Mainstream Media Stand To Receive $1.44 Billion From McCain’s Tax Cuts
Mainstream Media Stand To Receive $1.44 Billion From McCain’s Tax Cuts
Prior to and following the vice-presidential debates, conservatives on Fox News purported that the “mainstream media” has a preference for an Obama presidency. Bill Kristol, Kirsten Powers, and Bernard Goldberg all agreed in the “obvious fact” of the “transparent agenda” of liberal media bias. Watch it:
These claims fly in the face of reality. The multinational corporations that run the mainstream media — GE (NBC), Time Warner (CNN), Walt Disney (ABC), News Corporation (FOX), and Viacom (CBS) — stand to benefit hugely under a McCain presidency. The centerpiece of Sen. McCain’s economic plan — actually, the whole plan — is large tax cuts for corporations. It would deliver $1.44 billion in tax cuts to the five largest media companies, according to an analysis by the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
These giveaways are just one part of McCain’s doubling of the Bush tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy which would create the largest deficits in 25 years and drive the United States into the deepest deficits since World War II. McCain and Palin have promised that the $700 billion bailout would not threaten these tax cuts.
Transcript:
KRISTOL: Let me clue you in on something. The mainstream media wants Barack Obama to be the next president of the United States.
I’m very happy about the Gwen Ifill kerfuffle, because it has just exposed the obvious fact the media has never been more biased. They want Obama to win. They want McCain to lose. They hate Sarah Palin. I have never seen anything like it before.
And now they are trying to demoralize conservatives by pretending the race is over.
HUME: I want to hear Kirsten on this–your thoughts?
POWERS: I actually agree with what you just said. They are at the worst place they have ever been, the media. It is a transparent agenda, there is no doubt about that.
…
GOLDBERG: Well, look. Look. I’m not going to break any news here by telling you this so-called mainstream media has a rooting interest in, in Barack Obama. So if it’s … I’m sorry, I know Steve, you’ve been in a coma the past year, and you didn’t know that, but it’s true.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
55 Responses to “Mainstream Media Stand To Receive $1.44 Billion From McCain’s Tax Cuts”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Mainstream Media Stands To Receive $1.44 Billion From McCain’s Tax Cuts
- - Sounds pretty liberal to me.
October 4th, 2008 at 11:47 amMain Street moron:
Why should the Corporations be punished for doing well!?
(even if I don't have a pot to piss in...)
October 4th, 2008 at 11:55 amWhat liberal media?
Be specific about whom you are referencing when you say the liberal media - because surely you aren't talking about CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN or yourselves...
October 4th, 2008 at 11:59 amAnd yet they've all fallen off McStain's tire swing.
Except, of course, FuxNews.
PEACE
October 4th, 2008 at 11:59 amWhat they actually meant:
Bceause they can't do anything about the fact that reality is liberally biased, they have to blame some nebulous 'them', in this case the MSM to which they ironically belong...
October 4th, 2008 at 12:03 pmWhat - do you expect them to "catapult the propaganda" for nothing?
Only way mclame makes it to the WH is if they steal ANOTHER election. This is the payoff.
October 4th, 2008 at 12:03 pmOh sure the MSM prefer Barack Obama as president...give me a f**king break! His taxes alone on the wealthy who make over $250,000.00 effect the talking bobbleheads like O'Reilly and Hannity who have both whined on air about this.
October 4th, 2008 at 12:07 pmAnother Joe Says: Only way mclame makes it to the WH is if they steal ANOTHER election. This is the payoff.
Will be far harder this time, as the crevasse between the voting margins will require a freaking bridge to cross, unlike last time when they simply had to span a mud puddle in voting differential.
October 4th, 2008 at 12:08 pmOT: During her interview with FUX's Carl Cameron yesterday Sarah The Impaler *magically* answered the questions she was stumped by in her earlier interview with Katie Couric.
In her Cameron interview she brought up the Exxon Valdez Supreme court ruling which happened in Alaska and also brought up some eminent domain ruling. She went on to say how she is against the use if eminent domain as it takes away public land.
Of course Carl Cameron didn't do a follow up question asking her how she felt about using eminent domain as mayor of Wasilla to get the land to build a expensive sports complex in Wasilla. Nor did he mention that the town of Wasilla went ahead with the construction of the sports complex before they even *legally* owned the land and have had another law suit filed against them by the original land owner.
October 4th, 2008 at 12:13 pmThat helps explain Tom Brokow's intense interest in seeing McCain presented in a favorable light, even to the extent of using polling data that was several weeks old to make it look like McCain was hanging tough in this election. How sad it is to see the once honorable profession dragged into the mud by the likes of Brokow. Brokow turned me off when he was the local anchor here in Omaha because of his pandering to the powerful way back then. I never watched him at NBC for the same reason. Now he is intruding on MSNBC. Will he stop at nothing?
