Tea Party events coming April 15 to PTC and Newnan

This time last year a small handful of people in Fayette and Coweta counties decided to mirror similar efforts planned across America by protesting their dissatisfaction with the federal government at Tea Party rallies on April 15. Hundreds attended the local rallies.

Now with local mailing lists totaling a few thousand, the South Atlanta Tea Party Patriots, the Coweta Tea Party and the Fayette/Coweta 9.12 Patriots will be holding events again this year on April 15 in Peachtree City and Newnan.

The Peachtree City event will be held from 12-1:30 p.m. at Drake Field adjacent to Peachtree City Hall and Lake Peachtree. The event will feature radio talk show host Herman Cain.

The 2010 Tax Day Rally in Newnan will be held at Greenville Park from 12-1:30 p.m. The rally will kick off with live music followed by speaker Virginia Galloway, state Director for Americans for Prosperity, and comments from State Representative Billy Horne, State Senator Mitch Seabaugh and local businessman Rob Brass. Attendees are encouraged to bring tasteful protest signs and flags.

Fayette County’s South Atlanta Tea Party is the new name for the Southern Crescent Tea Party Patriots. The non-profit South Atlanta Tea Party is a grassroots non-partisan group concerned with the direction the country is headed. For more information on the organization and transportation to the rally later April 15 in Atlanta visit www.southatlantateaparty.org

The Coweta Tea Party is a non-partisan, non-profit social welfare organization dedicated to furthering the common good and general welfare of the people of the United States. CTP furthers this goal by educating the public and promoting the principles of fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government and free markets. CTP has not endorsed candidates for public office. Visit www.cowetateaparty.org for information on the organization and the Atlanta rally April 15.

The Fayette-Coweta 9.12 Patriots is a grassroots non-partisan organization of fiscally and socially conservative citizens dedicated to returning America to its founding constitutional principles. For more information visit www.fc912patriots.com.

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
White House caught altering job numbers

Just another LIE, courtesy of the Obama adminitstration.

White House Caught Altering Baseline Projection by 7 MILLION Jobs

An inconvenient truth, at least for the Obama Administration, is that once upon a time, in their January 2009 Romer/Bernstein Report they told America that without their stimulus there would be 133.9 million jobs. That’s right, in order to make it look like their stimulus has “created or saved” 2.8 million jobs, the Obama Administration first had to whack 7 million jobs from their previous estimates.

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
Bacon, that's why

I would be in favor of across the board cuts....pick a percentage that would work, and do it. No favorites...something much change, or the debt will be too much to bear in the future.

I agree that getting everyone to agree on targeted cuts would be almost impossible.

Obviously, this post went in the wrong spot. Oh well....

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Jeff in answer to your post "Re-Educate yourself"

I can not pull up your post but here is the answer from Forbes..

http://blogs.forbes.com/energysource/2010/04/07/exxon-says-it-does-pay-u...

You are both factually accurate and inaccurate as well. Exxon does pay Taxes in the US.

So I was correct..

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
CPBacon

There you go again not seeing the forest due to those trees!

Stop with the class warfare, down with class bigots!

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
PTC Observer
PTC Observer wrote:

There you go again not seeing the forest due to those trees!

Stop with the class warfare, down with class bigots!

PTC Observer, perhaps in the future you could use the "quote" button to let us see exactly what it is you are whining about.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - seems

we've been censored?

too bad, a dialog on this subject is well worth having.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - oops

I didn't go to page two, the string is getting quite long. I will reply.

Webmaster
Webmaster's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/11/2009
Censoring

All comments are run through a spam filtering service when they're submitted. As long as it passes that, it goes straight onto the site - if it fails, it goes into a queue and I either delete it or give it the go ahead on the off chance it isn't really spam. Some very, very short legitimate posts wind up there - particularly when the post is just a title and a link to something.

The only posts I've been deleting at this point are double / triple posts. Exceptions apply to the feedback forum - I try to keep a slightly tighter reign there since your comments, to some extent, are used to determine what I spend my time working on.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Webmaster

Thanks for the feedback and sorry for the mistake.

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
Crash the Tea Party

If you see any hateful, racist, or nazi type signs at any of the Tea Parties, they are probably being held by a cowardly, mindless, liberal that can't stand opposition to any of their ideas. Keep that in mind when MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS and the rest of the Obamamedia televise them.

Welcome to Crash the Tea Party

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
kawfi

I've been seeing those "hateful, racist. or nazi type signs" for a long time, haven't you?

Many are misspelled and mis-planned for room on the sign. Drop-outs, maybe?

Looks like FOX stations is the only one you left out! What major newspaper is for the TEAs?
Anyway I have heard Sarah say she was going to fire all them taxers in Washington anyway.

Your small print explanation of Patrick Henry's speech was for the blacks in slavery was it not?

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
Bonkie

No doofus, it was for the people desiring to be freed from the tyranny of England – Not unlike the Tea Party movement that desires to be freed from the tyranny of a corrupt, irresponsible government whose only interest is in more power over every American.

Like I said, those signs were held up by libs -

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
.

.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Educate yourself...

http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/30/pf/taxes/who_pays_taxes/index.htm

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Most people think they pay too much to Uncle Sam, but for some people it simply is not true.

The "RICH" pay the most TAX Bonkers.. They pay their fair share and then some..

Here's your Corporations..

"Exxon Mobil paid $32.361 billion in taxes in the second quarter, which works out to $4,114 in taxes per second."

"Our tax code and the fact that we tax our corporations at the second highest rate internationally may have something to do with out trade deficits and the loss of good paying jobs in this country. So yes, when we tax a corporation they bill us for the tax through domestic sales or sell us merchandise made in another country where the bulk of the profit is taxed at the other country’s favorable rate and the taxes go to the other country."

"U.S. politicians disagree about how much income tax the government should levy on corporations. Currently the rate is 35%, but most foreign governments have set their rates below the U.S. level.

"The U.S. corporate tax rate stayed the same while foreign countries have drifted down, which increases the incentive for companies to report income in other countries," said Toder. "If the U.S. drops the rate to 30% but closes other tax loopholes, that may ultimately generate more tax revenue for the government."

