Fox News’s ‘coverage’ of tea parties: 23 segments, 73 on-air promos in eight days.
By on Apr 15th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Fox News’s ‘coverage’ of tea parties: 23 segments, 73 on-air promos in eight days.
As ThinkProgress has documented, Fox News has aggressively promoted today’s conservative, anti-Obama tea parties. A Media Matters analysis found that Fox dedicated 23 separate segments to the tea parties between April 6 and April 13; it aired at least 73 in-show and commercial promotions for the parties as well. Of all the Fox programs, Neil Cavuto’s “Your World” dedicated the most time to the tea parties:
See Media Matters’s full findings, including an analysis of Fox’s weekend programs, here.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
TP, you are kicking Tea Bag ASS!
keep it up
April 15th, 2009 at 7:42 pmWhat? Man if the non-partisan (im sure) media matters would stop watching Fox. They might fall from #1
April 15th, 2009 at 7:47 pmi went to the local teabagging party here in southeastern connecticut for a quick chuckle on my way to the gym. two things struck me:
April 15th, 2009 at 7:48 pma) literally no people of color there.
b) their speakers made no sense. one was rattling on how he didn’t qualify for federal student aid when he is only attending a community college and somehow that’s tied into taxation and democrats.
Jeff, old boy! MediaMatters is partisan, and they say so upfront:
http://mediamatters.org/about_us/
April 15th, 2009 at 7:54 pmI hit the Boston showing at 6:30 to see if the group was still plugging away. I went to see how the party was going. Wish I had been there earlier to get a real feel of the attendance, as there were only twenty picketing outside of the State House.
I found it quite funny this was also happening right in front of Boston’s Fox affiliate’s studios.
April 15th, 2009 at 7:55 pmIt aint over yet…
Cavuto and Beck devoted two full hours of live programming to the Tea Bagging. That’s a huge chunk of broadcast real estate.
And it still isn’t over. Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, and Greta Van Susteran have yet to air. Hannity and Van Susteran previously announced that their program would be live with the TPers.
April 15th, 2009 at 7:59 pmTeabaggers are a sad group of fools manipulated by the very people they should be opposed too. The wont the rich to pay less taxes so they can pay more.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:01 pmAll that effort… for something that will mean absolutely nothing tomorrow.
These people have WAY too much free time on their hands. Perhaps they could donate some of it to charity and actually do something constructive.
Oh wait – that’s the Democrat’s job.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:02 pmJack o boy, i know.1 question, do you think you get the 100% truth from site like thinkprogress and media matters? Also from Fox news and MSNBC.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:03 pmHey Proud, TP has documented dozens of cases of “complete lack of objectivity on Faux.
Can you provide a few from MSNBC for us. Links, please.
Thanks.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:03 pmProud Says:
Wow, you guys have really ripped the covers off the tea bag protests.
For the thousandth time Proud, TP doesn’t even pretend to be objective. It never said it was non-partisan. TP is partisan. Quit accusing it of not being partisan, you’re just wasting pixels.
Please cite sources of the MSNBC and CNN coverage that you have a problem with.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:05 pmI was at work during the tea parties I don’t know about anyone else.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:06 pmProud Says:
I guess the overwhelming negative coverage on MSNBC, CNN and the rest of the media represents objective journalism.
It’s really funny, that you think that you can get a positive coverage of a negative event.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:07 pmProud,
The fact is that there are barriers being set up by media empires and that there is hardly anything left of an impartial media in America. MSNBC worships the left (mostly, sans Morning Joe), while Fox kisses the GOP’s feet. CNN’s caught in the middle, but the obvious bias can be seen in their individual anchors.
There is no such thing as neutrality in current American journalism, I will admit that much. However, I think the argument can also be made that, as much as MSNBC’s presentation of these tax parties is negative, Fox’s presentation of the Obama administration is just as negative.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:10 pm@10 jeff2001 – straw man allert! not helpful at all!
April 15th, 2009 at 8:10 pmjeffy, you’re pushing a false equivalency when you try to contrast the lack of objectivity of partisan blogs with the lack of objectivity of a supposed “news” channel that bills itself as “Fair & Balanced™”.
But you keep pushing it. You’re winning lots of hearts and minds, bucko.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:13 pmThe only thing worse than getting teabagged?
Being a teabagger fluffer, like Neil Cavuto.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:13 pmO ,yes say anything but don’t answer the question.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:14 pmLooks like “Cavuto’s World” takes top prize on this one. I always wonder what it’s like to be a cavuto ro hannity these days. What drives them to rediculousness? Is it personal face saving – cause if so it’s not working!
April 15th, 2009 at 8:15 pmHA, why are you watching Bill O? Just to give you something to get mad about?
April 15th, 2009 at 8:15 pmjeff2001 Says:
This strawman really needs a brain.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:16 pmO wayne, you don’t want to debate. So its easy to name call.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:18 pmElBruce Says:
Please cite sources of the MSNBC and CNN coverage that you have a problem with.
If you insist trolls need to use facts, then you have to clean up after their heads explode. Hehe
April 15th, 2009 at 8:18 pmjeff2001 Says:
O wayne, you don’t want to debate. So its easy to name call.
I would love to have a battle of wits with you but you seem to be totally unarmed.
I do not debate strawmen arguments.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:20 pmThe level of stupidity is glaring! Fake News has been exposed for what they’ve been up to and has proven that the conservative rethuglicans own them. They’ve accomplished nothing and have not grown their base.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:20 pm@1 jeff2001, he is a trouble maker with a megaphone. it would be unwise to ignore the retoric and not report it.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:20 pmOk , you people (yep,i said you people) are no funny.later.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:22 pmno fun,,,
April 15th, 2009 at 8:23 pmjeff, when you show yourself capable of debate, then you get to complain.
That point has not been reached yet.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:25 pmDoes the stupid “new” troll have a point? If he’s asking whether or not we recognize the difference between news and commentary? Yes.
The problem arises when commentary replaces news. Far too many people can’t tell the difference.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:26 pmFox calls themselves ‘fair and balanced’. If that were true, they wouldn’t need to try to convince anyone of it.
The way that Fox manufactured this astroturf movement is simply disgusting.
The REAL news media SHOULD be calling them on their bullshit.
I do find it highly amusing to see pinheads protesting the tax cuts as taxation run amok. It’s almost like watching an old Monty Python skit. Surreal to say the least.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:27 pmJeffs question,
“Jack o boy, i know.1 question, do you think you get the 100% truth from site like thinkprogress and media matters? Also from Fox news and MSNBC.”
Since TP has actual links and video of what people say and do I would say it’s 100% accurate. If you don’t like the message the fools on the right spout, then don’t come here.