October 4th, 2008 at 12:17 pmAs for McCain who has been slipping rapidly at the polls, look for the MSM to assist him by rehashing reverend Wright, Ayres, etc, etc, for the final month of campaigning.
We've already heard Tweety and other MSM bobbleheads saying that the dirtball strategy is all that McCain has left. So will we be seeing MSNBC, FUX, CNN, ABC, CBS & NBC all cover the attacks of Barack Obama 24/7 before November 4th? Time will tell.
October 4th, 2008 at 12:17 pmToday's Daily Kos Research 2000 tracking poll has Obama up over McCain 52-40.
http://www.dailykos.com/
October 4th, 2008 at 12:18 pmOT, but since we don't have a Think Fast thread, I'll post it here.
A very big fear is that the Republicans will steal the election again. They are disenfranchising liberal voters all across the nation and then there is the threat of flipping the vote in the voting machines. I read on Raw Story that a group is offering a $100,000 reward to anyone who can give them information connecting Karl Rove to a rigged election.
I think that is a great idea. But don't link it to Karl Rove. Offer a large reward to anyone who can expose plans to flip votes in the voting machines. I'm sure there are quite a few people involved in this kind of planning who will out the people involved for some hard cash. I wish that the Democrats would do something like that. Right now it looks like they are ignoring the threat of another stolen election.
October 4th, 2008 at 12:28 pmunbelievable - maybe, but you don't know that. The MSM creates the perception that it is close. Until last week, they were reporting polls that said it was a virtual toss-up.
All they need to do is pick up the "highly energized base" like of "security moms"
And then if all else fails, they can proclaimRacial Divide May Affect Election and proclaim that improbable sounding results are because of the "Bradley Effect."
October 4th, 2008 at 12:28 pmMore Corporfornication from the CorporaWhorehouses on the Washington Mall. Pimps Bush & Paulson just opened a %700 billion revolving account for their investment pleasure.
October 4th, 2008 at 12:40 pmSo when you hear a network's "political expert," like Chuck Todd, or Mark Halperin offer their views, it's a sure bet their opinions were vetted by corporate before being aired, for a properly corpro-centric angle.
October 4th, 2008 at 12:42 pmIf the elections are stolen once again it is time for Americans to rise up!
How can we hit "our" government where it hurts? Refuse to pay your taxes on April 15th, 2009. What would our government do if over one million angry Americans refused to pay their taxes? Are we being represented by our government? Is our republic a republic anymore?
If the GOP steal this elections it is time for action. I suggest:
The American Tax Revolt of 2009
No Taxation Without Representation
Lets make history!
October 4th, 2008 at 12:43 pmUncle Fester Lurks Says:
How can we hit “our” government where it hurts? Refuse to pay your taxes on April 15th, 2009.
Exactly how does that work? They've already deducted my taxes from my payroll check, when I get it. Do you mean don't file for a return?
That's my cash, Fester. You want I should let them keep it? Yeah, that'll teach 'em a lesson...
October 4th, 2008 at 12:48 pmClaim 9 on your w4 at work get much of your wages back on each paycheck. You'd end up owing money but if you aren't being represented....
October 4th, 2008 at 12:53 pmOr just continue to live in fear and do nothing and continue to get raped by your own government. It's your choice. I've made mine since 2003.
October 4th, 2008 at 12:55 pmUncle Fester Lurks Says:
Claim 9 on your w4 at work get much of your wages back on each paycheck.
Like they'll believe nine kids appeared out of nowhere, when I've been filing as a non-parent, my entire life. And I've worked at the same company for 14 years; they might get a little curious as to why I suddenly need a new w-4, when I'm not also asking to have these 9 kids put on my company insurance...
October 4th, 2008 at 12:57 pmUncle Fester Lurks Says:
Or just continue to live in fear and do nothing and continue to get raped by your own government. It’s your choice. I’ve made mine since 2003.
Barflies are genetically incapable of fear - that's why they get their asses kicked on a regular basis.
Believe me, I know.
October 4th, 2008 at 1:00 pmYes, I believe it's way past time the people of this country give phox what they deserve. They should be targeted, and so should some of their more colorful employees. It can start on a local level. Everyone in your city who is interested should attend local meetings to begin discussing ways to show their present and future employees that if you work for fox, you're not welcome in our town. In fact, you'd better watch your back, all the time. You know, persecution, for good reason.