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
Re-educate yourself, Exxon doesn't pay taxes in the US

The stated corporate tax rate of 35% does not take into account deductions and tax credits. BusinessWeek did an analysis of corporate taxes and the combined average rate for all companies in the S&P 500 over a 5 year period was 26%.

The Taxman Barely Cometh

CATO reports that the average corporate rate in the European Union is now 32.5 percent, down from 38.2 percent in 1996.

As for Exxon and US taxes, you'd better recheck your figures. Exxon paid $35 billion last year worldwide. Forbes Magazine broke it down and you know what Exxon's US income tax was. Zero. Exxon owed no US taxes in 2009.

What The Top U.S. Companies Pay In Taxes

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
Lindsey: Exxon's taxes

Exxon alternates with Walmart as the largest Fortune company.

They have been having income of about 500,000,000.000 per year and paying taxes of about $100,000,000,000.

Now you know why they say, "drill baby, drill?"

There are however few such tax-paying corporations. People pay most of the taxes.

By the way that is 20% they pay net in taxes! Not 35% as some say!

There are so many on here who use bad "facts" to win elections. We are the richest country in the world by far.

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
Taxed Enough Already TEA)

Lindsey:
"People (not corporations) "think they pay too much tax." You hit the nail on the head! $1.00 per year would be too much.

Poor oil companies!

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Hey Bonker$

Repeat after me....drill, baby, drill.

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
OK, I will

Drill baby, drill, drill and spout.
Make the earth hollow,the sky black.
Sarah wouldn't know drills from isotopes.
But "yabetcha" she knows pots with a crack.

The longer we suck out oil and use it up,
The longer we delay a renewable replacement.
Meanwhile we will cover the truth with muck.
It is as if the oil was there, heaven sent!

The solution we see by in the sky every day,
Is all we need as long as it functions there.
Of course if we blot the sky and use delay,
But as long as it works now why do I care?

Now that we are going to visit planet Mars,
The best thing we could do is take no cars!

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Gee Bonker$

And the president gave the green light to drill. I wonder why?

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
Cyclist: why?

Easy enough!
The same reason he allowed the Bush Administration's bailouts to continue---there was no other choice, the situation had been allowed to become almost catastrophic.

Same with oil. Some new drilling must be done until other methods of energy are on line.

There are those in power who operate on reaction and then there are those who plan ahead. Same reason we are going to Mars and not back to the moon, just in order to save a few NASA jobs now. There will be twice that many jobs over the next 10-15 years at NASA. About time for some "thinkers," like Jefferson and Roosevelt. We have had enough BS and greed for a long time.

!

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
I understand Bonker$

I'm not satisfied with this president either. HeHe.

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
Taxes: up or down?

The only tax increases of significance for working people since 2005 (people working hourly, on a salary, or executives) are LOCAL and state taxes for property owned , sales taxes, etc.
I suppose we can't count increases in medical expenses into this stupid argument?

The categories are simple: 10%;15%;25%;28%;33%;35%
Everyone gets about $18,700 (or more) for deductions and exemptions (for 2).

So up to $14,600 you pay no federal taxes except SS.
Up to $59,400 (over $14,600) less your E & D of 18,700, you pay 15% tax.
Up to $119, 500 (over $59,400) less your E & D you pay 25%.
Up to $182,800 (over $119,500) less your E & D you pay 28%

If you go up to the next category of $326,450, I have no sympathy for you 33% less......

Of course if you donated any Picasso paintings you probably didn't pay any!

Few Corporations pay much tax anyway due to a million ways not to.
Small businesses usually make no profit after deducting their own salaries and those of the family.

I'm a little fed up with many saying Federal taxes are killing them above what they were. Get on your "Locals."

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
Kawfi

By the way Patrick Henry was given six slaves by his second father-in-law for marrying his daughter. He made all of his money from marriages---he was a business failure.
His good friend Thomas Jefferson probably had more slaves total than did Henry!
So what did he know about freedom for humans? No matter he would have to have worked himself and hired help for his farm if they (his slaves) were free!
I would change my saying if I were you.

Anyway as a high gentry person, by marriage, he had time to run for president. He however might have had more principles than old Benjamin.

We have got to get away from referring to those "founding Fathers" so much. It is 225 years later! Why not emulate Solomon instead, he had hundreds of wives and thousands of concubines. OK, that's Old Testament, how about Saul the tax collector? (Wasn't he later Paul?)

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
Kawfi: you have to be one of those TEAS

Either real thick or flat out ignore facts.

You know well that I know when Patrick Henry served our nation and it was long before the slaves were freed..my point was of course that he cared not at all about all of the slaves we had then in this country and was talking
about himself being what he describes as free! If one of us is not free then none of us are free.
President Obama is no Tyrant. He was elected a little over a year ago by a large majority of voters. Would tyrants want 40 million health insured! No.

lion
lion's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2005
Tea Party Confusion

The poor tea partiers. They may mean well but they are so confused or misinformed.

President Obama cut taxes for 98% of working families and individuals in 2009 and 99% of working families and individuals in Georgia in 2009. These tax cuts saved those Americans an average of $1,158 on their 2009 tax returns (Citizens for Tax Justice)

A CBS NEWS/New York times poll reported that only 2% of those who support the "tea party" movement think taxes have been decreased. I must assume that most of the tea party folks had incomes over $250,000 so did not get a tax reduction this year.

The Tea Party claims that one of its goals is to "educate" the public.

I think they need to get rid of their "I hate President Obama and everything he does" blinders and educate themselves.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Lion I forgot this the other day

The only confused one here is you and here is why..

A TAX CUT would be as I said a reduction of the tax percentage owed..

Now to use a personal example.

My Weekly payroll check has not changed at all from Jan 09 to Jan 10..
So if I had received a TAX CUT then that payroll check would have increased by that percentage. No I don't make $250k either..

Now I filed My TAXES.. My ACCOUNTANT applied the "MAKING WORK PAY TAX CREDIT" to my Tax return. I had him remove the TAX CREDIT and looked at the amount of return.. it equaled only $127.00 difference.

So in reality I received a TAX CREDIT or BENEFIT of only $127.00. I got more under Bush's real TAX CUTS.. but I digress.