I haven’t checked media matters, but I understand they do the same thing. Again, if you don’t like the truth hitting you in the face, stop going there.
FOX rarely, if ever, reports on anything in a fair and balanced manner, actually for fair and balanced I’d have to say never. FOX cuts and pastes, splices sound bites and fire journalists who won’t go on the air and lie for them. I guess you feel comfortable there.
MSNBC, if you don’t count the few right wing tools they have on, and I assume your upset with Olbermann and Madow, they also report the facts. I’m sorry to dissapoint you, but they don’t cut and paste or splice sound bites to decieve it’s viewers. If that network makes you uncomfortable then please don’t watch it.
There, hows that for your debate? Anything I said wasn’t true? Would you care to provide any links validating your point?
Really, don’t bother, your just another brainwashed waste of time troll and I’m about to head out to the ball game.
I think the best thing you can do is just go somewhere where your poor little brain won’t have to summon the energy to think. I hear there’s plenty of room at the local teaparty.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:30 pmYou should check out Media Matters, Rich. They report what’s said, word for word and with transcripts, and the Reichwhiners can’t stand it!
April 15th, 2009 at 8:39 pmi love the fact that the urban dictionary definition for teabagger was updated!
Teabagger
2. n. A conservative activist who is so ignorant that they protest against tax cuts (that benefit them) by throwing tea into a river.
from DKos
LOL
April 15th, 2009 at 8:39 pmis jeff seven?
April 15th, 2009 at 8:41 pmhey pete, you got phoebes yet?
An old lady on CNN just suggested the tea baggers ammount to ’serpents’ – something the tea baggers can surely relate to.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:43 pmPurple State Says:
——————————————————————————–
Proud,
The fact is that there are barriers being set up by media empires and that there is hardly anything left of an impartial media in America. MSNBC worships the left (mostly, sans Morning Joe), while Fox kisses the GOP’s feet. CNN’s caught in the middle, but the obvious bias can be seen in their individual anchors.
There is no such thing as neutrality in current American journalism, I will admit that much. However, I think the argument can also be made that, as much as MSNBC’s presentation of these tax parties is negative, Fox’s presentation of the Obama administration is just as negative.
Exactly so, Purple State, exactly so.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:45 pmKeltoi #43,
I couldn’t agree with that for even the slightest moment.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:53 pmHi, dbadass.
I haven’t seen any phoebes but some of the trees are showing buds. Mostly it’s just been lots of dust.
Despite the floods just North of here it was a dry winter and I was just reading an article that opines last winter resulted in the shallowest freeze depth in the official record. We really need a good rain to give things a jump start.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:59 pmPurple State Says:
There is no such thing as neutrality in current American journalism, I will admit that much. However, I think the argument can also be made that, as much as MSNBC’s presentation of these tax parties is negative, Fox’s presentation of the Obama administration is just as negative.
Interesting point. I’d also exempt Shep Smith from FAUX News, as he’s actually often pretty moderate when it counts, if not even a little (gasp!) liberal.
But I’d like it on the record that FAUX News started it. Before them, there was an assumption that anything presented as a news network, or as the nightly news show of any other network, had some standards of journalistic integrity. The fact that all bets are off these days can be laid directly at the feet of Roger Ailes.
Anybody else here old enough to remember Cronkite? Let’s have a moment of silence for back when we used to be able to actually trust the people who read the news on TV.
.
sc mom Says:
i love the fact that the urban dictionary definition for teabagger was updated!
Teabagger
2. n. A conservative activist who is so ignorant that they protest against tax cuts (that benefit them) by throwing tea into a river.
But they haven’t been throwing their tea into any rivers because that would violate EPA standards. Seriously. It’s illegal, so they don’t do it. Oooh, real scary. I’d be afraid of their impending revolution, but apparently we’ll be able to shut it down with zoning laws or something.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:00 pmHeard on Countdown tonight something that was noted here yesterday — why isn’t anyone protesting the number of corporations who owe our government $1 billion each year in unpaid taxes due to their off-shore post-office box headquarters?
April 15th, 2009 at 9:03 pmCitizens of all states are having to make up the difference — Texas loses the most each year. How about sit ins in front of those corporations? Would make more sense than the idiotic, misguided, misdirected tea party.
Watching Rachel Maddow – I’m cracking up! The teabaggers are saying this was the LARGEST GRASSROOTS movement! WTF! ROTFL!
April 15th, 2009 at 9:07 pmToday, I protested the fact that none of today’s protesters protested last year when the tax rates were exactly the same as they are today.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:09 pmI know that from the beginning of journalism on this continent, newspapers were used as partisan mouthpieces by one political faction or another. Their rhetoric was far more vicious than anything seen today, and their treatment of opposition public figures far more brutal.
But with the advent of national organs — radio and television networks that were bound to serve the public interest as conditions of their access to the public airwaves — that partisan nature was recognized as inappropriate for what was seen as a public service. Television networks saw their news divisions not a profit centers but as part of their obligation as trustees of an informed public. There probably was never perfect neutrality in content, but that was a goal for which every news organization strove.
Then came cable, and the idea of “news” as a profit center, and Fox News, with Rupert Murdoch’s ambition to drive the US political character to the right, an ambition that ran roughshod over any pretense of journalistic credibility.
Oh, sure, they still try to convince us that they’re “Fair & Balanced™” but, seriously, who buys that, other than the choir to which they’re preaching? Besides, if they have to tell you they’re “Fair & Balanced™” it’s a good bet that they’re not.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:12 pmI don’t know, ElBruce. I’ve seen nothing that would lead me to conclude that Shep is a liberal. I think it’s more likely that he has a decent sense of the absurd and enough awareness to recognize when it surrounds him.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:13 pmTheres a great comedy show on right now with a bunch of a$$HOLES. Its called Hannity and his bunch of illiterate aholes protesting about getting a tax cut. I almost feel sorry for these people.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:14 pmFox has veered farther away from reporting and went full on promoting with the tea parties. Agree with them or not, the tea parties are significant events that should be covered by the MSM, but there is a difference between coverage and promotion. Fox went way over that line.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:16 pmElBruce Says:
Interesting point. I’d also exempt Shep Smith from FAUX News, as he’s actually often pretty moderate when it counts, if not even a little (gasp!) liberal.
Shep appears to be the only big name at Fox who appears to be trying to stay moderate. There are times he questions his authority with a straight face, but even some centrists conservatives can appear liberal on Fox.
But I’d like it on the record that FAUX News started it. Before them, there was an assumption that anything presented as a news network, or as the nightly news show of any other network, had some standards of journalistic integrity. The fact that all bets are off these days can be laid directly at the feet of Roger Ailes.