October 4th, 2008 at 1:05 pmAnd that could be just a start.
The Tax System - Explained With Beer
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all
ten comes to $100.
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go
something like this:
* The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. (Frey, Cavo,
Frey and Frey)
* The fifth would pay $1.
* The sixth would pay $3.
* The seventh would pay $7.
* The eighth would pay $12.
* The ninth would pay $18.
* The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with
the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to
reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.'
'Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.'
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so
the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But
what about the othe r six men - the paying customers? How could they divide
the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they
subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man
would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested
that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount,
and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
* The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100%
savings).
* The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings) .
* The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings) .
* The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 ( 25% savings).
* The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 ( 22% savings).
* The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four
continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began
to compare their savings.
'I only got a dollar out of the $20,' declared the sixth man. He
pointed to the tenth man, 'but he got $10!'
'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only Saved a
dollar, too.
It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!'
'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back
when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'
'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get
anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine
sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill,
they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between
all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how
our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get t he most
benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being
wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start
drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
October 4th, 2008 at 1:09 pmhttp://end-times-data.blogspot.com/2008/02/loser-john-mccain-to-clinton-horrible.html
October 4th, 2008 at 1:11 pmThe "Clinton elected 2008 president" script. explained worldwide first and long ago by one and so far echoed only by one (Kyoon):
http://last-antichrist.blogspot.com/2007/05/hillary-clinton-2008-for-dummies-two.html
http://end-times-prophet.blogspot.com/2008/02/hours-before-hillary-clinton-will-be.html
http://end-times-computers.blogspot.com/2007/05/ronpaul2008com-barackobamacom.html
Barfly, from 2001-2004 I've changed my w4 to 9, back then I was told by the payroll clerk that as long as you don't claim 10 it will not raise any flags with the Fed. I now as a single person claim 5. Your payroll people cannot say no if you change your W4 form they can only say how many dependants is the maximum you can claim. Many people used to claim 8-9 when they knew they would be getting future overtime so that they would take home even more money. Talk to your payroll clerk and see what they tell you.
October 4th, 2008 at 1:11 pmaceomalley7 Says:
````````````````````````````````````````
I believe that joke was written by a drunking billionaire.
You can claim they pay sooooo much more than the average citizen but yet you forget to mention the tax loopholes for the wealthy or how about the offshore tax shelters on the Caymen Islands among other places. Nice try though in your attempt to defend the wealthy, if you want a clue google David Cay Johnston to learn the truth about the wealthy and taxes...
October 4th, 2008 at 1:16 pmThe next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine
sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill,
they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between
all of them for even half of the bill!
But they jumped up, pointed at the darkest looking guy in the bar (darker even that the free-swilling Mexicans) and shouted "Bin Laden! Then they ran out the back door in the confusion...
October 4th, 2008 at 1:20 pmMattM @ 31 your links are pure gibberish and do not point out a damn thing about anything really. Hillary? Barack? McCain? What was the point of these multiple links of nothing?
October 4th, 2008 at 1:21 pmbarfly Says:
But they jumped up, pointed at the darkest looking guy in the bar (darker even that the free-swilling Mexicans) and shouted “Bin Laden! Then they ran out the back door in the confusion…
October 4th, 2008 at 1:22 pm`````````````````````````````````````````````
LMAO! Those cheap, cowardly bastards must be republicans! :)
Heh...besides MattM, everyone knows that Sarah Palin is the harlot riding the scarlet beast mentioned in the book of revelation. *snark*
October 4th, 2008 at 1:25 pmUncle Fester Lurks Says:
Dude, if that gives you emotional sustenance, go for it.
As a semi-pro drunk, I can lecture no-one without appearing two-faced. Or sh*t faced.
It's a toss-up.
October 4th, 2008 at 1:26 pmaceomalley7 Says:
October 4th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
You should give credit when you use someone else's drunken ramblings.
How many TPers have gotten this moronic email from "helpful" Repub acquaintances?
October 4th, 2008 at 1:29 pmA lot of that will go to bail out Bill O'Reilly as his ratings go south and he's stuck with a warehouse full of T shirts he can't sell.
http://www.WilyTrax.com
October 4th, 2008 at 1:29 pmZoey...yup you hit the nail on the head! I've received that very e-mail from a braindead republican friend.
October 4th, 2008 at 1:50 pmWe need to understand that there will have to be NO tax breaks for anyone for a long time now. We are over 10 trillion dollars in debt.
I really don't understand why we don't impose an emergency tax bill for all the wealthy Americans to pay to cover this bailout. They have benefited the most and need to help keep the economy going.
