The bottom line is that a small minority is paying for all of the government Americans enjoy. Why is it fair that they be required to pay more?

And yet my paltry unemployment compensation was taxed. I guess I imagined it. What a douchebag.

Remember, it’s only class warfare if we expect the rich to pay their share.

During Bill Clinton’s time in office higher taxes on the wealthiest was sound economic policy, not jealousy.

No war but class war.

You know, if the rich actually did supply “all” or most of the U.S. budget, maybe Asswipe McDickweed might have a point. But they don’t, so he doesn’t.

You’d think the right wing would be at a disadvantage in class warfare. After all, they have no class.

Yeah, they don’t so much “supply” the wealth in this country as they “steal” or “co-opt” it. And even if they did, they are benefiting from that society much more than I am. Why should I have to pay more so they can pay less? That’s like expecting me to buy a Casio at a Rolex price. Would the rich do that? Fuck no!

LMAO! Touche’

Doltz-Freakin had to write a check to the tax man last month and it made him haz a sad.

Here is his face.

http://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&hl=en&source=hp&biw=1024&bih=576&q=Douglas+Holtz-Eakin&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2&aq=f&aqi=g1&aql=&oq=

You mean despite his PO box in the Virgin Islands?

He has to show income in the US so he can justify all the campaign donations he made to Wingnuts in 2010.

In contrast I would argue (in keeping with the Rabbi Yeshua bar Yosef al Nazarat) that it is great wealth which is inherently immoral, as they have essentially stolen it from the workers who actually produced it and, as Adam Smith observed, deserve the greatest portion of its value.

Geez, BT, I had to use the last of my Visine after seein’ that link led to NRO.

There’s a way to look at this. The greater part of the 51% of us who pay no income tax is the number of people whose income is so low it flies under the radar of the income tax laws. Assuming they’re working class, they work for a living, their low income is what they receive in wages and those wages are paid by mega-rich corporations and those incomes not being taxed by the federal government is a back-door way of subsidizing the mega-corporations.

After all, a worker suffering from mal-nutrition and hypo-thermia and multiple illnesses won’t make it to work very often. A corporation is a corporation in name only if it has no work force.

Which is why the reichwing economists skip a lot of what Adam Smith said. Unca Milty Friedman is more to their liking.

Is that Thomas Jefferson dude some kinda Communist Outside Agitator, or something?

Does this have a vaguely familiar sound of “let them eat cake?” Some things never change.

I think he was a card carrying member of the Professional Left.

Wow, we’re sure lucky to have Obama in office, huh? Rest assured, I’ll be sure to vote for Obama in 2012 – He may be bad, but he’s certainly not as bad as THE alternative is!

Contrary to the conventional wisdom, the rich pay more taxes AND GET MORE BENEFIT FROM GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS.

You and I use the freeway to get to work, resulting in marginally survivable salaries.

The rich as shareholders get subsidized movement of trillions of dollars of goods and services over those same freeways for a much larger profit.

This is simple math and doesn’t require much more than undergraduate econ to analyze.

So tell me why ANYONE–liberal or conservative–must resort to “moral” arguments to justify higher taxes for the rich?

Wow. OT, kinda. Staggering numbers from Think Progress.

Fortune 500 profits up 81% in 2010.

The rich as shareholders get subsidized movement of trillions of dollars of goods and services over those same freeways for a much larger profit.

See the link in my @22

$10.8 trillion last year at an 81% profit among the Fortune 500.

OT: Huffpo reporting w has his little feelings hurt by O’s victory behavior…cry me a river.

Former Bush-Era CBO Director: Proposing Higher Taxes on the Wealthiest Unfair, “Pure Jealousy”
By: Blue Texan Thursday May 5, 2011 10:30 am

we are really, REALLY attacking this issue with the wrong perspective

we REALLY do NOT want to tax the wealthiest at a higher rate, we want them paying the SAME rate as we pay when regressive taxes are considered

the reason progressive taxes were invented in the first place was because local taxes are regressive and cost the labor class disproportionately more then the wealthy

real equity would be something along the lines of “percentages of wage in sales tax”, “percentage of wage in road tax”, “percentage of wage in school tax”, etc

instead of just percentage of wage in earned income tax

if we could actually do that, then they would get what they make believe they want, a “true” flat tax, which is not really what they want, their version of a flat tax has nothing to do with equalizing the tax code

Sita telling me it’s time to go back to work by blocking the keyboard.

Namaste

you don’t have it quite right, they do get more benefit from “the commoons” but they do NOT pay more taxes, they pay far less, progressive taxes are one method of getting them to pay close to the same amount

How very unfair to the rich! Are you sure that’s all their income increased. Well, that puts things in a different light. I should have sent the 26 bucks to the rich instead of renewing my license to drive.

