Comments on: Taxes Become A Political Weapon

By: freedom

freedom — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 12:08:53 +0000

Thank you for your wisdom, “Both Parties…” but, do you really think that if we all just sit down and wait for God to feed, clothe and shelter us that everything will in fact be peachy-keen? I think not. God is a worker and doesn’t rely upon others to take care of Him.

By: freedom

freedom — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 11:53:52 +0000

So simple, DPortM….yet so few understand it.

By: DPortM

DPortM — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:59:44 +0000

You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy
out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another
person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to
anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody
else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to
work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the
other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody
else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about
the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.

~~~~~ Dr. Adrian Rogers, 1931

By: BothPartiesColludeAgainstYou

BothPartiesColludeAgainstYou — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 14:37:29 +0000

Luckily, many of you are Christians, and therefore don’t need to worry about money issues.

Matthew Chapter 6, verses 19-34 :

19″Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. 20But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. 21For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
22″The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are good, your whole body will be full of light. 23But if your eyes are bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!

24″No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.

25″Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? 26Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? 27Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life[b]?
28″And why do you worry about clothes? See how the lilies of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. 29Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. 30If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? 31So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. 33But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. 34Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 03:31:38 +0000

There are NOW (4) lobbyists for EACH MEMBER OF CONGRESS. Do the Math. UNBELIEVABLE BUT TRUE!

By: BattleCat

BattleCat — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 19:30:34 +0000

There’s a new item on the menu at Fenway Park this summer…the Barney Frank. If you don’t like it, you can stick it up your ass.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:41:53 +0000

Implement one facet of Sharia Law on a “one time” basis, and stone the entire congress to almost death. Maybe they would then get the message that they are the problem. Blame Bush and Hussein all you want, but congress has the power of the purse and they can direct traffic. “Retainer” bonuses are a means of keeping key people in place until the restructuring is complete. Without that sort of incentive, they would all leave and let the corporation in a worse bind to comply with the bailout. Congress created the problem and now are attempting to change the focus to the bonuses vice the money laundrying AIG is doing at the behest of the Federal Reserve, Treasury, and themselves.
The so-called republicans are the worst of the batch because they are going along with the charade in lieu of raising hell. Term limits is one Constitutional Amendment we should all be pushing for congress. These jackasses never go home when they get retire or get booted out. They hang around Washington and lobby their cabal in Congress and that law should be extended and stirctly enforced.

By: Ron

Ron — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 23:29:21 +0000

Larry Kudlow has some interesting perspective as well:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Mjk0ZmRmNjM2YTIwMmQ3MDc4YmZjZjQ4NGY4NmFmZDM=

Anon 10:11 AM: As I understand it your interpretation of “Bill of Attainder” is incomplete. It can refer to groups as well as individuals, and I am not so sure that it only refers to individuals. There was some legal discussion of this I just saw (and I can’t put my finger on it right now). Maybe some of the other legal minds here (and I am not a lawyer) want to comment on this as well.

In any case, with the lynch mob that the Obamabots want to set off, aren’t you all glad we have the Second Amendment?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 23:26:39 +0000

Correct me if I am wrong, but the entire delegation voted Yes, only 93 voted no. The GOP seemed split on this vote.

By: Pat.Herve

Pat.Herve — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 21:12:38 +0000

the bonuses were addressed and approved back in November.

http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/industries/finance/treasury-fed-reviewed-aig-bonus-info-months-ago/

By: Karla H

Karla H — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 20:58:13 +0000

We are just digging ourselves deeper… you reward losers and guess what… you get more losers.

By: Karla H