October 4th, 2008 at 2:01 pmTP - Error in your post.
"Bill Kristol, Kirsten Powers, and Jeffrey Goldberg all agreed in the “obvious fact” of the “transparent agenda” of liberal media bias."
It's Bernard Goldberg in the clip, not Jeffrey.
Secondly, this right-wing idea that the media is "liberally biased" has been around for more than fifty years, dating back to a time when the only people who wanted to go into journalism were liberals. The only "bias" that existed was a bias for wanting to tell the truth. Since conservatives have no respect for the truth (they even think it's wrong to tell people the truth, sometimes), they have felt that "their side" of the story wasn't getting out (because it was usually wrong or filled with lies). They have put a lot of money into their efforts, but they have managed to convince way too many people in this country that what was missing from their news was "balance", that we weren't hearing from both sides. Never mind that once they were able to get their side of the story put on TV as if it carried equal weight with the truth, they started straying more and more from the truth. To the right wing, the "truth" is what people believe the truth to be, not what the facts and the evidence show it to be. In the age of Fox News Channel and Right Wing Conservative Hate Radio (Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, O'Reilly), the idea that the media is still "liberally biased" is an anachronistic joke.
October 4th, 2008 at 2:03 pmUncle Fester Lurks Says:
MattM @ 31 your links are pure gibberish and do not point out a damn thing about anything really. Hillary? Barack? McCain? What was the point of these multiple links of nothing?
A conspiracy theorist (belief in a secret society that is actually controlling the outcome of political and economic events on earth...the Illumani), along with a strong dose of Milleniumism based on a certain interpretation of Revelation in the Bible. It certainly is a great way to avoid looking at the leaders of our own country as bringing the nation to ruination. And I guess that's the point.
October 4th, 2008 at 2:21 pmaceomalley7 Says:
The Tax System - Explained With Beer
____________
Sorry, arse, but it's hard to understand what you're muttering about...
WHEN YOU'VE GOT YER HEAD SO FAR UP YER OWN CHENEY LIKE THAT...
October 4th, 2008 at 2:22 pmWayne A. Schneider Says:
To the right wing, the “truth” is what people believe the truth to be, not what the facts and the evidence show it to be.
_________
Which I why things have gotten so F-ed up the last 8 years. The more you lie, the more confused you get. No wonder the poor dears can't make a decent decision to save their lives.
_________
In the age of Fox News Channel and Right Wing Conservative Hate Radio (Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, O’Reilly), the idea that the media is still “liberally biased” is an anachronistic joke.
__________
And still they spread the manure, hoping to grow roses...
October 4th, 2008 at 2:25 pmWhich I why things
S/B - "Which IS why..."
October 4th, 2008 at 2:27 pmAlso, the pundits and some "reporters" will personally benefit from McCain's tax plan.
October 4th, 2008 at 2:48 pmWell, it may just be another game of semantics (and dealing with the right wing, it often is), but I would not call reducing someone's obligation to pay for what their government does today until a much later time, when it will cost us even more money, a "benefit".
If you can't afford to pay for an illegal war in Iraq, then the fiscally responsible thing to do would be not to have an illegal war in Iraq.
October 4th, 2008 at 3:18 pmMore Faux news in service of the Murdochs of this world.
October 4th, 2008 at 3:24 pm#15.Uncle Fester Lurks Says:
In her Cameron interview she brought up the Exxon Valdez Supreme court ruling which happened in Alaska and also brought up some eminent domain ruling. She went on to say how she is against the use if eminent domain as it takes away public land.
Did she really say "public land?" I thought eminent domain took private land.
October 4th, 2008 at 3:26 pmBillo: We here at the Factor and FOX News do not know anything about these socialist democratic tax cuts. If we did get a tax cut, we'd give them to you...the viewer. As in a high ranking member of the Republican party who watches us, who would put our "benefit" in a offshore tax shelter, preferably in Australia!
October 4th, 2008 at 3:28 pmaceomalley7 Says:
Tax them too much, attack them for being
wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
Sorry troll, they are already drinking overseas as are our corporations where 65% pay no taxes.
Trickle down economics doesn't work. It has been tried more than once and it never has worked.
If all the wealthy people in this country paid their fair share, we would be flush with cash. If all the corporations paid their fair share, we would be more than flush with cash. But since the wealthy and the corporations have all these tax shelters and loopholes, and have most of their money off-shore and not subject to taxation, this country is being supported by the middle class and the poor.
October 4th, 2008 at 3:56 pmsatirev Says:
speaking of taxes, it looks like Moosey & Co may be in a bit of a “stew”…..not reporting $60,000 of her per diem income???