You see Lion it's a word game.. just like factcheck.org said it was.. People like you spread the disinformation and hope it sticks. The uninformed amongst us will swallow it.. The rest of us not too much..

lion
lion's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2005
Lindsey and $127

You paid $127 less in taxes because of President Obama's policies.

You should say simply and politely: "Thank you President Obama."

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Let's see getting beat with a baseball bat

or run over by a bus.. Which do I choose.. Well I guess the Bat is not as bad.. Thanks President Obama..

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
One hundred twenty seven dollars?

If you are telling the truth (and given your posting history, this is rather questionable), there are three possible reasons you only got a $127 tax credit:

1. Your adjusted gross income was only $2048.00 for the year, you didn't meet the minimum income threshold, so you got a credit equal to 6.2% of your earnings.
2. Your adjusted gross income was $183,500, in which case you exceeded the $150,000 maximum income limit and your credit was reduced 2% for every dollar over $150,000.
3. You have an incompetent accountant.

The above assumes married filing jointly status. If you are single the max income limit is $75,000 so your AGI was $108,500.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
No dummy re-read.. Snif you still have issues

I did not say I got a $127.00 tax credit.. I said the difference in taxes using the "Making work pay" TAX CREDIT applied and then left out was only $127.

You have not changed.. You are still an idiot and an A$$..

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Outlandish claims

When you make outlandish claims ("Bush is a Progressive!" "Republicans are Liberals!" "The anti-abortion bill actually requires abortions!") over a long period of time, you tend to lose credibility in many peoples' eyes.

So keep up the steady stream of name calling and RANDOM CAPITALIZATION, perhaps people won't notice your problems with telling the truth if you bluster enough.

Like JeffC said, you'd rather lie than admit that President Obama cut your taxes. And you go full yellow pajamas when people notice your lack of honesty and integrity.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Sniffle.. Uhh so if I tell the truth but you don't think it is

then in your view I lie???

Do you want to poll the folks on here? You did that once and LOST (oops sorry random capitalization)so do you?

I proved to you that Abortion was in the bill.. Just because you refuse to acknowledged you were wrong does not make me a liar.. You used to call those that refused to admit they were wrong "COWARDS" (oops sorry again).

Tax credits are not Tax Cuts.. that is a fact. You can choose to ignore it. But then who is the one that has issues with truth Sniffle?

definition-Tax Credit
A credit against tax owed. Tax credits are subtracted from the tax owed, unlike tax deductions, which are subtracted from taxable income. Tax credits allow the government to encourage certain behaviors. Examples of tax credits are those that are allowed for people with disabilities, child care expenses, and the costs of adopting a child.

definition-Tax Cut
The act of reducing taxation.
Freeonlinedictionary..

Notice which has the easiest explanation. You can argue semantics.. You can even argue which is best.. But by claiming Tax Credits are the same as Tax Cuts then you are being dishonest.

If you cannot understand the difference or choose to intentionality confuse the two then you should look in the mirror for who has issues with the truth.

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Factually Incorrect, Liendsy

Do you really want to revisit this?

Spin it any way you want, but the underlying fact remains:

There is no taxpayer funding of abortions under the recently enacted health care reform legislation, with the exception of rape, incest and/or mother's life in danger (the same as the Hyde amendment).

Your claims to the contrary have no basis in fact.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Sarah Palin/cpb

Sarah Palin for President 2012-2013½

I don't think she could stand the 'heat' that long. Will quit again if given the opportunity.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Well fatback..it's open to interpretation

Many experts both agree and disagree on that issue.. The fact that Obama had to sign a EO to cover it clearly indicates what was potentially in the bill.

Again semantics..

Now why would these guys be concerned IF it was a non-issue..?.

"House leaders were still negotiating Monday with the bloc of Democrats concerned about abortion provisions in the legislation, saying that they could lead to public funding of the procedure. After an evening meeting of top House Democrats, Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (Md.) said, "We are making progress," but added that they had not reached an agreement."

"It also claims to ensure that conscience protections under the Church amendments (long-standing statute) and the Weldon appropriations provision “remain intact.” The problem is the Senate bill is not bound by the Hyde amendment restricting abortion funding or the Weldon nondiscrimination provision because those only apply to funds appropriated under the Labor, Health and Human Services (LHHS) appropriations bill."

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
S. Lindsey @ Lion

Lion can't read or reason, stop wasting your time.

He is clearly not to be changed, he was set in concrete in his youth when he joined a union.

He forgot the part about, thou shall not steal.

lion
lion's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2005
Lindsey and taxes

The Citizen has a picture of some of those attending the tea party rally in PTC. Those people look mostly like kindly, senior citizens who have been scared by Fox News, etc. into being terribly anti-government, except that they would not want to give up their Social Security, Medicare, VA benefits, etc. Although I would disagree with them on most issues, I am sure they are nice, polite people with whom I could get along well if we met.

Lindsey, on the other hand, apparently, belongs to the immature wing of the tea party movement. "A$$?" Very childish.

If you do not want the $127, send it back to the U.S. Treasury

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Lion.. How about "Bite Me" now is that adult enough for ya?

I guess sniffles calling me a habitual liar is not.. Oh well thanks for interjecting yourself into it..

I guess if you don't have a logical argument or can Break mine then you do as sniffles usually does.. go negative..

Poor boy come back when you want to play again...

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
SL

You're better than 'bite me'. Right?

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
LOL SL

You'd rather your taxes had gone up than admit that Obama gave you tax cut. A piddling $127 wasn't worth the pain of admitting that you got a break under Obama was it?

I bet we don't hear from Joe. Or if we do, I bet we don't get to see his returns to compare them to the huge increase he will be claiming.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Lindsey - Joe

Your hypocrisy is highlighting your desire to denigrate an administration that you can't stand. There are some cogent issues here - but try to be for real. Many today would welcome a return on their income tax. Too many had no income last year to report.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
DM your lack focus is truly amazing

I guess with you and porky aka sniffle just want to pick and choose certain bits and take them out of context you can make up any argument you desire.

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
S.Lindsey

DM is one of those types that just like to flap their gums because they like the sound of their own voice. (not unlike Obama)

She accuses me of hypocrisy, yet can't even point out anything specific as to what I was being hypocritical about regarding this particular discussion.