Karla H — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 20:56:20 +0000

From another thread, and by me…

“Don’t get me wrong. I am completely against these AIG maggots getting bonuses from a company that was pulled out of the fire by the taxpayers. But you will note that the government just instituted a 100% tax on these bonuses. Soon they will implement a 100% tax on all YOUR income too! They claim that “laws are difficult to change”. BS! They make up whatever they want, whenever they want! Gentlemen, secure your wallets!”

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:11:25 +0000

OP:

Too bad you have no understanding of the Constitution. A bill of attainder is a bill by which the Congress would find an individual guilty of a criminal law or impose a criminal sanction on a person.

As has been amply litigated in civil forfeiture and “drug Tax Stamp” cases, civil financial penalties and tax laws, however punitive, are NOT criminal law sanctions and ergo, neither the 8th Amendment nor the attainder clause apply.

The ex post facto clause relates to making something illegal retroactively. Ergo, it too has no applicability here.

By: Wolverine

Wolverine — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:37:40 +0000

Perhaps the next ones to have a 90% tax placed on their income ought to be members of the U.S. Congress. After all, are we not talking here about giving taxpayer money to people who have run an organization into the ground? Talk about chicanery. Talk about a balance sheet far in the red. Pelosi or AIG. What’s the difference really?

By: Sanford Horn

Sanford Horn — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:34:38 +0000

Good nail on the head comment by Brian L regarding the Constitutional issue. This does set a dangerous precedent in that when the government wants to exact its revenge, it can and does and will again in the future. Additionally, these pinheads are to blame for this in the first place for (a) not reading for what they voted, and (2) not remembering that we are a nation of laws and they violated the rule of law that they didn’t read in the first place.

As for where the patriots are, we are too busy trying to fight city hall, as they say, as the conservative underground. If some of us could muster the dollars we could run to put these morons out of work. I have said repeatedly that I would gladly run in my district - VA-8 against the moron of all morons - Jim Moran if there were some buck and volunteers.

May G-d Bless the Union.

By: BothPartiesColludeAgainstUs

BothPartiesColludeAgainstUs — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:36:22 +0000

We’re allready in a “state of transition”, hopefully temporary, away from capitalism which Bush and the rest of our lovely government representatives (who I like to call “our elitist ruling class”) more or less killed on its feet. Given that this is a good decision.

I’m not delusional enough to blame Obama, or to think that America would be in better shape with Bush or McCain in charge. Or Sarah Palin or Bobby Jindal. Please.

How would you guys feel about taxing all of the lobbyist contributions from these bailed out firms, that went to the Obamas and McCains of the world, at 110%? I’d be all in favor of that.

By: Vigilant1

Vigilant1 — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:14:23 +0000

Wolf and Wittman voted for this bill because they know the courts will overturn it. “See, we tried to do something but the courts wouldn’t let us.”
Smart politics?

By: James Young

James Young — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:12:30 +0000

I agree with virtually everything you said, Greg, but how can this surprise anyone? It’s even logical: once the Federal government gets in the business of bailing out businesses, why shouldn’t it follow that it tells them how to run their business? Or providing health care, so it tells us how to run our lives with things (like smoking, drinking, cholesterol, red meat, exercise, etc., and everything else except perverse and/or promiscuous sexual practices (those are protected)) that affect our health?

And Brian, I think you’re right on the constitutional question. Then again, with my recent luck before the Supreme Court (lost 9-0, thinking we would win 6-3), I may be the wrong person to ask. That, and the Court validated a retroactive tax increase imposed by the Great Prevaricator in 1993.

By: Vigilant1

Vigilant1 — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:09:30 +0000

Brian L. said on 19 Mar 2009 at 9:35 pm: Flag comment
Seems pretty clear to me. Congress is violating the Constitution. Where’s the outrage at *that*?

Our Congress hasn’t gotten anything right lately. Should this bill be any different? It is just grandstanding by a group of incometents who are trying to show their constituents that “we won’t tolerate ceo’s being paid big bonuses” while our congress spends millions on earmarks. Kind of calling the kettle black wouldn’t you say? It will never stand up to a legal challenge and they know it.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 12:41:52 +0000

“Congress is violating the Constitution. Where’s the outrage at *that*?”

Oh! Oh! I know the answer to this one. It’s in the same place as the outrage over them systematically shredding the Fourth Amendment and the right to habeus corpus. What do I win?