Effete Senate Republicans Rest on A Letter and A Resolution on START

The news that a resolution of understanding will be attached to the START treaty along with a letter from President Obama to address the misgivings of Republicans reminds one of the Executive Order on abortion the president provided when healthcare reform passed in March.

The language of the treaty will be the law, not the resolution nor the letter from the president, as surely as abortions will be paid for under Obamacare despite the Executive Order.

Fill your boots, men, and stop acting like the sissies everybody thinks you are.

Story here.

Obama's FCC Internet Commissars Impose Doctrinaire Anti-Capitalism

In other words, Marxism masquerading as "net neutrality," as John Fund for The Wall Street Journal makes plain here:

Over 300 House and Senate members have signed a letter opposing FCC Internet regulation, and there will undoubtedly be even less support in the next Congress.

Yet President Obama, long an ardent backer of net neutrality, is ignoring both Congress and adverse court rulings, especially by a federal appeals court in April that the agency doesn't have the power to enforce net neutrality. He is seeking to impose his will on the Internet through the executive branch. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, a former law school friend of Mr. Obama, has worked closely with the White House on the issue. Official visitor logs show he's had at least 11 personal meetings with the president.

The net neutrality vision for government regulation of the Internet began with the work of Robert McChesney, a University of Illinois communications professor who founded the liberal lobby Free Press in 2002. Mr. McChesney's agenda? "At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies," he told the website SocialistProject in 2009. "But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control."

A year earlier, Mr. McChesney wrote in the Marxist journal Monthly Review that "any serious effort to reform the media system would have to necessarily be part of a revolutionary program to overthrow the capitalist system itself." Mr. McChesney told me in an interview that some of his comments have been "taken out of context." He acknowledged that he is a socialist and said he was "hesitant to say I'm not a Marxist."

"You'd think that this thing was some Bolshevik plot." -- Barack Obama, January 29, 2010

Leading Commie Advocates Cooperation with Democrat Party

"It is certainly the case that in the US the real stuff of politics and governance occurs through the two mass political parties. Here is where the action is and it is here, mainly through the vehicle of the Democratic Party, that the peoples' movement fights for its interests. Serious politics cannot stand apart from these struggles...

For the foreseeable future Democratic Party circles will be an area of engagement for those wanting to make a difference.

That said, even with the growth of newly independent forces operating within the Democratic Party, it’s hard to see how the role of a communist party could be realized within these confines. ...

One does not have a crystal ball and even an unlikely outcome such as capturing the Democratic Party cannot be completely ruled out.

What is certain is that the CPUSA must be part of this broad struggle in which two trends – the old Democratic Party machine and the all peoples coalition – continue to coexist in cooperation and antagonism."

-- Joe Sims, co-editor, CPUSA's Peoples World, here, and quoted here. 

3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals Defends Fourth Amendment on Cellular Info

A federal appeals court on Wednesday rejected the Obama administration’s contention that the government is never required to get a court warrant to obtain cell-site information that mobile-phone carriers retain on their customers.

For more on the ruling against the Obama administration, which wants to spy on you without a warrant, just like the Bush administration did, go here.

6th US Circuit Court of Appeals Defends Fourth Amendment on Email

“The government may not compel a commercial ISP to turn over the contents of a subscriber’s e-mails without first obtaining a warrant based on probable cause”, the appeals court ruled. The decision — one stop short of the Supreme Court — covers Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee.

So, how about all that email the NSA has already illegally read?

Read more on the story at Wired.com here.

Blame, or Credit, GLD for the Rise of Gold

With which Peter Cohan seems to agree:

The key hasn't been any inherent increase in gold's value to society. Instead, gold rose because a South African mine owner -- with help from consulting firm Bain & Co. -- invented a way to sell it to the masses without the hassle of physically delivering the shiny metal, explains a Bloomberg BusinessWeek article published Sunday. The question now is: How will the masses react when the parabolic price rise facilitated by this marketing coup ends up collapsing?

Me too. It's an easy place for fear to tread.

The rest is here.

They Make The Scanner Vans That Spy On You

as-e.com

They Make The Drones That Spy On You

insitu.com

Your Garbage Man is Spying on You, Too

Trucks are now armed with a cell phone, camera and incident reports so they'll have accurate information for police and, possibly, prosecutors.

The story is here.

Houston Police Test 40 lb Scan Eagle Drone To Spy on Americans

The video is here.

Test launch in Houston

Insitu Inc. Ground Ops, Houston

Close up by TV crew

Fly by footage

from insitu.com video

drone in a box

military use

insitu.com

We Have Created a Police State Monster in the Name of Homeland Security

A vast network of "fusion centers" in every state in America now routinely develops data bases containing centralized data files about Americans, their communications and their movements, who do such innocent things as gather for a ferry ride and take pictures but which some snitch reported as "suspicious."

From today's disturbing 8-page Washington Post story:

The vast majority of fusion centers across the country have transformed themselves into analytical hubs for all crimes and are using federal grants, handed out in the name of homeland security, to combat everyday offenses.