She just likes to spout out about stuff that she knows nothing about and thinks because she is old that she is wiser than the rest of us.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Lindsey on DM and others

Lindsey, this is why I didn't bother to respond to her last e-mail to me, I have given up communicating. Facts are simply ignored if they fly in the face of her preconceived vision of "equality" based on the concept of a divided culture. We will never come together if we constantly view others through this lens.

A friend describes this type of exchange as Snoopy talk; it's the best description I can give. It’s a little sad since she is clearly intelligent enough to understand but not inquisitive outside her stereotyped world. And it’s not just DM; there are others here that have their thinking shaped about entitlement.

I think I am also a bit naïve that I could expect to have people on this site that had an open mind to IDEAS based on principles and would be willing to debate them based on FACTS, all in an attempt to discover the TRUTH. Once the idea is engrained into the human mind that it’s ok for the governments to steal and redistribute, we are all lost.

Another thing I have noticed, is that these people are not particularly well read, they can’t point to references that explain in detail their philosophy, they simply provide snippets from quick Google searches or repeat something they heard in school years ago, no original thinking, no ideas, nothing.

If this is the level of discourse in our community, then we, who work every day to produce value for our customers, should simply “shrug”. Let the government do it. Then we'll see if these people can even survive without a handout.

Enough said.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTC Observer

You didn't answer, because you may not know how to deal with ideas that conflict with your own. Come on - how do my ideas about 'equality' differ from yours? Aren't we all products of our 'American' culture? How do you see it as an 'undivided' culture? (Of course race would have nothing to do with your view.)
Nice 'out' - to stop communicating because I am so 'tainted' with unreality. (My assumption from your words.) [Realities can be different for different people - and still be 'real'] Why can't one communicate with one whose views/opinions are different in an intelligent, civil manner? Just asking. No response requested or expected.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTC Observer

Enough said.

Exactly!

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
PTC Observer, speaking of FACTS

Would you mind telling us if your federal taxes rose or fell this year in relation to your income?

Most Americans saw their federal tax liability fall relative to their income last year.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
PTC it shows the level of education of PUBLIC ED..

Government run School education clearly teaches their revisionist view of History. The sad part of it as teachers all they have to do is do a little reading outside of the textbooks but you feed pabulum you get it back from the other end.

Many here do not want a discussion they have their "belief" and that's good enough for them.. Breaking your argument to them means simply saying you are wrong. That means they are right and should you argue THAT then a coward you are. Oh they post as proof that their argument is greater "data" from sites. Once you explore their "proof" that they are right you find that the "Broad of Directors" are clearly biased or agenda driven.. The site has a progressive agenda or merely opinion based data.

Many also have an issue being able to separate "Opinion" from "Fact". It makes me wonder when one of these throws out a link to the Huffington Post as evidence of fact..

November will be the tell.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Lindsey November

True, so true

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Jeff you need to go back aways

and see all the post.. You might get a different context of the argument.
See the original claims of tax cuts and amounts..

Lion Wrote"President Obama cut taxes for 98% of working families and individuals in 2009 and 99% of working families and individuals in Georgia in 2009. These tax cuts saved those Americans an average of $1,158 on their 2009 tax returns (Citizens for Tax Justice)"

or are you like the others claiming.. That tax credits are the same as tax cuts?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Tax cuts

Maybe Lindsey needs a better CPA or he just didn't make that much last year.

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
six of one, half dozen of another....

Liendsey,when Joe Sixpack pays less federal income tax this year than he did last year, he's not going to be too concerned as to whether it was the result of "tax credits" or "tax cuts".

He'll leave that hair-splitting minutiae to people like you.

Now tell us again how a $127 tax credit is actually a tax increase if you squint just right.

yardman3387
yardman3387's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/12/2009
Oh boy!

I never realized how much I missed the old tete-a-tete between those who think they know something and those who really DO know something.

carbonunit52
carbonunit52's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/05/2008
yardman

Hey homey,

Glad to see you on here. Has this been a crazy year so far or what?

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
yard, you old goat....

it's good to see you are back!!!!!

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Lion -

you just have to be a union guy......

lion
lion's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2005
PTC Observer and union

Well, you called me out as a union guy--I guess that is one of lowest forms of life here in the South

I did belong to a union--the Teamsters-- for two weeks in the summer of 1963. I guess that shaped my views for life.

Nevertheless, you got an Obama tax cut this year unless you made over $250,000. If you made that much, you deserve congratulations but not sympathy. No need for you to be angry.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
So Lion

I guess your mind was made up in your youth?

There’s nothing like advocating stealing from those that are successful.

We certainly wouldn't want to incent success in our country.

We will simply corrupt our youth, but I guess that's where we started.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
uh.. I guess you failed to read the FACTCHECK.ORG article

but don't let something as trivial as facts interfere with your STORY..

47% of TAX FILERS do not pay taxes.. So they did not get a tax cut they got a welfare check.. and a tax credit is not a tax cut..but what the heck.. Semantics right?

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
*

*

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Citizens for Tax Justice.. Let's look at them shall we

Their Board of Directors:
http://www.ctj.org/about/board.php
AFL-CIO, ACORN, UAW, Community Organizers and Yes people we have a winner.. a SOCIAL JUSTICE Worker..

And another winner it's a PROGRESSIVE Group who want to re-distribute wealth. Well how very progressive of them..

http://www.ctj.org/fed_pub_news/payingforhealthcare.php

Obviously an unbiased group..

Please try harder Lion you guys don't even make me work hard anymore..

Factcheck.org

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/02/fact-checking-obamas-speech/

Tax Cuts for 95%?
Obama said his stimulus program provides a tax cut for "95 percent of working households" and later said that a cut would go to 95 percent of "working families." That calls for some explanation. The key words are "working" and "cut."
He’s referring to the "making work pay" refundable tax credit, which is only available to workers. As we pointed out previously on The FactCheck Wire, there would be no credit for retirees or those who are unemployed. A Tax Policy Center analysis found that a more modest 75.5 percent of all households would benefit, whether their members are working or not.
It is also questionable whether all of the tax refunds can properly be called "tax cuts." The credit is refundable and, therefore, is going to many who earn so little that they pay no federal income taxes in the first place. The White House calls them tax cuts, but the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office officially scores the bill’s refundable credits under "direct spending."