Fox News’s existence created the void in impartiality? That could be an interesting approach. The sad thing is that such partisan coverage has infected some local news outlets, as I turn on the local Fox affiliate and hear the same bullet points at times.
Heck, don’t get me started on AM radio, one of the most disturbing forms of partisan media out there.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:19 pmralph the wonder locust Says:
April 15th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
You got that right, ralph. And that’s why I, without a great deal of support or incentive, refuse to subscribe to cable so long as my “basic service” includes corporate “news”. There’s no way in Hell I’m going to pay anyone to lie to me.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:20 pmsignificant!?
like Ron Paul’s candidacy?
to whom?
on what scale?
beyond today?
do you know how many people there are in the US?
you outdo yourself every time i bother to read your posts, Captain.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:21 pmTea Bag Parties: More promos than actual attendees. And a higher count than the average IQ.
Cheers,
April 15th, 2009 at 9:21 pmProud Says:
Wow, you guys have really ripped the covers off the tea bag protests. I have to give you credit for not being afraid to show your complete lack of objectivity. I guess the overwhelming negative coverage on MSNBC, CNN and the rest of the media represents objective journalism.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:23 pm——————————————————–
…and i have to give you credit for showing your lack of intelligence
fire _ant_chavis Says:
Watching Rachel Maddow – I’m cracking up! The teabaggers are saying this was the LARGEST GRASSROOTS movement! WTF! ROTFL!
Just wait until the 2M4M events!
.
ralph the wonder locust Says:
I don’t know, ElBruce. I’ve seen nothing that would lead me to conclude that Shep is a liberal. I think it’s more likely that he has a decent sense of the absurd and enough awareness to recognize when it surrounds him.
… which would make him a moderate. But sometimes I wonder how he manages to keep his job over there. Just today he was talking with some guy about the DHS “right wing terror threat” report, and they were both coming to the conclusion that it was no big deal and nothing for conservatives to worry about.
.
backup Says:
Fox has veered farther away from reporting and went full on promoting with the tea parties. Agree with them or not, the tea parties are significant events that should be covered by the MSM, but there is a difference between coverage and promotion. Fox went way over that line.
Agreed. The fact that they’ve been playing it up before the events occurred pretty much amounted to free promotion for potential events. If they had kept mum and then shown up at the events afterward, that would be another thing. But FAUX Noise also plays fast and loose with editorial decisions – how much of what they show. For example, cutting to which blonde woman went missing or which black celebrity is on trial whenever they’ve got no anti-liberal news to report that day. They could also have done a lot just by picking and choosing what they cover.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:23 pmThanks for your concern, b-cup. I sure hope you get several more opportunities to insist that these teabagging parties are “legitimate events”. Just because everyone rejects your arguments is no reason to stop advancing them.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:27 pmI’ll buy that. It’s a measure of how whacked-out Faux News is that someone with a moderate perspective and an ability to examine events with some reason make shim look like a liberal.
On second thought, maybe it’s not so crazy.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:30 pmralph. what’s so illegitimate about people protesting taxation or increased deficit spending that they believe will result in more taxation?
April 15th, 2009 at 9:31 pmMarie,
I saw that report. The figure was $100 billion, not $1 billion.
“A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you’re talking real money.”
April 15th, 2009 at 9:34 pmSo where does faux go from here ?
Will they now organize protests against seating Al Franken ?
Perhaps they’ll plan some dissent against immigration reform.
I’m sure they’ll want to build on this success.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:36 pm@ backup’s 63, if I may answer,
…the same thing that is wrong with me slandering or attacking my neighbor because I think he may someday do my family harm.
even if I’ve got a scintilla (look it up) of evidence that it might be the case, I am nonetheless criminally culpable if I act on my suspicions.
shorter answer: it’s teh stupid.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:36 pmb-cup, I told you before. They have no credibility.
A protest by people who have shown genuine concern over deficit spending over the past eight years and continue to voice their concerns with the new administration would be legitimate.
These teabagging parties are illegitimate in the terms you are using (which will probably change as soon as they prove inconvenient to you), because the people behind them showed no such concern over the past eight years.
They are not protesting taxation (their taxes have not increased) and the increased deficit spending that Bush rang up on the national Mastercard raised not a peep out of them.
All evidence says this is a partisan, anti-Obama astroturf movement. “Taxes” and “spending” is just an excuse to call Obama a socialist.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:38 pmbackup, what is “illegitimate” is that a so-called news outlet has spent the last month telling their viewers to protest the legal government of our country. And? They haven’t offered a single specific example.
WTF? are they protesting? Name a single, specific, example of what they are so pissed about.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:39 pmCan’t these whiny mofos just pony up some minor taxation dollars while still wrapping flags all over their jingo asses?
April 15th, 2009 at 9:41 pmbackup Says:
ralph. what’s so illegitimate about people protesting taxation or increased deficit spending that they believe will result in more taxation?
You do understand, do you not, that the people attending these rallies and doing the protesting are not the ones who will be paying more in taxes to finance the stimulus spending they say they’re against but will accept anyway?
It’s the rich people, the people born millionaires, who will have to pay their fair share. And in a well-functioning capitalist society, “fair share” for the wealthiest means a higher percentage than the ones below them on the income scale. And corporations will also have to start paying their fair share of taxes which, for some of them, would mean actually paying taxes. And ending no-bid, cost-plus contracts would save taxpayers billions each year.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:42 pmtombaker. We’ve been spending the money. Bush spent hundreds of billions in bailouts. Obama has spent hundreds of billions in stimulus. And there doesn’t seem to be much debate that there are more deficit spending proposals on the table. It also seems reasonable to assume that we will eventually pay for the debt through increased taxation.
I don’t see how it can be chalked up to slander or attack.
Whether they are right or wrong, many people disagree with the level of deficit spending and the debt that has accumulated. And they don’t want to support today’s increased spending initiatives through higher taxation.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:46 pmI still haven’t decided if you are really this dense or just deliberately playing stupid for reasons of your own.
We all know that Bush spent hundreds of billions in Iraq and Obama authorized hundreds of billions in stimulus. No one disputes that.
The difference is that George Bush spent hundreds of billions in Iraq EVERY YEAR and none of these “protesters” said “boo”.
This tells me they aren’t really concerned about deficit spending per se.
It tells me that they are concerned about deficit spending when a Democratic President is behind it.
I don’t know how much of it is racist, how much of it is knee-jerk partisanship and how much of it is opportunistic. But it IS absolutely PARTISAN.
That is what makes it a farce, b-cup.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:56 pmwhat’s so funny is that these ‘tea-baggers’ so called protest was a complete failure and a waste of money, they made a complete ass outta themselves? They protested on complete lies, given to them by fox news and the republicans.
did anyone notice that those interviewed had no central theme for there protest and all there answers sounded so scripted by fox and those ‘obstructionist republicans’ and hard reich-wingnuts?