This is happening because, after 9/11, local law enforcement groups did what every agency and private company did in Top Secret America: They followed the money.

Read the whole thing, here.

The 20th Amendment isn't Working

David Fahrenthold here for The Washington Post provides a nice summary of the history of the 20th amendment, ratified in 1933, which was supposed to stop lame duck sessions, but hasn't, because of air travel.

It seems the founders weren't the only ones without a crystal ball.

Bank Failure Friday: 6 Tonight, 157 Year to Date

This is an updated post which corrects information previously posted in error:

#152 was The Bank of Miami N.A., Coral Gables, FL, costing the FDIC $64 million. Stated assets were short by 44%.

#153 was Chestatee State Bank, Dawsonville, GA, costing the FDIC $75.3 million. Stated assets were short by 48%.

#154 was Appalachian Community Bank FSB, McCaysville, GA, costing the FDIC $26 million. Stated assets were short by 35%.

#155 WAS UNITED AMERICAS BANK N.A., ATLANTA, GA, COSTING THE FDIC $75.8 MILLION, NOT $195.8 MILLION AS PREVIOUSLY POSTED. STATED ASSETS WERE SHORT BY 105%. STATED ASSETS WERE $242.3 MILLION WHEN TRUE ASSETS WERE MORE LIKE $118 MILLION. SEE WHAT HAPPENS TO YOU WHEN YOU TRY TO GET A LOAN AND THEY FIND OUT YOU EXAGGERATED YOUR ASSETS ON PAPER BY 105% AND SIGN YOUR NAME TO IT. NORMALLY YOU GO TO JAIL FOR FRAUD AND PERJURY, BUT IF YOU'RE A BANK YOU GET A TAXPAYER BAILOUT. 

#156 was First Southern Bank, Batesville, AR, costing the FDIC $22.8 million. Stated assets were short by 44%.

#157 was Community National Bank, Lino Lakes, MN, costing the FDIC $3.7 million. Stated assets were short by 26%.

Next Friday is Christmas Eve, and the Friday after is New Year's Eve, so I'm guessing that's a wrap for 2010: 157 bank failures vs. 140 last year.

But you never know.

Rush's Brain Goes on Vacation Early

Today he's said the SPENDING in the $857 billion bill extending the Bush TAX rates for two years was minimal, and that the majority of it, $700 some billion, had to do only with the tax rates.

Pure rubbish.

A lazy, over-generalized point showing yet again lack of show prep, and an effort to co-opt the outrage and the influence of the Tea Party, which Rush is trying to steer toward establishment politics to prevent it from exploding into a genuine third party movement.

The tax rates, extended for two years, will cost just over $207 billion, not $700+ billion. The rest is all tax credits, fixing the Alternative Minimum Tax yet once again, and a host of other goodies handed out via the tax code in order to mask what's really going on: the rich and the poor getting special favors through the tax code at the expense of the chumps in the middle who must pay and pay and pay.

Wake up Rush, you dunderhead.

Here's a table breaking it all down.

On Narcissism

"People who complain overmuch about narcissists resent the competition."

-- Imam John

TSA Screeners Routinely Miss Guns and Bombs

According to this ABC news story, last fall a guy forgets he's got a loaded pistol in a carry-on but gets through security anyway in Houston and doesn't realize it until he's in his destination hotel room after the three hour flight.

And then there's this. The story says it was an international flight. Didn't he go through customs at the other end?

Do you think if we had profiled the Iranian-American, Farid Seif, we'd have found the weapon?

Whatever people may think TSA is doing at airports, it isn't security. It's security theatre.

Democrats Become The Party of No, Sort of

By a margin of 3 to 1, more Democrats in the US House voted last night against extending the Bush-era tax rates than Republicans who voted No:

Like the Senate, the vote on passage in the House was bipartisan. While 139 House Democrats voted for it, 112 opposed it; 138 Republicans voted yes and 36 voted no.

Full story here.

On Compromise

"Death turns compromise into capitulation."

-- Imam John

Pretty Boy Hannity Gets a Lesson in the Constitution

From the American Thinker, here:

Dear Sean:

Concerning the 17th amendment, the argument for its repeal absolutely centers around states' rights.  If Senators are elected by elected reps and senators, they are more likely to defend their state against federal encroachments (upholding the 10th amendment), than they are if elected by the general population.  Any federal program - ObamaCare, the financial reform bill, etc., -  which increases burdens on state budgets would not sit well with Senators answerable to congressional bodies in their state.

Greg Halvorson

Tax 'Em All: Let God Sort 'Em Out

People who claim, like Rush Limbaugh, that no one is undertaxed in this country don't know what they are talking about. Both the rich and the poor are undertaxed. Here is why.

For tax year 2008, IRS figures show that the top half of the country, over 69 million tax returns, contributed in excess of 97 percent of the tax revenue, $1.004 trillion. The bottom half, over 69 million returns, contributed less than 3 percent of the revenue, $27.9 billion, a staggeringly small sum by comparison.