And McCain may be in a pickle regarding his taxes also since he claimed no gambling winnings on his taxes. Hopefully some enterprising reporter is out there investigating this story.
October 4th, 2008 at 3:58 pmSo that explains it. How they try their worst to turn this election into a horse race to increase eyeballs hence ad revenue. We can’t hang the bastards yet but just be aware instead of allowing yourself to become hypnotized.
Wake up...!
====
October 4th, 2008 at 5:12 pmBernie Goldberg is an ass. (Excuse my French...)
====
October 4th, 2008 at 5:22 pmaceomalley7
Your far fetched narrative doesn't fool anybody here. You'll find in the rich a herd of ungrateful bums who want to give nothing back to the land of the free, the land of opportunity.
The rich are not most productive. Not even close. The economic engine in this country is found in the middle class.
In America you're supposed to get what you work for and you're supposed to help the helpless. Nobody can actually work for millions a year, so anything above the nominal amount of $250,000 under Obama's plan should be fair game. The government is merely taking back their excess currency.
You have to fund priorities, like the invasion you and your chickenhawks enjoy at the expense of American and Iraqi lives, and you must enact a sound fiscal policy to keep the dollar strong in the world market.
Did you want the invasion for free, GOP bum? Sorry, economists say that can't go on.
The rich have you convinced that you can be one of them, and that's why you're here shilling for greedsters, I take it?
Let me kill off your narrative: Tax sheltering is punishable by prison and/or heavy fines.
October 4th, 2008 at 5:32 pm#15.Uncle Fester Lurks Says:
In her Cameron interview she brought up the Exxon Valdez Supreme court ruling which happened in Alaska and also brought up some eminent domain ruling. She went on to say how she is against the use if eminent domain as it takes away public land.
Did she really say “public land?” I thought eminent domain took private land.
October 4th, 2008 at 5:34 pm````````````````````````````````````````````````
Oops, you are correct I got that backwards,
aceomalley7 Says:
The Tax System - Explained With Beer
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
October 4th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
I understand it and an explanation to anyone fooled by it is needed. You clearly do not understand, but I hope it's still possible that I can help you see why.
There are a number of flaws with your story. First of all, you took too much money off when the bartender cut their $100 tab by $20. The resulting tabs only add up to $79.
Second, your numbers regarding how much the bar tab is (which I am guessing come from the conservative - which has nothing to do with political party affiliation, only ideology - Tax Foundation, an anti-FDR organization founded in the 1930s) are based on personal federal income tax only. They do not represent the full source of revenue raised to pay for what our government does (such as illegally occupy a foreign country). Our government does not operate solely on funds raised through personal federal income taxes. While many of the larger corporations (some of which seem to be making lots of profits) pay little or no federal income taxes, they do pay some. There is also sales taxes and gasoline taxes which also raise money for the government to use. Because there are other sources of income for the government, they could reduce everyone's federal income tax burden (or, in your example, the bar tab), and still raise enough money through other means to pay for their operations.
Third, just because the richest guy doesn't partake in the beer drinking, it doesn't mean he doesn't have to pay his share of the bar tab. If he tried to get out of it, he could end up in jail, and still have to pay those back taxes, with penalties.
Fourth, if he moves to another country, not only will he have to pay taxes to that country's government, but he will still have to pay Uncle Sam taxes on any income he earns inside the U.S. I think it would actually cost him more.
Lastly, if the rich cannot appreciate the country that gave them the liberal freedoms they have to make all that money, then they should just go fu(k themselves anyway, and take you with them.
October 4th, 2008 at 5:48 pmBilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
aceomalley7 Says:
Tax them too much, attack them for being
wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
Sorry troll, they are already drinking overseas as are our corporations where 65% pay no taxes.
Trickle down economics doesn't work. It has been tried more than once and it never has worked.
If all the wealthy people in this country paid their fair share, we would be flush with cash. If all the corporations paid their fair share, we would be more than flush with cash. But since the wealthy and the corporations have all these tax shelters and loopholes, and have most of their money off-shore and not subject to taxation, this country is being supported by the middle class and the poor.
Loopholes/shelters/kick-backs/income taxes code word for he masses pay.
October 5th, 2008 at 9:00 amMainstream media is also ignoring major candidates who don't serve their agenda. The exclusion from the public debates is a violation of basic democratic principles! Please send this video to others: 5 Friends? Hell, tell 10 and tell them there are 6 presidential candidates who are on the ballot in enough states to win enough electoral votes to win the election: Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney, Chuck Baldwin, Obama and McCain
October 5th, 2008 at 9:24 am