April 15th, 2009 at 9:58 pm#68 What these morons are protesting is the fact that they lost the last two election cycles. I also cant help but to think that it might have something to do with the first african American to be elected to the white house. Im watching fair and balanced fox noise right now.Anyone with a ninth grade education can see that fox promoted these bagging events. Hannity is obviously just against president Obama
April 15th, 2009 at 9:59 pmand anything that his administration does to help improve our country,and our reputation around the world. Screw him Fox and all the wingnuts.
Wayne. Many people, not just the rich, don’t believe that rich people should be taxed more, just because they are rich. Many people believe that increased taxes will not be limited to just the rich. I believe that if we increase the tax burdens on U.S. corporations, they will be less competitive with foreign corporations in an increasingly global marketplace. And there is support for the idea that many of the rich are not born millionaires, but small business owners that provide many of the jobs that fuel our economy.
These ideas could be misinformed, but many truly believe them.
I think the Obama administration could use the tact that they won the election and will simply do the things they want to do without regard to those that disagree. Or they can attempt to change the beliefs that I think motivate the tea partiers and try to co-opt them.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:59 pmfor clarification: co-opt the opposition, not the beliefs.
April 15th, 2009 at 10:00 pmProud,
I politely asked you over an hour and a half ago to provide me of a single example of bias on MSNBC. Since you have not only ignored my request, but have disappeared faster than Dick Cheney during the VietNam war, I have to assume you can’t provide what you are “proud” to flap your jaws about.
“Proud”, indeed.
Sorry about the stains (is that tea?) in your undies.
April 15th, 2009 at 10:03 pmbackup Says:
——————————————————————————–
Wayne. Many people, not just the rich, don’t believe that rich people should be taxed more, just because they are rich. Many people believe that increased taxes will not be limited to just the rich. I believe that if we increase the tax burdens on U.S. corporations, they will be less competitive with foreign corporations in an increasingly global marketplace. And there is support for the idea that many of the rich are not born millionaires, but small business owners that provide many of the jobs that fuel our economy.
These ideas could be misinformed, but many truly believe them.
I think the Obama administration could use the tact that they won the election and will simply do the things they want to do without regard to those that disagree. Or they can attempt to change the beliefs that I think motivate the tea partiers and try to co-opt them.
——————-
Both logic and experience prove otherwise. See my last post.
Thanks for the fun, all.
Out.
April 15th, 2009 at 10:06 pmWhat part of
“Ronald Reagan proved deficits don’t matter” -Dick Cheney
do these people refuse to understand???
If they hadn’t just fallen off some big’ol turnip truck,
they’d have been voting Democrat since 1972,
instead of doing exactly the goddamned opposite.
Where do I go to protest the tax on my patience these witless wonders impose, sans representation???
HFS!!! Guess it just goes to prove that even those really dumb kids who were held back 3 times eventually do go on to resemble adults and hold down jobs.
April 15th, 2009 at 10:07 pmb-cup, sure many people believe as you say. Many people believe otherwise, too — that a more progressive tax structure will help recover this nation’s status as a creditor nation, as we were in the nineteen fifties and sixties — when the top tier tax rate went from 91% to around 70%.
But you know what? The people who believe like you describe lost the election. And the economy that they left us is in tatters. So perhaps we shouldn’t pay so much attention to them for a while.
Maybe this is what they’re protesting — that we’re ignoring them and they don’t like it, so they’re throwing a temper tantrum. Ya think?
April 15th, 2009 at 10:10 pmbackup Says:
ralph. what’s so illegitimate about people protesting taxation or increased deficit spending that they believe will result in more taxation?
Nothing illegitimate about it. But if well-organized think tanks and media outlets are creating the events, and then saying they’re not creating the events, that’s illegitimate.
April 15th, 2009 at 10:13 pmB-Cup when you say “many people” is that like the Faux news “some people say” line?
Can you be more specific many people seem like the majority but I’ve a feeling they’re a very small uneducated crowd I mean if someone tells any sane person that the top 2% rich crowd will get a tax increase they’ll be glad or they won’t even care.
Didn’t Obama campaign on raising the top 2% taxes?
April 15th, 2009 at 10:18 pmOh Hello TP it’s been a while since I’ve time
April 15th, 2009 at 10:20 pmThere are two reasons for a government to spend money. They can spend money to help people or, they can spend money to kill people.
The first instance shows instant results. All one needs to do is count the bodies.
It’s harder to quantify the results of spending to extend lives. And, since the 28%ers are not very bright, it’s easier to fund killing people than it is to fund helping people.
April 15th, 2009 at 10:27 pmAnd the rest of the corporate broadcast media is tripping over themselves to cover this nonevent. Never mind that they conveniently ignored the hundreds of thousands to millions who protested prior to the Iraq invasion. Silence on all fronts at that time. And all the other huge protests in DC on several occasions during the Bush years. But a few hundred uninformed ditto heads? They are all over it. That’s journalistic integrity.
April 15th, 2009 at 10:32 pm@62 backup
expecting it after a tax break.
April 15th, 2009 at 10:40 pmbackup Says:
Wayne. Many people, not just the rich, don’t believe that rich people should be taxed more, just because they are rich. Many people believe that increased taxes will not be limited to just the rich.
Let me stop right you there for a moment. First of all, there is logical foundation on which to base this belief. Actually, what these people fear is that they will be rich one day, and they don’t like the idea that they would have to pay more in taxes. (Of course, the reality is that many of these people think they’ll get rich, not through their own hard work, but through luck, like hitting the lottery or having a rich relative die and leave them money.) What they fail to understand is the fact that, at the levels of income we’re talking about taxing more, they would still have ten or more times as much money as they have now. To want more is simply selfish greed, which is not in the best interests of society as a whole.
I believe that if we increase the tax burdens on U.S. corporations, they will be less competitive with foreign corporations in an increasingly global marketplace.
You do understand that it is profits that get taxed, not gross income, and not net operating expenses. I really don’t understand what taxes have to do with “competitiveness” except, again, maybe to the selfishly greedy who don;t want to pay any taxes.
And there is support for the idea that many of the rich are not born millionaires, but small business owners that provide many of the jobs that fuel our economy.
Again, at the levels of income we’re talking, the vast majority of them are born into wealth. And, once more, we’re talking about profits from those businesses being taxed, not gross income. The businesses that would have to pay more in taxes are really not all that small if they’re making those kinds of profits.
These ideas could be misinformed, but many truly believe them.
They are misinformed, and believing those ideas doesn’t make them any more valid as points of debate.
I think the Obama administration could use the tact that they won the election and will simply do the things they want to do without regard to those that disagree.