The effective tax rate on the top half was 13.66 percent, on the bottom half just 2.6 percent.

It seems self-evident that the poorer half of the country escaped a lot of taxation, but how?

For one thing, George Bush's creation of the 10% tax bracket in 2001 reduced federal tax revenues from payers in the 10 percent bracket by $42 billion per year. For another, the Earned Income Tax Credit diverts away even more money, now approaching $50 billion per year. These credits wipe out any federal income taxes qualifying filers may owe, and actually reimburse many of them for the payroll taxes they pay, so that many actually have a negative tax rate. This is using the tax code to provide what amount to direct welfare payments, stimulus spending, whatever you want to call it. But it sure isn't "taxes."

But the poorest Americans are not the only beneficiaries.

These credits also percolate far up through the income quintiles. And none penetrate as high as the child tax credit does, relieving the middle classes of taxes to the point that many people in the middle quintile earning between $38,551 and $61,801 also pay little to no federal income tax at all. Created under Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton and expanded under George Bush, this credit now reduces federal revenues by $143.4 billion per year. People even in the top income quintile, making in excess of $100,000 a year, can qualify for this credit, which also directly reduces their tax bill, and government revenues.

Taken together, the 10% bracket, the EITC and the Child Tax Credit help taxpayers to be sure, but at a cost of nearly $2.4 trillion over ten years to the federal government.

Compare that with the big tax break the top earners in the country enjoy because the payroll tax cap is set at $106,800. Everything they earn after that escapes the 6.2 percent tax. The annual cost of that is now $130 billion, or $1.3 trillion over a decade. The denizens of the top 25 percent of taxpayers, who earn 68 percent of the total adjusted gross income in this country, will doubtless complain that they already contribute 86 percent of the tax revenue.

But the result is that a narrower and narrower band of taxpayers in the fourth quintile (those making between $61,802 and $100,000 per year) and in the top half of the middle quintile (about $52,000 to $61,800), gets squeezed with responsibility for income and payroll taxes without enjoying the relief provided to their poorer fellows who pay very little in taxes, or their richer ones who can afford them.

A ladder needs rungs on it to get from the bottom to the top and back down again, and ours in the upper half are getting worn out.

Congress Was Last This Unpopular During Watergate

36 years ago. Story here:

Americans' assessment of Congress has hit a new low, with 13% saying they approve of the way Congress is handling its job. The 83% disapproval rating is also the worst Gallup has measured in more than 30 years of tracking congressional job performance.

Extension of Bush Tax Rates Now Goes to US House

The Senate passed the extension of the Bush tax rates, which will last for two years only and is adorned with billions in new spending which we cannot afford, 81-19. Here are the nineteen no votes, a photograph of left and right in the current Senate:

Democrats:

Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)

Dorgan (D-ND)

Russ Feingold (D-WI)

Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)

Kay Hagan (D-NC)

Tom Harkin (D-IA)

Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)

Pat Leahy (D-VT)

Carl Levin (D-MI)

Jeff Merkley (D-OR)

Mark Udall (D-CO)

Udall (D-NM)

Wyden (D-OR)

Republicans:

Tom Coburn (R-OK)

Jim DeMint (R-SC)

John Ensign (R-NV)

Jeff Sessions (R-AL)

Voinovich (R-OH)

Independents:

Bernie Sanders (I-VT)

Senate Votes For "Almost All" of the Bush Tax Cuts

So says TheHill.com, here:

"The package extends almost all of the Bush tax cuts . . .."

The devil is in the details, and I smell a devil.

Years of Blood, Sweat Equity, and Tears . . . Gone: Home Equity Down $7 Trillion Since 2006

The Nutter feels your pain:

Since early 2006, American families have lost $7 trillion in home equity — more than half of their equity has simply vanished. Many millions, of course, have lost everything they put into their house, and more.

Years of blood, tears and sweat equity gone. Remember, for most families, home equity accounts for most of their wealth. In the past, wealth in the form of home equity has often been the ticket to upward mobility; many a small business or college education has been funded from real estate wealth.

About 11 million families — about 23% of those with mortgages — now owe more on their house than it’s worth. Before the bubble burst, that figure was about 1%.

More from Rex here.

Judge Objects to Obamacare Bait and Switch: The Mandate Became a Tax

From Peter Wehner at Commentary Magazine:

Judge Hudson writes, “Despite pre-enactment representations to the contrary by the Executive and Legislative branches, the Secretary now argues that the Minimum Essential Coverage Provision is, in essence, a ‘tax penalty.’”

That’s a polite way of saying that the Obama administration willfully misled the public during the health-care debate. In fact, President Obama repeatedly denied that the mandate was a tax — but now, in order to pass constitutional muster, his administration is insisting it is. I urge you to watch ... [w]hen ... Obama scolds Stephanopoulos. “That’s not true, George,” the president says. “[It] is absolutely not a tax increase.”

Now the president and his administration are arguing exactly the opposite.