A TAX CREDIT is not a TAX CUT Lion.. A TAX CUT is a reduction of the amount or percentage of TAXES you owe based on your income.. A TAX CREDIT is simply a EXEMPTION one can use to off-set your TAX BURDEN.

AN EXEMPTION CAN BE REMOVED AT ANYTIME AND IN FACT THIS IS A ONE TIME ONLY CREDIT.. So you are absolutely incorrect in your statement.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Online
Joined: 01/18/2007
"Making Work Pay" certainly did

nothing for me as a retiree. Both my tax liability and my tax refund were very close to last year.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Lindsey - sooooo

It just goes to prove that if you don't have the facts, you can just go make them up. Better you can get a "group" to make them up for you!!

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
PTC.. if they can't get it from the Huffington Post

then it didn't happen..

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Liberals/Progressives

Since a vast majority in this discussion claim Conservative values, please share with me how you divide 'liberals' from 'progressives'. Thanks
(Definitions from Dictionary.com)

lib·er·al
   Show Spelled[lib-er-uh l, lib-ruh l] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2.
(often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3.
of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4.
favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5.
favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6.
of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7.
free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8.
open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
9.
characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.
10.
given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.
11.
not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
12.
of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.
13.
of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.
–noun
14.
a person of liberal principles or views, esp. in politics or religion.

pro·gres·sive
   Show Spelled[pruh-gres-iv] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, esp. in political matters: a progressive mayor.
2.
making progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods, etc.: a progressive community.
3.
characterized by such progress, or by continuous improvement.
4.
(initial capital letter ) of or pertaining to any of the Progressive parties in politics.
5.
going forward or onward; passing successively from one member of a series to the next; proceeding step by step.
6.
noting or pertaining to a form of taxation in which the rate increases with certain increases in taxable income.
7.
of or pertaining to progressive education: progressive schools.
8.
Grammar. noting a verb aspect or other verb category that indicates action or state going on at a temporal point of reference.
9.
Medicine/Medical. continuously increasing in extent or severity, as a disease.
–noun
10.
a person who is progressive or who favors progress or reform, esp. in political matters.
11.
(initial capital letter ) a member of a Progressive party.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Dm hard to label but...

Liberals tend toward BIG GOVERNMENT and show a lack of personal responsibility towards others. Liberals believe the Government for the most part is a benevolent organization who "Just wants to help their fellow man"

I use this to explain the difference between Libs and Conservatives..

A Liberal will give a man a fish to feed him for a day...

A Conservative will teach him to fish so he can feed himself..

Now Progressives.. Well contrary to what Megan McCain thinks it not all about "Like Progress and stuff"... unless you think progressing towards Socialism is the right direction.

Progressives are by their very nature Socialist. FDR and Woodrow Wilson are fine examples of Progressives. But then again so is Bush and McCain.

Obama is a Progressive.

Progressives believe in re-distribution of wealth. You know spreading the Wealth around as Obama said it..and Big Government much like Liberals only Liberals generally do not believe Government should Nationalize private Industry.

Maxine Waters said it best.."And guess what this liberal would be all about? This liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about basically taking over and the government running all of your companies." She said to a bunch of Oil Executives. She is a Progressive.

Progressives believe that privately owned companies could never be made to serve the public interest. Therefore, the federal government should acquire ownership and Nationalize all Wealth. We are seeing that with GM and Chrysler as well as the Banks..

There are many nuances of each some not all bad but most not what we would call American Free Market Capitalism.

References:
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0331-22.htm
"It's time to break a taboo and place the word "socialism" across the top of the page in a major American progressive magazine. Time for the left to stop repressing the side of ourselves that the right finds most objectionable."

http://www.newsweek.com/id/183663/page/2
"Bush brought the Age of Reagan to a close; now Obama has gone further, reversing Bill Clinton's end of big government. "

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Lindsey

I'll look at your references. What would Conservatives have done to begin to turn the economy around?

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
DM

I don't speak for anyone but myself.. However with that said..

Study the "Forgotten Depression of 1920" Have you ever heard of the Depression other than the 1930's? Doubt it why.. Because generally CONSERVATIVE philosophies where brought to bear and the Depression lasted only 1 year.. It was actually worse than the 1930's depression but what made it "Great" where the Progressive programs instituted that made the depression last for a decade..

A slashed Budget.. Government REDUCTION.. and FISCAL responsibility..Fixed it before it became the "GREAT" depression.. Corporate greed and Big Government created the depression in the 30's and the Great Society made it a tragedy.

Here is some info:

The experience of 1920–21 reinforces the contention of genuine free-market economists that government intervention is a hindrance to economic recovery. It is not in spite of the absence of fiscal and monetary stimulus that the economy recovered from the 1920–21 depression. It is because those things were avoided that recovery came. The next time we are solemnly warned to recall the lessons of history lest our economy deteriorate still further, we ought to refer to this episode – and observe how hastily our interrogators try to change the subject.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/woods/woods125.html

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Lindsey/PTC Observer

One can always find some 'facts' to support their argument. Do you care to check the accuracy of this person's 'paper' for a Business Economics class?
One needs a well-rounded education - exposed to all ideologies in order to make rational decisions/opinions. Are we still in disagreement? I guess so, since the goal here is not a discussion, but indoctrination to YOUR way of thinking. You might not even consider the sources used in this paper - since they are not 'conservative' enough - but it is still important to know what and why others are forming their opinions which may be different from yours. To constantly denigrate one whose opinion is different without giving cogent reasons - is. . . well . . . .telling. The Marist resource is unavailable - but check out the history of this institution. Most persons who studied American History have been exposed to the causes of the great depression - and are not limited to thinking it all began in 1929. . .right? What you considered as the 'fix' - was to some actually the cause. The fix came,according to some scholars, after jobs were created and America went back to work - and a middle class was established. A war-time economy also helped.

