
 
 
 
2011 Taxes
 In just six months, the largest tax hikes in the history of America will
 take effect.  They will hit families and small businesses in three great
 waves on January 1, 2011:
 
 First Wave: Expiration of 2001 and 2003 Tax Relief
 
 In 2001 and 2003, the GOP Congress enacted several tax cuts for investors,
 small business owners, and families.
 
 These will all expire on January 1, 2011:
 
 Personal income tax rates will rise.  The top income tax rate will rise from
 35 to 39.6 percent (this is also the rate at which two-thirds of small
 business profits are taxed).  The lowest rate will rise from 10 to 15
 percent.  All the rates in between will also rise.  Itemized deductions and
 personal exemptions will again phase out, which has the same mathematical
 effect as higher marginal tax rates.  The full list of marginal rate hikes
 is below:
 
 - The 10% bracket rises to an expanded 15%
 - The 25% bracket rises to 28%
 - The 28% bracket rises to 31%
 - The 33% bracket rises to 36%
 - The 35% bracket rises to 39.6%
 
 Higher taxes on marriage and family.  The "marriage penalty" (narrower tax
 brackets for married couples) will return from the first dollar of
 income.  The child tax credit will be cut in half from $1000 to $500 per
 child.  The standard deduction will no longer be doubled for married couples
 relative to the single level.  The dependent care and adoption tax credits
 will be cut.
 
 The return of the Death Tax.  This year, there is no death tax.  For those
 dying on or after January 1 2011, there is a 55 percent top death tax rate
 on estates over $1 million.  A person leaving behind two homes and a
 retirement account could easily pass along a death tax bill to their loved
 ones.
 
 Higher tax rates on savers and investors.  The capital gains tax will rise
 from 15 percent this year to 20 percent in 2011.  The dividends tax will
 rise from 15 percent this year to 39.6 percent in 2011.  These rates will
 rise another 3.8 percent in 2013.
 
 Second Wave: Obamacare
 
 There are over twenty new or higher taxes in Obamacare.  Several will first
 go into effect on January 1, 2011.  They include:
 
 The "Medicine Cabinet Tax"  Thanks to Obamacare, Americans will no longer be
 able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA),
 or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription,
 over-the-counter medicines (except insulin).
 
 The "Special Needs Kids Tax"  This provision of Obamacare imposes a cap on
 flexible spending accounts (FSAs) of $2500 (Currently, there is no federal
 government limit).  There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap
 will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children.
 There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United
 States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education.
 Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in
  Washington , D.C. ( National Child Research Center ) can easily exceed $14,000
 per year.  Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of
 special needs education.
 
 The HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike.  This provision of Obamacare increases the
 additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20
 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged
 accounts, which remain at 10 percent.
 
 Third Wave: The Alternative Minimum Tax and Employer Tax Hikes
 
 When Americans prepare to file their tax returns in January of 2011, they'll
 be in for a nasty surprise-the AMT won't be held harmless, and       many
 tax relief provisions will have expired.  The major items include:
 
 The AMT will ensnare over 28 million families, up from 4 million last year.
 According to the left-leaning Tax Policy Center , Congress' failure to index
 the AMT will lead to an explosion of AMT taxpaying families-rising from 4
 million last year to 28.5 million.  These families will have to calculate
 their tax burdens twice, and pay taxes at the higher level.  The AMT was
 created in 1969 to ensnare a handful of taxpayers.
 
 Small business expensing will be slashed and 50% expensing will disappear.
 Small businesses can normally expense (rather than slowly-deduct, or
 "depreciate") equipment purchases up to $250,000.  This will be cut all the
 way down to $25,000.  Larger businesses can expense half of their purchases
 of equipment.  In January of 2011, all of it will have to be "depreciated."
 
 Taxes will be raised on all types of businesses.  There are literally scores
 of tax hikes on business that will take place.  The biggest is the loss of
 the "research and experimentation tax credit," but there are many, many
 others.  Combining high marginal tax rates with the loss of this tax relief
 will cost jobs.
 
 Tax Benefits for Education and Teaching Reduced.  The deduction for tuition
 and fees will not be available.  Tax credits for education will be limited.
 Teachers will no longer be able to deduct classroom expenses.  Covered
 Education Savings Accounts will be cut.  Employer-provided educational
 assistance is curtailed.  The student loan interest deduction will be
 disallowed for hundreds of thousands of families.
 
 Charitable Contributions from IRAs no longer allowed.  Under current law, a
 retired person with an IRA can contribute up to $100,000 per year directly
 to a charity from their IRA.  This contribution also counts toward an annual
 "required minimum distribution."  This ability will no longer be there.
 
 
 Now your insurance is INCOME on your W2's......
 
 One of the surprises we'll find come next year, is what follows - - a little
 "surprise" that 99% of us had no idea was included in the  "new and
 improved" healthcare legislation . . . the dupes, er, dopes, who backed this
 administration will be astonished!
 
 
 Starting in 2011, (next year folks), your W-2 tax form sent by your employer
 will be increased to show the value of whatever health insurance you are
 given by the company. It does not matter if that's a private concern or
 governmental body of some sort.  If you're retired?  So what; your gross
 will go up by the amount of insurance you get.
 