This is a deeply cynical maneuver on the part of the man who promised to put an end to cynical political acts. Like so much of what Obama said, this promise was fraudulent.

The complete entry is here, with links.

Father Castrates Daughter's 57 Year Old Boyfriend in Germany

Nuts to you, buddy! Now you've got two pair.

Story here.

Obamacare is Not Just Un-American, It's Anti-Human

In a story at TheHill.com here, reporting on the ruling of a Virginia judge that the individual mandate in Obamacare is unconstitutional, we are met with the following bizarrerie:

The Obama administration argues healthcare is different from other commercial markets, because — illness being both inevitable and involuntary — everyone ultimately requires some form of care.

By this reasoning, government should mandate that the baby pay for his own birth, and the corpse for his own burial, the first and the last of the involuntaries which bookend human existence. 

Obamacare is not just un-American. It's anti-human.

America is Not Either Or, It's Both And

Bill Clinton once shot back at black incitement to violence against whites, and wore it as a badge of a non-extreme third way ever thereafter. His critics would say his sincerity was on full display in Waco and Kosovo.

The founders had already discovered a third way of their own, however, and had called it America:

The third model of human nature is found in the thinking of the American founders. “If men were angels,” wrote James Madison, the father of the Constitution, in Federalist Paper No. 51, “no government would be necessary.” But Madison and the other founders knew men were not angels and would never become angels. They believed instead that human nature was mixed, a combination of virtue and vice, nobility and corruption. People were swayed by both reason and passion, capable of self-government but not to be trusted with absolute power. The founders’ assumption was that within every human heart, let alone among different individuals, are competing and sometimes contradictory moral impulses and currents.


Thanks to one of those contradictory moral impulses, the American Revolutionaries shot back using real bullets when Redcoat extremists came to assert the absolute power of the Crown, not unlike the Korean Americans who took to the rooftops in Los Angeles in 1992 to defend their property against rioters. Americans at their best recognize that sometimes absolutism must be met with force, and don't lie about it or apologize for it.

Don't miss the rest of "Human Nature and Capitalism" here.

4 of 6 Current Tax Rates Already Do Not Apply to 80% of the Country

Per the US Census, all US households divide into five groups of equal size along these income lines for 2009:

1) $0 to $20,453

2) $20,454 to $38,550

3) $38,551 to $61, 801

4) $61,802 to $100,000

5) over $100,000 (the top 5% make in excess of $180,000).

Current tax brackets are concentrated on the fifth group, the over $100,000 set, so that the top four of the six brackets affect the top 20% of earners in the population the most:

10% for adjusted gross incomes $0 to $16,750

15% on AGIs to $68,000

25% on AGIs to $137,300

28% on AGIs to $209,250

33% on AGIs to $373,650

35% on AGIs above $373,650.

The result is that 60% of the country is responsible for very little tax revenue, and the expansion of various credits like the Child Tax Credit and the Earned Income Credit have meant that an increasingly large percentage of the population is paying no tax at all.

For the 2008 tax year the Tax Foundation reported here that 36% of filers paid no tax at all:

Nonpaying status used to be a sure sign of poverty or near-poverty, but Congress and the President have changed the tax laws to pull much of the middle class into the growing pool of nonpayers. The income level at which a typical family of four will owe no income taxes has risen rapidly, now topping $51,000. 

As a result, recently released IRS data for the 2008 tax year show that a record 51.6 million filers had no income tax obligation. That means more than 36 percent of all Americans who filed a tax return for 2008 were nonpayers, raising serious doubts about the ability of the income tax system to continue funding the federal government's ballooning expenditures. 

The situation worsened dramatically in 2009, to 47%, according to the Tax Policy Center in this AP story: 

About 47 percent will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Either their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to eliminate their liability. That's according to projections by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research organization. ...The bottom 40 percent, on average, make a profit from the federal income tax, meaning they get more money in tax credits than they would otherwise owe in taxes. For those people, the government sends them a payment.

"We have 50 percent of people who are getting something for nothing," said Curtis Dubay, senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation. ...The number of households that don't pay federal income taxes increased substantially in 2008, when the poor economy reduced incomes and Congress cut taxes in an attempt to help recovery. 

In 2007, about 38 percent of households paid no federal income tax, a figure that jumped to 49 percent in 2008, according to estimates by the Tax Policy Center. 

In other words, the tax code under George Bush and the Republicans in 2001 and 2003 became an instrument of liberal social policy, providing massive social spending on America's middle and lower classes. Combined with George Bush's massive hand out to the elderly in the form of drugs for seniors you now understand why liberals hate George Bush so much: because he out-liberaled the liberals. 

And don't expect to hear about it from Rush Limbaugh. He thinks there isn't anyone in the country who is undertaxed. 

If there were really any conservatives left in the country, they'd be calling for a complete end to these subsidies because they represent government spending which we cannot afford, and for a broader tax base which embodied every American's patriotic duty to contribute to the general welfare. 