That’s what winning an election means. It’s what the Republicans did when they controlled everything.
Or they can attempt to change the beliefs that I think motivate the tea partiers and try to co-opt them.
for clarification: co-opt the opposition, not the beliefs.
Why co-opt beliefs that are wrong? Just because someone believes something that is false doesn’t mean you have to adopt that belief yourself to get their support. You need to educate them on the facts, and then present a rational, fact-based analysis of why we have to do what we have to do. Now, part of the problem (in reality) is that some of these people of whom we’ve been speaking do not know how to think critically, nor how to use proper logic to start with a premise and reach a conclusion. That is the only reason it will be difficult. How’s that expression go?
April 15th, 2009 at 10:41 pm“None so blind as those who will not see.”
Correction:
s/b
Let me stop right you there for a moment. First of all, there NO is logical foundation on which to base this belief.
Sorry if I confused anyone.
April 15th, 2009 at 10:42 pm“ralph. what’s so illegitimate about people protesting taxation or increased deficit spending that they believe will result in more taxation?”
The tax cuts.
April 15th, 2009 at 10:44 pmOne last time.
First of all, there is NO logical foundation on which to base this belief.
I’ll shut up and go away now. Thank you.
Visit TheZoo.
Vote Quimby.
April 15th, 2009 at 10:49 pmKeith Olbermann just showed a clip of Cavuto at one of the bagging party`s. Cavuto was off camera asking someone how many people were estimated to be there,the guy told him it was about 5000 people. Nine minutes later Cavuto went on air and said they were expecting 5000 people, but theres double or even triple that right now. When will the lying fox noise machine stop its Bullsht.
April 15th, 2009 at 11:33 pmCan I get special dispensation to Recommend Wayne’s long post at #91 multiple times? Put an exception in the programming that prevents that or something? Because every time I click into here, I just want to thumbs-up it again. And again. And again. Frankly, it’s starting to drive me nuts that I can’t.
.
sscncturn64 Says:
Keith Olbermann just showed a clip of Cavuto…
I was watching Cavuto earlier, and there were no wide shots the entire time he was there. You couldn’t actually see more than a couple dozen people. Ever. You’d think if there were a decent number, they’d want to pan back once or twice…
April 15th, 2009 at 11:39 pmWayne. do not sweat the corrections. I tried to clarify that Obama shouldn’t co-opt the beliefs, but should try to inform those with oppositional beliefs, change their opinion, and thereby co-opt the opponents.
I think when you tax profits of a corporation it could restrain the company’s stock price and impede it’s access to capital; creating a competitive disadvantage.
It is a perfectly legitimate position to say that Democrats won the election and should do whatever they want. I think Bush and Republicans did that. The only problem with that approach, is that I believe there is a significant moderate center that decides elections. Maybe some of these moderates are sympathetic to the tea party message. It is the right of Democrats to govern however they want. The only jeopardy is if a significant amount of the moderate center feel that the current administration acts heavy handed or strays too far from the mainstream; they might be peeled off sometime in the future.
And I just don’t feel that the lower and middle incomes that support the status quo tax structures really support it because the think they are going to one day hit the lottery. I think that although they are not currently rich or may not become rich, they believe that tax structure is an appropriate balance to get operating revenue for the country (if we spent less) without disincentivizing productivity.
April 15th, 2009 at 11:52 pmI attended a tea party and also viewed the coverage of Cavuto and Beck. Both had wide shots. Trust me, there were thousands of people at these rallies. I’m proud to be an American when these large groups can peacefully demonstrate their discontentment with the mindless spending of this administration. Mindless: a Congress that passes stimulus bills without even reading what they are voting on – Merrill Lynch/AIG bonues … People are just simply pissed off at all those passing enormous burdens on all Americans. Taxes come in many forms. Everyone should be really concerned about their futures.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:01 amNuna:
Please tell us, specifically, what program is “mindless”?
How much will your taxes increase under the Obama budget?
I’m retired. I payed in my whole life and now I’m collecting on my investment. Am I a “freeloader” in your estimation?
April 16th, 2009 at 12:06 amFox News is propaganda, pure and simple.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:16 amDon’t know what you would call Congressmen who vote on a stimulus bill without reading it other than mindless. Perhaps you would call them irresponsible. Perhaps you would label them something worse.
“Freeloaders”. If you’re old enough to be retired, you should know what a freeloader is. Perhaps you would refer to them as those who expect entitlements at the cost of others.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:16 amAnd by the way, Cavuto is the official term for regurgitated scrotum.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:18 amActually, Fox News is very imformative. I stopped watching NBC years ago. Guess I grew out of them and moved on. Don’t agree with everything on Fox, but sure beats the alternatives if ones looking good news coverages. Guess that is why Fox News beats the rest in ratings.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:21 amThese goof balls with the tea bags and their foolishness have gotten ten times more media coverage that the tens of thousands of thoughtful concerned people who knew the war in Iraq was a mistake.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:22 amEven most people, if they are honest, know that Fox News is nothing but a shill for Right Wing positions. It gives the wing nuts ammunition for the watercooler wars as they can’t think of anything to say otherwise.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:24 amJb, you are so silly. Live for the present. Deal with what is going on now. Obama has got his own war now. Do you support it?
April 16th, 2009 at 12:25 amThe wealthiest 3% percent are the freeloaders in this country. They only want to take from this country.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:26 amI did not say anything about Obama or any wars other than the watercooler wars.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:28 ambackup Says:
Maybe some of these moderates are sympathetic to the tea party message.
I was with you right up until that bit. These “tea party” people are fringe extremists. That much is obvious. They have no single, coherent message, no answers, and are hooked on cheap theatrics. If you can’t tell the difference between a moderate and a lunatic, then you’re probably one of the lunatics.
.
backup Says:
I think that although they are not currently rich or may not become rich, they believe that tax structure is an appropriate balance to get operating revenue for the country (if we spent less) without disincentivizing productivity.
Obama’s just talking about going back to the pre-Bush tax structure. You know, the one that was in place during the long period when more people were doing a lot better. But this is the kind of talk that leads to solutions, let’s keep it up.
As for spending, I’d like to see us be able to spend less. The European socialist countries do alright, but I believe it’s just part of the American experiment to try to minimize that. However, that doesn’t mean that we have to minimize spending at all times no matter what. Sometimes we will need to spend more for good reasons, sometimes less. Bush had no good reasons, but he over-spent anyway. Obama has to spend, or else we’re looking at the depression over again. That’s not his fault, it’s the fault of the people who mismanaged the economy preceding him.