The country entered the 1920’s with Warren G. Harding as president. Harding was a Republican as well as a laissez-faire capitalist who advocated policies which reduced taxes and regulation, allowed monopolies to form, and allowed the inequality of wealth and income to reach record levels (Tanner, 3). Harding died in 1923 and Calvin Coolidge continued Harding’s policies of minimal government intervention in the economy and in business. Under Coolidge, the stock market began its “artificial” five year rise, the top tax rate was lowered to 25%, and the Supreme Court made an important ruling which further limited government control over monopolies (Tanner, 8).
In the 1920’s more people invested in the stock market than ever before. Between May 1928 and September 1929, the average prices of stocks rose 40 percent. Stock prices rose so quickly that at the end of the decade, some people became rich overnight by buying and selling stocks (Matthews, 3). People could buy stocks for only a 10% down payment. Between 1920 and 1929 the number of shareowners rose from 4 million to 20 million (Temin, 45). With artificially low interest rates and a booming economy, people and companies invested in over-priced stocks. During 1928 and 1929, the prices of many stocks went up faster than the value of the companies the stocks represented. “It was like pouring gasoline onto a fire-the flames rose up, no lasting fuel was added, but the economy sure looked great” (Matthews, 3).

Bibliography
Matthews, Layth. “What Caused the Great Depression of the 1930’s?” Internet. http://www.shambhala.org. 2002.
Samuelson, Robert. J. “Great Depression.” The Concise Encyclopedia of economics. Internet. http://www.econlib.org. 2002.
Tanner, Neal. “The Easy Life of the ‘20’s Contributed to Great Depression.” Overview: The Great Depression. Internet. http://www.marist.edu/summerscholars. 2002.

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Okay, Lindsey the Budget Cutter...

Okay, Lindsey the Budget Cutter, you've shown us that you can "talk the talk", let's see if you can "walk the walk".

You gave us the usual conservative "talking points": "slashed budget", "Government reduction" and "fiscal responsibility".

Please tell us WHERE you would make budget cuts!

Social Security?
Medicare?
Medicaid?
Defense Spending?
Interest on the public debt?

The above items make up 2/3 of the federal budget right there! LINK

Do you think a politician could get reelected if he cut Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid? Hmmmm?

Tell us.

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
Are you saying NOTHING can be cut?

That's nuts, and one of the reasons the Country is piling up debt at an alarming rate.

Just saying 2/3rds of the budget is off limits, and leaving it at that is one of our biggest problems.

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Difficult...maybe impossible
Spyglass wrote:

That's nuts, and one of the reasons the Country is piling up debt at an alarming rate.

Just saying 2/3rds of the budget is off limits, and leaving it at that is one of our biggest problems.

I'm not saying "NOTHING can be cut", although I will admit it will be extremely difficult to find any common ground regarding items to cut. One man's "waste" is another man's "needed program".

For example, I am of the opinion that the entire SDI Star Wars program is a monument to excess and waste, yet a great many people feel this is an integral part of our national defense.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
All of them

and you're right.. No politician has the nads to do it. Not right now.. That's why it has to be forced on them. November a new crop of FISCAL Conservative leaders with a clear mandate will be sent to DC.. Start reigning in the DEBT.

The debt is killing America.. I am sure you were against Bush's spending why is it now good?

However Sniff.. this is a good place to start..

http://www.thecitizen.com/node/2045

Why do we give MILLIONS in agriculture to family's with annual incomes of over $200k???

$146 MILLION to Federal Employees for upgrades to 1st class because they felt they deserved the PERK?

Washington spends $92 billion on corporate welfare (excluding TARP) versus $71 billion on homeland security.

Washington spends $25 billion annually maintaining unused or vacant federal properties.

Government auditors spent the past five years examining all federal programs and found that 22 percent of them -- costing taxpayers a total of $123 billion annually -- fail to show any positive impact on the populations they serve.

WE could easily start here.. and in fact we will.

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
Lindsey: cuts

You speak as if all of that money is spent in Washington. D.C.--in the ghettos or somewhere!

The TEA party is a fake-out organization for the republicans who were bigger spenders than the democrats! Once elected they will vote republican---I imagine a few will be elected.

Now as to cutting the spending:
Agriculture---Georgia gets more than their share of federal money as a support to Georgia agriculture! I'm just sure they will allow you to cut that!

First Class plane tickets for some Federal employees: again, Georgia has as many as nearly any state. That is about 1500 round trip average flights at first class. (which averages about double the SRO seats!)
That allows 15 flights per year for 1000 federal execs. There are that many Generals, GS-18s, secretaries of departments and their assistants, alone. Maybe you could put that many more out of work, huh?

I don't know what 92 billion on corporate welfare means! Allowances for doing things, maybe?

$25 billion maintaining currently unused property. Much of that would be necessary if we ever start fighting Iran for instance!

$123 billion for no impact things on the population, 22% of the total.
Assuming they knew what they were doing, 78% good ones ain't bad!

Suggest you start with Our cities budget, Fayette County's budget, school board's budget, and Governor Perdue's budget.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Lindsey

http://www.thecitizen.com/node/2045

Good list - and you're right - there are more!! Groups have been writing to their representatives for at least the last 8 years regarding this mess, but because the lobbyists had more influence than the voters, well . . you see what happened. NOTHING! . . and then came the bridge to nowhere in Alaska.
The citizens in this country have to make their voices heard - and it takes more than marches (I know) - it takes the fear/respect of the VOTE!!

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
"Easily start there"?
S. Lindsey wrote:

and you're right.. No politician has the nads to do it. Not right now.. That's why it has to be forced on them. November a new crop of FISCAL Conservative leaders with a clear mandate will be sent to DC.. Start reigning in the DEBT.
(snip)
Government auditors spent the past five years examining all federal programs and found that 22 percent of them -- costing taxpayers a total of $123 billion annually -- fail to show any positive impact on the populations they serve.

WE could easily start here.. and in fact we will.

I suppose I expect too much from you....I was hoping for a little bit more than Heritage.org cut and paste talking points.

Now, I happened to look at that $123 billion figure that "failed to show any positive impact on the populations they serve".

Quite a list, actually. YOUR list proposes doing away with:
1. The entire Veterans Disability program (38 billion)
2. The entire GI Bill education program (3 billion)
3. The entire VA Home Loan program (7 billion)

LINK

$48 billion of the $123 billion of your "easy" cuts would come from America's military veterans.