A real conservative would equate exempting low incomes from taxation with the practice of exempting high incomes from taxation. The "refund" checks which "the poor" receive from the government when they file their taxes are no different from the exemption the rich receive when payroll taxes are not collected on income above $106,500. The former are justified as offsets of the payroll taxes the poor pay, the latter as exemptions from contributions the rich would never live to recoup. Everyone in a narrower and narrower middle pays and pays those taxes, year in and year out, to benefit the poor and the elderly. It is unsustainable.

Obama's Senate Tax Plan Will Outspend the 2009 Stimulus: $858 Billion in New Spending

A veritable Christmas tree for programs which would die in the free market without federal help, like ethanol, commuter trains, and wind and solar energy.

Conservative Republicans should help the Socialists like Senator Sanders filibuster it.

The story is here.

Words Mean Whatever I Say They Mean, Says Alaska Judge

An Alaska judge has ruled against Tea Party candidate Miller for the US Senate because the judge doesn't understand the plain meaning of the English language, according to this story in The Anchorage Daily News. The law says a write-in candidate's name must be written in on a ballot as it appears on the candidate's declaration of candidacy, which any educated person would understand to mean that write in votes for Lisa Murkowski should match Murkowski's name on her declaration of candidacy. Instead, the judge ruled it only had to appear to match it, which isn't what the law says:

Miller argued state law doesn't allow misspelling or state judgments of what the voter intended when writing in a candidate's name. The law says write-in votes should be counted if the name "as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidate or the last name of the candidate, is written in the space provided."

The judge focused on the fact that the word "appears" is a part of a definition.

"The definition of 'appears' in this context does not require perfection or precision, but rather a close, apparent approximation known to the viewer upon first look ... if exact spellings were intended by the legislature, even with respect to the most difficult names, the legislature could have and would have said so," Carey wrote in his ruling.


The judge has imported meaning and intent where it did not exist. A graduate, clearly, of the deconstructionist school of law. He should be impeached.

When the clear meaning of the English language can be manipulated at will in a society, there can no longer be a society, only chaos. Stop no longer means stop. Just ask Senator John Kerry, who is famous for ignoring such signs at intersections, and yacht taxes in his home state.

Bill Clinton in an Alexander Haig Moment at The White House

Reagan was wounded, literally, when Al Haig tried to assure the country that someone was in control at The White House (video here).

Obama is wounded politically (keeping the wife waiting he says), so Bill takes over at The White House! Watch that video here.

The Religious Origins of the Income Tax's "Standard Deduction"

The standard deduction was designed to make it easier for people to claim their charitable contributions, without itemizing them. Note how the standard deduction early on was fixed at 10% of annual income, the common tithe prescribed in the Bible, not to exceed $500 (the median income in 1944 was less than $2,400):

Almost from its inception in 1913, the federal income tax has allowed taxpayers to subtract from their taxable income amounts spent for particular uses. For example, beginning in 1917, taxpayers could deduct donations made to charitable causes. To claim the deduction, taxpayers had to itemize their allowable expenditures. That itemization imposed a burden on taxpayers, but relatively few people were affected because only about 5 percent of households had to file tax returns.

World War II dramatically increased the reach of the income tax: by 1944, nearly three-fourths of households had to pay the tax. With that expansion came concern about the complexity of tax filing. To simplify tax returns, in 1944 the Congress created the standard deduction, then equal to 10 percent of a taxpayer's annual income, up to a maximum of $500. Taxpayers could select the standard deduction as an alternative to itemizing their expenditures on specific activities, reducing their taxes as if they had made that level of deductible expenditures but without having to comply with recordkeeping and reporting requirements. By taking the standard deduction, people are generally claiming deductions that are greater than their actual expenditures would have been if they had itemized.


Obviously the government made a concession to the entire population, Christian or not, and allowed everyone to deduct their "tithe," whether they made it or not.

Now if we could just get government to take no more, and no less, than 10% from everyone, on everything. The government would have plenty of money, and so would we.

Let me channel my inner Santelli: "President Obama, are you listening?"

So let it be written. So let it be done.

More here.

Cancun 100 Year Record Low of 54 Degrees, For Global Warming Summit!

The story is here.

Sure, They Screen The Luggage BEFORE It Gets On The Plane

I've been told that whopper since TWA Flight 800 went down in 1996 off Long Island.

If they did, then why screen at customs ON ARRIVAL?

A guy from Ghana passes through customs at Dulles, has his suitcase opened, and they find the following:

The suitcase contained two elephant tails, bloody sheets, five chicken feathers, chicken blood, a dried hedgehog, two dried chameleons, grass, seed pods, tree bark chips and a jug filled with soil, herbs and blood, authorities said.

The story is here.

Have a nice flight.

Just Six More Reasons Why I'll Never Buy Another GM

From Gary Jason at The American Thinker, here:

The Obama administration rigged the [GM] bankruptcy to favor the union, rigged the IPO to favor the union, and has purchased much of the inventory unsalable in the free market, again to benefit the union (and the environmentalists). But of course, the unions (and the environmentalists) pumped many millions of dollars into Obama's campaign. They also pumped many millions into trying to keep Democratic candidates in office in the last election.