If the “center-right” folks would chill out and work with us, then it’s more likely that the current spending increase will be temporary and we can get back to a primarily free-market economy as soon as possible. But if the Republican party continues with their slash-and-burn “with us or against us” political approach, then they very well might push the left into trying to transform the economy into a permanently socialist model.
In short, knock it off, or else.
.
nuna Says:
I attended a tea party and also viewed the coverage of Cavuto and Beck. Both had wide shots.
I watched their coverage. No, they didn’t. No wide shots. You are lying. You are a lying liar.
.
nuna Says:
Don’t know what you would call Congressmen who vote on a stimulus bill without reading it other than mindless.
Except that the details of the bill under discussion were open to the public the entire time. Hell, I read the thing. It’s not like it was submitted overnight for a vote the next morning, like the PATRIOT Act was.
.
nuna Says:
“Freeloaders”. If you’re old enough to be retired, you should know what a freeloader is. Perhaps you would refer to them as those who expect entitlements at the cost of others.
Those would be called right-wingers. People who benefit from a modern, developed society, but who continually complain about paying their fair share for it.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:28 amI thought the topic was the way in which Fox News uses its platform to shape the views and the debate in this country. Silly me, but it looks like Fox news is nothing but a propaganda loudspeaker for the extreme Right Wing.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:31 amnuna Says:
Jb, you are so silly. Live for the present. Deal with what is going on now. Obama has got his own war now. Do you support it?
Which war that he started are you talking about? Are you talking about the pirates?
April 16th, 2009 at 12:32 amJb, whatever. If you think that the wealthiest that provide the jobs are the takers, I guess you don’t know many freeloaders. Besides, who are you to begruge those that have worked hard and achieved monetary success? America wasn’t founded on socialism. They did try it, but some people just didn’t have the ambition to work and freeloaded off the other settlers. The settlers changed the rules and everyone kept the profits of their own labor – capitalism. If you want to live in a socialistic country, I hear England is beautiful and its working real well for them – not.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:34 amMy Representative and Senator both read the stimulus bill and made public statements that proved it. The only people who claimed they hadn’t were those who voted against it.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:36 amGot to go, feed the cats, let the dog out. Parting words that I live by: One way or another, everyone pays their dues.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:36 amWhatever? Yeah, sit by the pool and collect the dividends from Chevron, now that’s hard work…wouldn’t want to have to pay much tax on that hard work. These lazy fat cats wouldn’t know real capitalism if it bit them in the ass.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:38 amDid George Bush pay his dues? No, he was born into the club.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:40 amnuna:
Why have you never answered the simple questions I ask? I can only conclude that you can’t answer them and run off when pressed.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:41 amThis is not Capitalism, its feudalism and 905 of us are serfs and will be all our lives. Those at the top just keep getting richer and more powerful and I guess that’s how the teabaggers like it. Grovel away, fools.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:42 amSo Pete, you’re saying your Congressman actually knew they were voting for Merrill Lynch/AIG bonuses? Interesting. They must be really, really fast readers since the bill was over 1200 pages long and they only had less than 12 hours to read and comprehend it not withstanding any sleep.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:42 amSorry, typo, 905 should read 90%.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:43 amThe cats need feeding.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:45 amWhatever?
April 16th, 2009 at 12:45 amReally? Whatever?
April 16th, 2009 at 12:50 amSome people’s dues get them further than other people’s dues.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:54 amSorry, love to chat all nite, but have responsibilities. Jb, so now you begruge those that were born with a silver spoon in their mouths. So sad. I guess someone in the Bush family worked hard to pass the wealth along. That is exactly what Americans do. There is nothing wrong with that concept. Any money that my husband and I have will be pasted on to our children. You shouldn’t be jealous or envious. Simply work your ass off to make your life better for you and for those that you love. I know that I’ve had to pay my dues in countless ways to get where I am today. I know those that aren’t willing to do the same. They made poor choices. How am I responsible for other peoples actions or inactions? Simply, I’m not and neither are you. You are only responsible for your own actions and the consequences of those actions good and bad. Quite frankly, I was born into poverty. I’m still paying on my college loan. Nothing ever given to me, in fact, been screwed over a few times. But I will never begrude those that work hard, earn their own way (one way or another) and pass it on to their children. That is the American way.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:54 amjb Says:
The cats need feeding.
What is this, Twitter? Knock it off, please.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:57 amFailure is not an objection when you have no place else to go. When you have no lifelines in place to catch you when you fall, you think things through. If you live with a life plan of consistency and persistency, you cannot fail.
Good nite Jb. I hope that I’ve been of some encouragement to you. All I know is, those that don’t succeed, allow themselves to be unsuccessful in their own minds.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:59 amnuna Says:
Jb, so now you begruge those that were born with a silver spoon in their mouths. So sad. I guess someone in the Bush family worked hard to pass the wealth along. That is exactly what Americans do. There is nothing wrong with that concept.
That’s perfectly allowed. But:
1) They don’t get to cry about how hard they work.
2) They should pay their fair share, commensurate with how much they have “won” from the economy.
3) They don’t get to complain about it.
4) Nobody gets to pretend that people who actually work for a living are in the same situation.
The problem is that the current wingnut anti-tax rhetoric violates all 4 of the above stipulations. It amounts to a few rich people getting a bunch of stupid people to foment for policies that benefit those few rich people. You are one of the stupid people in this equation, btw.
.
nuna Says:
I know those that aren’t willing to do the same. They made poor choices. How am I responsible for other peoples actions or inactions? Simply, I’m not and neither are you. You are only responsible for your own actions and the consequences of those actions good and bad.
Sure. But it’s simply better to live in a society that helps them turn around rather than one that abandons them. People with problems (whether of their own making or not) just don’t vanish to bother us no more, they continue to exist. Their continued existence suffering the consequences of those decisions makes the rest of us just a bit poorer. That adds up. The only people who don’t notice that are, by definition, “evil.”
April 16th, 2009 at 1:05 amI have worked hard and fought all my for every scrap for me and my family and I have willingly paid my fair share of taxes. when I hear about multi-millionaires paying money to organize these fake teabag events because they don’t want to pay their fair share of taxes to help make this a better country for all citizens, it makes me mad. It seems rather un-American. Perhaps they should all move to Texas as the Governor down there would rather secede than support out country.
April 16th, 2009 at 1:08 amAlmost as sad as you begrudging those who have to work low wage jobs for a living.
So sad.
You seem to assume that money is always made legitimately, through hard work, and that inherited wealth carries inherited virtue along with it.
In my experience, people who are handed great wealth, like our former President, can very easily grow up without any sense of the value of hard work at all. Inherited wealth is not evil, but it comes with dangers, both to society and to individuals.