You get the most fiscal conservative candidate you can find, make him promise to cut those "wasteful" programs above....and see what happens on election day.

Here's my prediction: Your candidate will get annihilated at the polls.

Feel free to disagree.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Well Fatback..

I am not a Politician.. SO I don't get to make the cuts.. now do I?

Second this is not my list. You have an aversion to the truth. I linked to the report. So point away sniffie.

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
S Lindsey: Veterans are a "waste of govt. money"
S. Lindsey wrote:

I am not a Politician.. SO I don't get to make the cuts.. now do I?

Second this is not my list. You have an aversion to the truth. I linked to the report. So point away sniffie.

It most certainly IS "your list", Lindsey.

Twice in the past week you've regurgitated the Heritage.org talking points about $123 billion dollars in government waste.

Unlike you, I actually took the time to visit the Heritage website. The government waste article is footnoted. Look down at footnote 4...this points to a Bush-era government website that identifies VA Loans, GI Bill and Veterans Disability payments as $48 billion in ineffective government waste.

THAT is what you are proposing to eliminate?

If this is not "your list", why did you post this list TWICE?

As I see it, you have three alternatives here:
1. You can be a fiscal conservative, and stand in front of veterans groups and tell 'em their free ride is over. I recommend wearing Kevlar if you choose this option.
2. You can be a fiscal conservative but admit that removing $48 billion dollars from the budget relating to veterans is a political impossibility, which in turn negates your $123 billion in "easy cuts" rhetoric, or
3. You can take the coward's approach and continue to deny that you ever wanted to gut VA Loans, the GI bill and veterans disability even though you're on record as doing so not once but twice; and shoot any messenger who calls attention to your lack of honesty.

Your choice.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Sniff you are all bluster and hot air..

Show me where I posted from Heritage?

http://www.cagw.org/

My info came from Citizens Against Government Waste..

You would know that if you took a minute to research the subject instead of ASSUMING. But oh no that doesn't fit your misconceptions or your agenda.

I checked YOUR link and Heritage is not advocating anything like you have stated. That article that YOU linked to are 50 examples of Government waste.. Which came from by the way CAGW.. So you are wrong on both counts.

SO GO AHEAD MAN UP ADMIT I AM SMARTER AND YOU ARE A COWARD FOR NOT SAYING SO.. (My Sniffles imitation)

As usual you are all bluster and hot air..Wimpy.

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Stop wasting money on Vets! - S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey wrote:

Show me where I posted from Heritage?

http://www.cagw.org/

My info came from Citizens Against Government Waste..

You would know that if you took a minute to research the subject instead of ASSUMING. But oh no that doesn't fit your misconceptions or your agenda.

I checked YOUR link and Heritage is not advocating anything like you have stated. That article that YOU linked to are 50 examples of Government waste.. Which came from by the way CAGW.. So you are wrong on both counts.

SO GO AHEAD MAN UP ADMIT I AM SMARTER AND YOU ARE A COWARD FOR NOT SAYING SO.. (My Sniffles imitation)

As usual you are all bluster and hot air..Wimpy.

Show you where you posted from Heritage?

I would be glad to!

Take a look at this link HERE This is a comment from someone named "S Lindsey", the comment is entitled "More Government WASTE Your TAX DOLLARS NOT at work" and is timestamped "Fri, 04/16/2010 - 10:03pm".

Look through that comment. It's a cut and paste.

Do you see any reference or link to CAGW?

I sure don't!

Do you see any reference to Heritage foundation?

I sure do!

The very last line, written by YOU, clearly states "...Heritage Foundation".

THAT is where I looked up your cut-and-paste and found the original article you copied HERE

I took the time to look up what YOU claimed was from CAGW....I couldn't find it using CAGW's search function. Want to give me a link to the article you made up?

Heritage smugly reports...and you smugly regurgitated TWICE here on this website...that there was $123 billion dollars in ineffective wasteful government programs.

*I* pointed out that $48 billion dollars in purported "savings" were to be gained from screwing the veteran out of VA Home Loans, GI bill and Veterans Disability.

By the way...don't bother editing your original 4/16 post. I took a screen print.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Bacon aka Sniffle.. Oh man you got me. how very Alinsky of you.

I forgot I did use Heritage.. One of the post was from Heritage the main post was from CAGW..

But I have to ask.. SO WHAT? I am still waiting for you to qualify your statement that the article is all about taking away vet benefits..

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/10/50-Examples-of-Governme...

There's the article do a search for that mythical $48 Billion.. WHERE IS IT?
Go ahead show me where it says that the Heritage group wants to cut $48 Billion in Vet Benefits !!!

What about all of the spending and waste porky? Is it OK that Obama has tripled the debt? Is it OK that his budget forecast Trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see? I sit OK to mortgage our kids futures and bring this Country down while doing it?

btw.. Your Rosie O'Donnell C&P doesn't count huh..

http://open.salon.com/blog/sophiegirl/2010/03/25/you_didnt_get_mad_when
http://www.iberianet.com/articles/2010/04/01/forum/doc4bb0ee5b7081062250...

You telling me you did not Cut and Paste.. REALLY???

You're a hypocrite sniffle the only liar here is you.. I didn't change my name to try to make others forget how nasty you are.. That's you.

You are just an un-electable bully and wouldn't know the TRUTH if it walked up and punched you in the face.. Which I offered to do by the way. You remember don't you http://archive.thecitizen.com/node/36267/#comment-108889

Where were you.. Oh yeah you had to conveniently go out of town or some such BS.

You have tried to bully everyone here.. You keep being you though. WE will keep proving you wrong.

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
"I forgot I did use Heritage"....
S. Lindsey wrote:

I forgot I did use Heritage.. One of the post was from Heritage the main post was from CAGW..

But I have to ask.. SO WHAT?

Apology accepted. It takes a big man to admit he was wrong and apologize.

S. Lindsey wrote:

I am still waiting for you to qualify your statement that the article is all about taking away vet benefits..

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/10/50-Examples-of-Governme...

There's the article do a search for that mythical $48 Billion.. WHERE IS IT?
Go ahead show me where it says that the Heritage group wants to cut $48 Billion in Vet Benefits !!!