This is corrupt, crony car capitalism, all paid for by coerced taxation, from an administration that promised a new era of transparency and honesty in government.  But at the end of the day, the cabal at the top behaves just like the dirty Chicago machine that spawned it.

Why Rush Limbaugh Can't Tell The Truth About Income Taxes

Rush claims no one in America is undertaxed.

He doesn't want to mention, of course, that nearly half of America doesn't pay income taxes.

And why don't they pay taxes? Because that's been the goal of Republican tax policy since the 90s:

"The dramatic increase in the number of people who owed no income taxes since the mid-90s was driven almost entirely by the creation and expansion of the per-child tax credit, a policy driven by the Right."

-- Keith Hennessey, April 15, 2010, here

The Democrats hate Republicans as much as they do because Newt Gingrich and George Bush out-liberaled the liberals. How dare they!

DADT Repeal Fails in Senate By Three Votes

Not quite a stake through the heart, though. But we can always hope.

Story here.

Democrats Think Obama Caved In To Republicans, Can't Trust Him

Democrats were already being critical of the regime back in July as we mentioned here because it seemed to some of them that the White House was already conceding that Democrats would lose control of the US House.

Now that the president User in Chief has flip-flopped one time too many, acquiescing on the 28%, 33% and 35% tax brackets for earners making $200,000 a year or more, passed under the Bush administration in 2001 and 2003, Democrats appear to be in revolt.

Disrespectful language is being used, according to this story.

Imagine that.

American Workers are Slaves, In Thrall to the Corporations

Joan Vennochi for The Boston Globe focuses an unflattering spotlight here on State Street Corp. whose profits are soaring as it fires personnel. The example is representative of the wider reality:

[W]hile wage and salary payments to workers declined by $121 billion or about 2 percent since the last quarter of 2008, pre-tax corporate profits rose sharply — up by $572 billion or 57 percent over the same time period.

Land of the free, home of the brave? We've got corporations right where they want us.

Final Uncalled House Race Update: NY-1 Remains a Democrat Hold

The Republican challenger has conceded to the Democrat incumbent. The story is here.

The net gain for Republicans in the US House in 2010 remains at 63, putting the Republicans in the majority with 242 seats to the Democrats 193.

No one foresaw such an eventuality two years ago when the Democrats decisively swept Republicans aside on Obama's coattails and acquired an overwhelming majority numbering 256 seats. That tide wasn't completely reversed in this election, but for a party deemed dead for all intents and purposes the comeback is a remarkable thumping, thanks in part to the activism of the Tea Party movement, which was created spontaneously out of thin air in February and March of 2009 in response to Democrat stimulus spending and mortgage modification programs.

The battle to stop and reverse Obama's programs designed to transform American culture and institutions has now been joined.

Beware Obamao's red guards.

Bob Sellers Joins The New American Nightmare

This is the American workplace, 2010. No loyalty, and a cavalier consideration for the life changing consequences of treating people and their livelihoods as mere pieces on a chess board.


Maybe if it were still a Christian nation people wouldn't treat each other this way as often.

Full story here.

On the Fourth Gospel

"The Fourth Gospel portrays a Jesus who is, simply, unparalleled."

-- Imam John

If You Want Fewer Poor People in America, Tax Them Already!

Here's Rush Limbaugh, with his whole brain tied behind his back, today:

"Nobody in this society is undertaxed, so why applaud an extension of tax rates? Where are the cuts?" -Rush

When nearly half the population pays no income taxes at all, you cannot say no one is undertaxed. All of them are undertaxed, by definition.

The poor have a responsibility to contribute to the general welfare no less than the rich do, so for them to pay no taxes means they are not doing their fair share, and are in no way equal to everyone who does pay taxes. They are AINOs, Americans in Name Only, who pay no taxes. Just ask Joe "It's Time to be Patriotic, Time to be Part of the Deal" Biden.

If there were any conservatives left in this country, they would be calling for taxes on the poor, to reduce their surplus population.

Wake up Rush, before conservatives start calling you a big fat idiot.

The Tax Elephant in the Room: The Poor Don't Pay Their Fair Share

Once again, the Republicans are about to blow it.

What's needed for the country right now, attempting to leave politics out of the discussion for a moment, is a tax system which is reasonably fair and predictable for the long haul. But what we've got, thanks to George W. Bush, is an unfair system which is deliberately gamed at the extremes, at the expense of the middle. And extending it for another two years just kicks that can of crap down the road.

Under it, nearly half of Americans, those at the low end, pay no federal income tax whatsoever, and millions of them actually get subsidies through the tax code in the form of a big fat "refund" check when they paid no taxes in the first place. These were expanded under Bush, and are defended as offsets of payroll taxes. Do the poor really need yet another offset, in the form of a temporary reduction in the payroll tax rate, especially considering that Social Security is an unfunded liability which is going broke fast?