That is admirable. But you still seem to assume that great wealth is accumulated only through hard work. That’s a romantic but hopelessly naive notion. Regardless, the wealthy in this nation depend on the protections our society affords them, and they have much greater access to most of them than you or I do. Legal protections, for one thing. They should contribute more of their earnings than they have been. It’s not only just, but it also works better for the whole society. History shows that.
April 16th, 2009 at 1:09 amAgain, a nice, romantic thought, but naive and dangerous. Tragic things happen to people — jobs disappear, medical conditions strike — and where there is no lifeline in place to catch them when they fall, they are destroyed.
But as long as you can console yourself with the thought that your good fortune is entirely the result of your own good planning, and not the result of providence, you’ll sleep quite well, I bet.
And a society with no safety net is a society beset with crime and turmoil.
April 16th, 2009 at 1:13 amDamn, it’s good to see you again, ElBruce. Your insight and eloquence have been missed, my friend.
April 16th, 2009 at 1:15 amBut you still seem to assume that great wealth is accumulated only through hard work. That’s a romantic but hopelessly naive notion.
Let’s throw out some names that wingnuts can understand (aka. vilify). Rockefeller. Kennedy. Get it now?
If you earn all your own money, then you definitely can say you deserve it. If you inherited it, then you might or might not deserve it, based on what you do with your life.
In either case, you got the money because of your (or your parents’) participation in our society. That society has a developed infrastructure, approppriate regulation to prevent cheating and enforce contracts, other regulation to prevent environmental destruction, police protection, fire protection, an educated workforce to work with and employ, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. For all of these things, everybody else is chipping in to pay for.
So for someone to make (or inherit) a great deal of money from it to turn around and complain that they shouldn’t pay very much to maintain it, is – crap. Pure goddamn crap. I can’t think of anything worse.
Actually, yes I can. Instead of just having rich people complain about having to support the economic environment that makes their wealth possible, how about they turn around and “create a grassroots movement” using political think tanks and media outlets to get poor stupid people (who would proportionally benefit from an increased tax on the wealthy) to protest against increased taxes on the wealthy? That would be about as low as it gets.
And that’s exactly what’s going on here.
April 16th, 2009 at 1:25 amEveryone knows Sean is a Conservative. Where is the surprise that Fox news would do so many on-air promos in eight days. April 15, was the day for the Tea Party. Who didn’t get the memo?
April 16th, 2009 at 1:28 amralph the wonder locust Says:
Damn, it’s good to see you again, ElBruce.
Thank you, that’s lovely to hear. I kind of wandered off for a while, thinking incorrectly that our work was done. But it seems the scum are seeping back out from under their rocks recently, so I wearily shouldered my rifle once more and trudged back to the front lines. (just kidding, I love this crap. glee!)
April 16th, 2009 at 1:38 amYou are all probably right. However, I have to live by what I know is right for me. I’m a simple person who was raised to believe that successful people (monetarily speaking) get there by working harder than the rest. So far, it’s worked for me. I’ve never asked for a hand out, even when I desperately needed one. Maybe the norms of society is stacked against the common man, but I guess that we all have to stop putting road blocks in front of ourselves and believe in ourselves and encourage others to do the same. If indeed people really believe that big government with more regulations and controls over our daily lives is the solution, we are all indeed going to fail. Nothing in life in free. Everything has a price. History has shown that when those that have money are taxed their unfair share, jobs evaporate. Even when FDR introduced his socialistic agenda and placed 100% taxes on those who made over $25,000 a year, he stagnated the economy which in turn caused the depression to extend out seven additional years.
Life is unfair. We are not all born equally. So what? Work harder. This will be the first time in history, that our children will have a lower standard of living than their parents. Great legacy. I call that regression, not progression. At least I won’t have to explain to my kids why I didn’t stand up to the nanny state way of thinking.
April 16th, 2009 at 1:40 amHow am I not getting through? There were NO GOVERNMENT safety nets. Only in the last thirty years or so, all these entitlement programs popped up. If you lost your job, you found another one. I’m not being naive cause I lived through it. Don’t make assumptions that you know nothing about.
What I don’t hear anyone complaining about is those who got us in this situation. Why isn’t your anger being directed at Barney Franks and Chris Dodd?
April 16th, 2009 at 1:55 amnuna Says:
——————————————————————————–
I attended a tea party and also viewed the coverage of Cavuto and Beck. Both had wide shots. Trust me, there were thousands of people at these rallies. I’m proud to be an American when these large groups can peacefully demonstrate their discontentment with the mindless spending of this administration. Mindless: a Congress that passes stimulus bills without even reading what they are voting on – Merrill Lynch/AIG bonues … People are just simply pissed off at all those passing enormous burdens on all Americans. Taxes come in many forms. Everyone should be really concerned about their futures.
————–
Sorry, you lost me with “Trust me”.
April 16th, 2009 at 2:17 amnuna Says:
I’m a simple person…
Got it.
.
nuna Says:
…who was raised to believe that successful people (monetarily speaking) get there by working harder than the rest. So far, it’s worked for me. I’ve never asked for a hand out, even when I desperately needed one. Maybe the norms of society is stacked against the common man, but I guess that we all have to stop putting road blocks in front of ourselves and believe in ourselves and encourage others to do the same…
That’s great. You keep on keeping on. I’ll do the same. But let’s all quit making it into a grand romantic “bootstrap” story that doesn’t exist. We’re all working hard and scraping by. We’re going to need to help each other out to get out of this mess. But some of you want to keep everything you make, and not share with others. That’s life, there are a few in every crowd. But quit romanticizing it: you are bad people. You refuse to play nice with others. You don’t want to join the team, but you’ll be glad to share in the win. You still believe in “greed is good.” OK fine, you are what you are. But do not come on here and pretend to be the good guy. You are evil. You fit the precise criteria of the definition of moral evil. So either own it, or knock it the hell off.
.
nuna Says:
If indeed people really believe that big government with more regulations and controls over our daily lives is the solution, we are all indeed going to fail.
We tried deregulating and removing all the controls, and we all failed. As it turns out, you need regulations and controls in a modern economy, much in the same way that you need traffic lights to prevent fatalities. Something to do with a complex economic system involving millions of interactions daily? I don’t know, maybe you don’t believe in traffic lights either.
.
nuna Says:
Even when FDR introduced his socialistic agenda and placed 100% taxes on those who made over $25,000 a year
Link please. I’ve never heard of a 100% tax. That doesn’t even make any damn sense. It’s like saying that FDR made magic cars to stop the dragon infestation.
.
nuna Says:
This will be the first time in history, that our children will have a lower standard of living than their parents.
Link, please. I’m pretty sure that’s happened before. As a matter of fact, I’m extremely certain that the standard of living has decreased before. For example, slowly and steadily over the last 30 years for all workers.