Once again, I'll be glad to assist you. I'll even number the steps for you, as you seem to have major issues following instructions.

  1. Click HERE
  2. do a search on "examples of government waste below:"
  3. Look at item 4. There's the $123 billion dollars you say you should "easily start there...and in fact we will"
  4. notice the number 4 at the end of that line. This is called an endnote.
  5. Scroll down to the bottom of the article.
  6. Click the line that says "show references in this report
  7. Scroll down to endnote 4. You will see a link
  8. The link is to http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore/rating/notperform.html . Click this link
  9. You will be taken to a site that breaks down the $123 billion dollars in purported "government waste"
  10. You will see a list of programs. Go to the bottom of the page. Click page 4
  11. Go to the 17th line on the page, the one labeled "Veterans Education Benefits" Note that this "wasteful" program costs 2.864 billion dollars
  12. Go to the 18th line on the page, the one labeled "Veterans Disability Compensation" Note that this "wasteful" program costs 38.415 billion dollars
  13. Go to the 19th line on the page, the one labeled "Veterans Home Loans" Note that this "wasteful" program costs 7.304 billion dollars
  14. Add 2.864, 38.415 and 7.304 billion dollars together
  15. Most people will get $48,583,000. That's 48 billion dollars (we'll forget about rounding, m'kay)
  16. There you have it: the 48 billion dollars in Veterans Benefits you say should be "easily" cut from the federal budget.
S. Lindsey wrote:

What about all of the spending and waste porky? Is it OK that Obama has tripled the debt? Is it OK that his budget forecast Trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see? I sit OK to mortgage our kids futures and bring this Country down while doing it?

Let's stay focused on the $123 billion you say can be easily cut. If you want to debate these other issues, start another thread.

S. Lindsey wrote:

btw.. Your Rosie O'Donnell C&P doesn't count huh..
http://open.salon.com/blog/sophiegirl/2010/03/25/you_didnt_get_mad_when
http://www.iberianet.com/articles/2010/04/01/forum/doc4bb0ee5b7081062250...
You telling me you did not Cut and Paste.. REALLY???

Please point out where I claim that I "did not cut and paste". Unlike you, I am very upfront when I post other people's material.

S. Lindsey wrote:

You're a hypocrite sniffle the only liar here is you.. I didn't change my name to try to make others forget how nasty you are.. That's you.

Yep. I point out YOUR factual inaccuracies, so that somehow makes ME a "liar" in your mind.

S. Lindsey wrote:

You are just an un-electable bully and wouldn't know the TRUTH if it walked up and punched you in the face.. Which I offered to do by the way. You remember don't you http://archive.thecitizen.com/node/36267/#comment-108889

Where were you.. Oh yeah you had to conveniently go out of town or some such BS. You have tried to bully everyone here..

Yep. YOU threaten ME with physical violence so that somehow makes ME a "bully".

S. Lindsey wrote:

You keep being you though. WE will keep proving you wrong.

*points and laughs at you*

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
So you admit that Heritage did not say it.. OK

You have to jump a bunch of hoops to get to that conclusion. I am not going to waste a lot of time, which you obviously have, with go backs and links .. You said HERITAGE advocated cutting:

"Quite a list, actually. YOUR list proposes doing away with:
1. The entire Veterans Disability program (38 billion)
2. The entire GI Bill education program (3 billion)
3. The entire VA Home Loan program (7 billion)" Sniffles aka Chispy

Now let's look at your minutia since you want to take the entire argument and boil it down..

You do know what references are right..? I looked at your list.. YOU have to conclude that the reference list was in fact a check list of all Government waste.. It is not.

It is a SOURCE OF INFORMATION. Where a conclusion was drawn. Information extrapolated to form a basis for a the story.

You concluded that particular line item meant what YOU wanted it to mean. You assume too much.. Typical of Liberals and Progressives like you.

Sniffle.. you can re-direct/deflect the argument anyway you want.. HOWEVER it is minutia. You want to deflect the argument to be about me and "MY" supposed hated of the Vets.. Again you assume too much.

Sniffle.. you rail against others using C&P articles, but you did it yourself. Oh again you tried to deflect the issue by assuming again that I do not reference the links.. I will ask you to show ONE.. Again you assume too much

Sniffle .. yes you are a LIAR.. and here is why.. YOU changed your name.. WHY? You assumed a false identity. Now you can argue that it's just a posting name and does not really matter. BUT.. Here these monikers the assumed names are no different then the names we are known by. I use my REAL name why? Because I have the courage of my convictions. You don't even have the courage of your conviction under an assumed name.. You felt you had to re-invent yourself. WHY? Is that not the definition of dishonesty?

Sniffle.. yes I did threaten you with the "potential" of violence. I think I invited you to coffee.. Now you and I know what that meant. Of course you forget that you wanted to "meet" Darth as well. So that street goes both ways doesn't and you forget the provocation of bringing our families into this discussion.

You have a tendency to use family as weapon that is why you want to bully people, but I am well past that.. I KNOW YOU.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
When civility is lost - so is the argument

Lindsey - you're losing.

hutch866
hutch866's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/28/2005
Dm

Since you had nothing to say to Sniffles about his remark on Lindsey mom, I guess your sense of civility must be different then mine.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Hutch

Didn't see that remark. If it was uncivil - than he is a loser also. We know that we have high school students and possibly younger that view this blog. We should attempt to keep our responses at an adult level. It is easier to make a nasty, uncivil retort than to take the time to get the same message conveyed in a civil manner.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
A Reality Check on Taxes, etc.

Click here for unbiased fact finding.

I hope the students who may participate/view this and other blogs will be encouraged to do their own research and develop their own opinions. A democracy is only as strong as an informed electorate.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Dm I think not..

But go ahead spin it.. bottle it.. and drink it.. the kaid is good..

I guess you missed his crack about bedding my mother huh?

hutch866
hutch866's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/28/2005
SL

What's that pet phrase that snif uses, oh yeah, selective outrage, that's the one, I guess Dm has that. She never said a word when ol' snif was calling someone a punk 10 times or so in a post, nothing to say to him today either, go figure.

Recent Comments