Compared to the rates they replaced under Clinton, Bush's rates on everyone but the rich are projected to cost the treasury something like $3 trillion going forward, while only an additional $700 billion in tax loss expenditures are predicted to be forfeited from the well to do. Yet the Democrats characterize this as tax cuts for the rich. In point of fact, it's been massive tax cuts for everyone else, especially for the poorest, in the form of subsidies like the Earned Income Credit, the Child Tax Credit, and the creation of the lowest 10% bracket.

Those at the high end, people making in excess of about $106,000, get a huge payroll tax break of their own. They pay zero in payroll taxes above that ceiling at the same time that they pay the vast majority of federal income taxes with a top rate around 35%.

People who've lived a little remember when the poorest among us had one income tax rate, 15%, and the richest another, 28%. What makes those rates in principle unfair now?

Under them today's poorer Americans might actually pay some taxes for a change. And don't they have a responsibility to do so? Didn't Joe Biden tell us paying taxes was the patriotic thing to do? Back in the day the Senator's son got the deferment while the white trash got his ass shot off in Vietnam. Now the "deferment" goes to both the poor and the rich.

Wealthier Americans would see a decline in the rate of the federal tax they paid, that is true. But a broad-based single higher rate on income could be paired with an increase on the payroll tax cap. Why should people who make millions pay no Social Security tax on that income? Social Security is a regressive tax because it taxes the poor end the most and not the rich end. By distributing its pain on everyone equally maybe we would actually have an incentive going forward to put that boondoggle on a more solid footing once and for all, along with the rest of government.

To which end, Republicans should not compromise with the devil. If he won't bow and extend the Bush tax rates, and only the rates, permanently, then Republicans should let them expire. At least the rich will pay a little more, and the rest of us a lot more, and especially the poor. And Obama will get the blame.

On Insanity

"You know you are insane if you've listened to Glenn Beck for fifteen minutes and you're not embarrassed yet."

-- Imam John

Caroline Baum Says "There Isn't Anything Government Can Do" For Housing

It's right here:

Owners’ equity in household real estate, or the value of assets minus liabilities, fell from a peak of $13.1 trillion in 2005 to a low of $5.9 trillion in the first quarter of 2009, according to the Fed’s Flow of Funds report. That’s a whopping 55 percent decline in four years. By the second quarter of 2010, owners’ equity had climbed back to $7 trillion.

Even with the 87 percent rebound in the Wilshire 5000 Total Market Index from the March 2009 lows, household net worth is still below its 2007 peak.

Housing, which along with manufacturing has traditionally led the economy out of recession, won’t be pulling its weight this time -- even with historically low mortgage rates. And there isn’t anything the government can do except let prices fall so the market can clear, something it’s been unwilling to do.

Aside from the fact that the rebound in equities would directly benefit fewer than half of US households, what's this about government impotence? Government can do plenty.

If the fascists over at the Federal Reserve can loan a bunch of fascist bankers and fascist industries $9 trillion from 2008 to 2010 at nearly zero percent interest, surely it can come up with $6.1 trillion for homeowners to close the gap in lost equity in household real estate.

Oh, but I forget! Most homeowners aren't fascists like the oligarchy!

My bad.

Love the makeover, though, Caroline. You look mahvelous.

George Will Notices That Sarah Palin Will Never Be A Ronald Reagan

What took you so long, George? This was all pretty clear already in January, here and here.

“After the 2008 campaign she had two things she had to do: she had to go home to Alaska and study, and she had to govern Alaska well,” Will told “This Week” anchor Christiane Amanpour. “Instead she quit halfway through her first term and shows up in the audience of ‘Dancing with the Stars’ and other distinctly non-presidential venues.”

More at this link.

Global Warming? Better Luck Next Year. Britain 2010 The Coolest Since 1996.

As reported here by The UK Daily Mail:

[A] remarkable climbdown that has huge implications . . . for debate over climate change as a whole[:] for the past 15 years, global warming has stopped.

$9 Trillion in Fed Bailouts Saved the Elites, But $50 Billion for Unemployed Will Bankrupt Us?

Here's an excerpt from "The Con of the Century," by someone worth reading who gets it:

[U]nemployment insurance will cost roughly $4 billion per month and most of this money will go back into the economy. Congress is stalling on this yet the media is completely silent on the $9 trillion in Federal Reserve loans? This should be the headline story over and over until people realize how big the bailout was (and how this false dichotomy is being used as propaganda in the media as if $4 billion a month is going to bankrupt the system). The banking elites just want to shift the blame to “poor” people while ignoring the elephant in the room which are the trillions of dollars in Fed loans.

Man Gets 13 Years Instead of Castration

Is there no justice in this world? Polanski didn't even get jail.

The story is here.

Another Reason Not to Use Your Credit Card: The Feds Track You Without a Warrant

As reported here at wired.com:

Federal law enforcement agencies have been tracking Americans in real-time using credit cards, loyalty cards and travel reservations without getting a court order, a new document released under a government sunshine request shows.

Look for rfid chips in the currency next.