April 16th, 2009 at 2:22 amnuna Says:
What I don’t hear anyone complaining about is those who got us in this situation. Why isn’t your anger being directed at Barney Franks and Chris Dodd?
Yes, those two minority party Senators were personally responsible for completely destroying the mortgage industry. We’ve heard it, and debunked it, before. Barney Frank is apparently fukcing omnipotent, when even with no power whatsoever, he can control multiple industries by fiat. Or something. Because Republicans are apparently nowhere to be found when it turns out all the fukcups happened.
It would be like me blaming everything on Tom DeLay and Newt Gingrich. Sure they’re awful, but it takes a lot more than that to destroy the world. People who aren’t morons understand such concepts. Still follow me?
Didn’t think so.
April 16th, 2009 at 2:30 amThanks, ElBruce.
I took a hiatus to eat, drink and be merry for awhile, but I appreciate your reasoned approach and patience with “nuna”. To my mind anyone who begins their posting telling one and all about their poverty stricken childhood and how they’ve overcome all sorts of obstacles automatically makes them suspect. Many of us have had to deal with hardships thoughout our lives, but someone who wears what they consider to be an extraordinary ability to overcome them on their sleeve always sets off my BS-dar.
In any event, thanks for arguing so eloquently with someone with whom I would have had much less patience and grace.
April 16th, 2009 at 2:39 amThese protests were incredibly peaceful and purposeful. There is nothing to criticize in them and only reasons to applaud them. In indianapolis, several thousand turned-out and conducted themselves very well. News stations blaming each-other have become a disgrace and distraction from the fact that they all are biased and have an agenda.
April 16th, 2009 at 8:18 amDr. Moth Matt Says:
95% of tax payers are receiving a tax cut. Again, are you really this fing stupid? The answer really is appearing to be “yes”.
WHAT?!!! No, no my friend. Returns during tax season do not make-up for increases in capital gains taxes, gasoline, taxes, cigarette taxes, death tax, sales tax, property tax, business tax trhough regulations,etc…the list goes on. What are you smoking?? Fanboy with no brain, makes me ashamed to have fought for you.
April 16th, 2009 at 8:27 amElBruce Says:
It would be like me blaming everything on Tom DeLay and Newt Gingrich. Sure they’re awful, but it takes a lot more than that to destroy the world. People who aren’t morons understand such concepts. Still follow me?
Uh, I think so? But also, people who aren’t morons would blame DeLay and Gingrich as equally as Frank, Dodd, et al. The goal is to be objective and not tolerate failure. Shame on you for being a democratic pundit. If this is your cause then your argumanets have no further purpose in regard to truth.
April 16th, 2009 at 8:31 amElBruce, post 139;
bravo
April 16th, 2009 at 8:39 amnuna #137 said; Only in the last thirty years or so, all these entitlement programs popped up.
but what about
#136; when FDR introduced his socialistic agenda
?
Got to go
Sorry, love to chat all nite, but have responsibilities.
Good nite Jb
why do wingnuts always feel the need to announce their departure?
April 16th, 2009 at 8:49 amyelena amorbus alternatus vee Says:
nuna #137 said; Only in the last thirty years or so, all these entitlement programs popped up.
but what about
#136; when FDR introduced his socialistic agenda
Please tell me that have not just postulated that these two items are indeed mutually exclusive?! The only point you made in this post is that you fail to make a point!
April 16th, 2009 at 9:13 amOf course, simply naming a bunch of taxes does nothing to prove your point that any of those have gone up, without specific information related to each, with relevant links. Especially when you try to extend your bogus point with an et cetera following something as amorphous as “business tax trhough regulations”.
Your use of the inaccurate term “death tax” rather than the more properly descriptive “estate tax” (after all, most people who die are not subject to this tax — only those with significant estates) further reduces your credibility. As does your casual dismissal of the good doctor’s character and reasoning ability, based on your self-serving re-imagining of the argument he advanced.
Other than that, you did fine.
April 16th, 2009 at 10:40 amWhat safety net programs have popped up in the last thirty years?
Safety net programs like Social security date to the FDR era, as yelena pointed out. Unemployment insurance was also established in the thirties under Roosevelt.
I think nuna’s argument that “Only in the last thirty years or so, all these entitlement programs popped up” can safely be dismissed as fantasy, and yelena’s point is not pretty clearly made, despite your desire to dismiss it.
April 16th, 2009 at 10:45 amralph the wonder locust
April 16th, 2009 at 12:21 pmYou are correct in that I have not given specific examples. Firstly, though, their is the increase in income tax for top earners…over $250K. This is among numerous examples, and I only give intellectual credibility to readers to understand that increases in spending lead to increases in taxes. It would reqiore a dissertation to speak truly of our tax structure. You live in NY or Cali? Check them out. For the last 30 years…hmmm, social security has gone up, as has the poverty level and issuance of medicare, medicaid and foodstamps. Further, there has been a dramatic reduction in taxes to lower income families, funded by wealthier, harder-working americans. FICA was at one time 2%, income taxes at 3% and 5%. To seriously conjecture that taxes have not gone up is unproductive. Please site sources to the contrary, else I may attack you as you have done me. Sounds silly, doesn’t it?
Hey slip-shod, got any REAL links or REAL facts?
Didn’t think so.
You tell Ralph to “site sources” yet you have none. Thanks for playing, though.
April 16th, 2009 at 3:30 pmHey slip-shod, it took me all of 5 minutes to refute your nonsense.
Top federal income tax rate in 1944-45: 94%
Top federal income tax rate in 1952-53: 92%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States#History_of_top_rates
Got google?
April 16th, 2009 at 3:39 pmwoody
April 16th, 2009 at 8:56 pmYou make fun and claim its non-sense. Clever. Well, here, your stats means nothing. How about tax burden as % of GDP? Can we agree that this would most accurately reflect the take of gov? OK then. 1992 = 17.6%, climbed throughout the 1990’s to reach a record high in 2001 at 20.9%, then fell to a 50 year low in 2004 at 16%, then climbed ever since to 18.9% (as of 2007). This graph…http://www.heritage.org/research/taxes/images/WM1628-chart1-lg.jpg provides a wonderful and clearly contrite picture of how large our government has become since the dates you mentioned. Shame, isn’t it. I could ’source’ all day, but I fear you would never be satisfied. Also, my ending last time was a little sarcasm.
OK Pat obviously senile dementia has set in. Time to see the nice young men that will need to take care of you soon.burun estetigi rent a car arac kiralama
April 18th, 2009 at 5:14 amsac ekimi
OK Pat obviously senile dementia has set in. Time to see the nice young men that will need to take care of you soon.burun estetigi rent a car arac kiralama
April 18th, 2009 at 5:15 amsac ekimi