 You will be required to pay taxes on a large sum of money that you have
 never seen.  Take your tax form you just finished and see what $15,000 or
 $20,000 additional gross does to your tax debt.  That's what you'll pay next
 year.  For many, it also puts you into a new higher bracket so it's even
 worse.
 
 This is how the government is going to buy insurance for the15% that don't
 have insurance and it's only part of the tax increases.
 
 Not believing this???  Here is a research of the summaries.....
 
 On page 25 of 29: TITLE IX REVENUE PROVISIONS- SUBTITLE A: REVENUE OFFSET
 PROVISIONS-(sec. 9001, as modified by sec. 10901) Sec.9002  "requires
 employers to include in the W-2 form of each employee the aggregate cost of
 applicable employer sponsored group health coverage that is excludable from
 the employees gross income."
 
 Joan Pryde is the senior tax editor for the Kiplinger letters.  
 
 Why am I posting this?  The same reason I hope you forward this to every  single person in your address book.
 
 People have the right to know the truth because an election is coming in  November.

 

 

[clover]

Maybe Kiplinger doesn't read the WSJ


The Obama administration is considering a range of new measures to boost economic growth, including tax cuts and a new nationwide infrastructure program, according to people familiar with the discussions.  The president's economic team has met frequently in recent days to list ways to bolster the struggling recovery, according to government officials.

On the list of possible actions: additional tax cuts for small businesses beyond those included in a $30 billion small-business lending bill before the Senate. It's not clear what those tax breaks would target or how much they might cost in lost revenue to the government.

Also in the mix: a possible payroll tax cut for businesses and individuals, as well as other business tax breaks, according to people familiar with the discussions. Currently, income taxes are scheduled to rise with the expiration of Bush-era tax cuts at the end of this year.

Efforts to boost growth have taken on urgency as the economy has shown signs of flagging and is among voters' chief concerns ahead of November's midterm elections.

The White House is struggling with whether to propose ideas that would appeal to Republicans, and thus get support on Capitol Hill—such as tax cuts—or whether to promote ideas that officials believe could have more economic impact but might hit political resistance, such as more aid for states and more infrastructure funding.

Aides to the Democratic leadership in the House and Senate see little prospect of anything significant happening soon. With the party's majority in Congress under threat in November's elections, Democratic lawmakers are primarily busy campaigning.
One of the few exceptions: Democrats have lined up enough support to pass the small-business bill the Senate has been considering, said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.).

In a Rose Garden address Monday, President Barack Obama said he was aiming to identify "additional measures that could make a difference in both promoting growth and hiring in the short term."

Among the ideas he cited were extending tax cuts for the middle class and renewing a mix of tax credits for businesses, such as the research tax credit.

The administration hasn't settled on whether to take bigger—and more expensive—steps, such as a payroll tax cut or additional tax cuts for small businesses. Complicating the talks are concerns about the cumulative federal deficit, which could rise by $11 trillion over the next decade.

"Everyone is mindful of the deficit problem, and everyone is mindful of the slack economy. The question is how you thread the needle, and so I think the programs will be narrow and focused," said Sen. Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.).

Some Republicans say an array of tax cuts is the best strategy to stimulate the economy. They include on their list reductions in the individual payroll tax used to fund entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, as well as cuts in corporate income taxes.

All the talk about taxes—whether to raise them to address the deficit or cut them to stimulate the economy—may be having its own effect on growth. Allan Meltzer, an economics professor at Carnegie Mellon University, said the economy wouldn't fully revive until Washington resolved uncertainty surrounding business costs, including taxes.

"Companies are cutting their expenditures and not hiring because they're very uncertain" about these costs, he said.

Mr. Manley said Democrats wanted to hold a vote this fall to extend the tax cuts passed during the Bush administration for families earning less than $250,000 a year.

But a fight is looming, and that might mean more delays. Senate Republicans are likely to resist any legislation that doesn't also extend the Bush tax cuts for families and small businesses with earnings over $250,000.

Write to Deborah Solomon at deborah.solomon@wsj.com and Jonathan Weisman at jonathan.weisman@wsj.com

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704421104575464012356644550.html?mod=rss_US_News


There's more.....................

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/02/AR2010090204235.html?wpisrc=nl_natlalert

[ragman]

This is really a big deal and is a large tax increase for most families.  I'm starting to read more and more about it.  Clover what's your take on it?  I thought you said there where no tax increases for families under $250k?  

Now your insurance is INCOME on your W2's......
 
 One of the surprises we'll find come next year, is what follows - - a little
 "surprise" that 99% of us had no idea was included in the  "new and
 improved" healthcare legislation . . . the dupes, er, dopes, who backed this
 administration will be astonished!
 
 
 Starting in 2011, (next year folks), your W-2 tax form sent by your employer
 will be increased to show the value of whatever health insurance you are
 given by the company. It does not matter if that's a private concern or
 governmental body of some sort.  If you're retired?  So what; your gross
 will go up by the amount of insurance you get.
 
 You will be required to pay taxes on a large sum of money that you have
 never seen.  Take your tax form you just finished and see what $15,000 or
 $20,000 additional gross does to your tax debt.  That's what you'll pay next
 year.  For many, it also puts you into a new higher bracket so it's even
 worse.

[martinbsmithjr]

Actually there is currently no change in how your employer paid health insurance is taxed. They are just getting ready for down the road when you will have to start paying. It doesn't happen (or at least it is not scheduled) this year. Obviously it is going to be taxed otherwise why put it there.