Tyrannies Desire to Know Everything You Say and Do: Feds Violate FISA

From The Washington Post:

The federal government has repeatedly violated legal limits governing the surveillance of US citizens, according to previously secret internal documents obtained through a court battle by the American Civil Liberties Union.

What the ACLU got was heavily redacted. Read about it here.

Assume no communication whatsoever is exempt from eavesdropping. I know I don't.

So to all my regular readers over at 216.81.81.84 in the Department of Homeland Security in Woodbridge, VA, hello! And a big shout out to you over at Customs and Border Protection at 63.167.255.154! Also to the DHS in Springfield, VA, at 216.81.81.83, greetings! And you over at United States Army Information Systems Command Headquarters at 141.116.212.32 in Alexandria, VA, thanks for visiting!

I would be remiss if I left out the FBI. Hello over there in Clarksburg, WV! Nice of you at the Criminal Justice Information Systems office at 153.31.113.26 to stop by! And also those of you in Bridgeport, WV, at 153.31.113.21. I appreciate your interest, ever so much!

What will you all do, when the power goes out?

Is Ron Paul the Republicans' Dennis Kucinich?

He was one of just three Republicans in the US House to vote with the Democrats today to send a bill to the Senate which extends the Bush tax cuts only to those making less than $250,000/$200,000.

Can't wait to hear from Dennis Ron the chapter and verse from the US Constitution which allowed him to vote Yea on a tax increase for only "wealthy" Americans.

TheHill.com reports here the independent Democrats who voted against Pelosi's class-warfare tax increase bill on the "rich":

Here are the Democrats who voted against the bill (nine of whom lost their reelection bids):

Rep. Brian Baird (Wash.)

Rep. Dan Boren (Okla.)

Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (Pa.)

Rep. Artur Davis (Ala.)

Rep. Lloyd Doggett (Texas)

Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (S.D.) 

Rep. Ron Klein (Fla.)

Rep. Jim Matheson (Utah)

Rep. Mike McIntyre (N.C.)

Rep. Mike McMahon (N.Y.)

Rep. Jerry McNerney (Calif.)

Rep. Walt Minnick (Idaho)

Rep. Gwen Moore (Wis.)

Rep. Jim Moran (Va.) 

Rep. Collin Peterson (Minn.)

Rep. Earl Pomeroy (N.D.) 

Rep. Bobby Scott (Va.)

Rep. Gene Taylor (Miss.)

Rep. Mike Thompson (Calif.)

Rep. Pete Visclosky (Ind.)

Among the brave above who were re-elected to return next year I count Dan Boren, Lloyd Doggett, Jim Matheson, Mike McIntyre, Jerry McNerney, Gwen Moore, Jim Moran, Collin Peterson, Bobby Scott, Mike Thompson, and Pete Visclosky. 

Why couldn't the three Republicans have been more like these eleven Democrats and voted No?

Libertarians are nuts.

Come On, Come On, Come On, Do The Mussolini With Me!

Here's Why Your Government Stalled on the FOIA for Two Years

Because the American taxpayer has bailed out the whole world, that's why. We're now the biggest suckers in history.

And the following information wouldn't have been released either, except for the Dodd-Frank legislation:

Citigroup ($2.2 trillion)

Merrill Lynch ($2.1 trillion)

Morgan Stanley ($2 trillion)

Bear Stearns ($960 billion)

Bank of America ($887 billion)

Goldman Sachs ($615 billion)

JPMorgan Chase ($178 billion)

Wells Fargo ($154 billion)

Swiss bank UBS ($165 billion)

Deutsche Bank ($97 billion)

Royal Bank of Scotland ($92 billion)

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack ($1.25 trillion)

General Electric ($16 billion)

Harley-Davidson Inc. ($2.3 billion)

Caterpillar Inc. dealers ($733 million)

The story from yahoo.com is totally irresponsible for saying the Fed didn't take part in an appeal to the Supreme Court with a group of commercial banks seeking to prevent the disclosure of the names of institutions receiving emergency loans in 2008. Hell, the Fed appealed all the way up the line until it came time to appeal to the Supreme Court or comply with two (2! II! Zwei!) orders from lower courts to disclose the information. And we still don't have that.

Has anyone painted a clearer picture of the bankruptcy of our largest institutions and industries?

Only a fool would keep his money in a bank now.

Hell, only a fool would keep money.

Stupid Shit I Read at Washington's Blog

Here:

Since there's only 300 million of us, I guess when this is prefaced by "polls show that" it means that 1) nearly everybody got asked, and 2) the country is considerably bigger than we realized.

As for 1), no one polled me. And last time I checked, the people voted for Bush rather conclusively in 2004.

As for 2), they must be hiding all that extra population in the extra 7 states of the union candidate Obama claimed to have visited in 2008.

What a wack job. 

Federal Reserve Emergency Lending Round Up of Stories at Naked Capitalism

Lots of reaction pouring in on today's data dump, nicely pulled together by nakedcapitalism.com, here.