Huffpo AOL reporting w has his little feelings hurt by O’s victory behavior…cry me a river.

Sorry, that needed fixed.

And yeah, whine, Bush, whine.

The cats of your homestead must have their buds coming over to play poker or something. Count yer beers.

I thought the little infant was invited and declined.

thom hartmann on tom paine, another founder;

“But,” Paine added, “the chief object of this progressive tax (besides the justice of rendering taxes more equal than they are) is, as already stated, to extirpate the overgrown influence arising from the unnatural law of primogeniture [inheritance], and which is one of the principal sources of corruption at elections.”

What a smart kitty. Have a good one.

yep. …and last week’s Economist pointed out that federal and state car/gas taxes only pay for 70% of the woefully underfunded construction and maintenance of said roadways… yet ANOTHER FREE GIFT to the rich….

And Social Security tax,which is capped for the well-to-do and rich.

True – and Clinton’s higher taxes made for prosperity that made the rich richer and gave us 22 million new jobs.

Seems the media is nor allowed to push back when GOP nonsense about how the rich are being picked on is sent them in their emails.

The question is why isn’t there class warfare. OK, most people don’t like fighting, but there should come a point where people become willing to at least discuss what can be done to make life tolerable for all. The reason we don’t, as I see it, is the same thinking that has people wiped out by flood or tornado thanking God for the experience. If God were all that sympathetic he (or she) wouldn’t have sent the flood or tornado in the first place. We are pretty divorced from reality.

ss is one of the regressive taxes I was talking about, there are also sales taxes which are regressive, useage taxes, etc

any tax that is set at a percentage of product rather then a percentage of wage is regressive;

if I make 10,000 a year, I am going to spend my entire salary on taxable goods, which means I am retaxed on the entirety above and beyond federal income tax

if I make 1 million a year only a fraction of that is spent on taxable goods, let’s for argument say that fraction is ten percent, that would mean on 900,000 dollars I am not re-taxed

this is what the regressive taxes do, they give a break to the wealthy, progressvie taxes are an effort in equalizing that inequity

And calling some or all of their income “capitol gains” and having that taxed at a lower rate.

Let’s do a thought experiment:
One guy makes 10,000 dollars a year and is taxed at 10 percent, (yeah, I know but this is hypothetical and let’s keep it simple). That leaves him with 9,000 cash to live on the whole year, minus local fees, taxes, sales taxes, etc.
A second guy makes 1,000,000 and is taxed at ten percent also. That leaves him with 900,000 dollars to live on. Even if this second guy was taxed at 90 percent, which of them is going to have a nice home, a new car, decent health insurance, summer vacation, access to good schools, etc?

Cry me a river rich people. Cry me a fucking river.

Goddamnit. I owe you a drink. What’ll it be?

But…all taxation is theft, and progressive taxation is theft that punishes hard workers.

[/wingnut]

Well stated – indeed in Social Security every extra dollar of earnings brings a higher benefit -

up to the wage cap

Time to remove the cap for both benefits and for the social insurance premium that is collected as a payroll deduction, and to apply the payroll deduction rates to both wages and investment income, giving the rich the extra benefit they will thereby earn.

Doing so ends all financing of SS problems – and the extra funds might give us a leg up on single payer national health for basic care.

don’t forget margaret, even with a progressive tax, the wealthy are taxed at the same rate for the first 10,000 dollars as the man making ten thousand, and then at the same rate as the man making 20,000

the progressive tax does not kick in all of a sudden, the wealthy are ALWAYS paying THE SAME for the lower amounts of salary as the man making that lower amount

this point is mostly missed

The Koch brothers, their tools in the House and governorships, W. and the rest appear to yearn for the days when they will be called sir or massa by grovelling employees, their grandchildrens’ teachers or by firemen who may possibly come to save their house. They seem to yearn for hamlets with serfs. They appear to lie about Planned Parenthood, who is the most Christian and what party is the most patriotic in order to force votes from others. Pathetic people need the income disparity and power to feel worthwhile. Pathetic, empty people are very dangerous people. Kochs, W. and the rest have no idea of nobility or noble behavior. Jealousy also involves not wanting others to have what you have. They covet any crumb that another may have, then want to take it away. It is the wealthiests’ jealousy that makes them abuse those with less. They are not strong people without the abusive laws they pay for. They are really weak, nothing things when they are forced to stand alone. They represent so very few of the votes. Dem campaign ads should ask Americans, why vote against your own economic interests? Dem ads should ask, do you have a brother or sister who is a police, fireperson or teacher and do you think they are valuable and necessary? They should be asked if they have ever known a union member with more of a backbone than many poliiticians to stand up for justice for those in their own economic group.

You mean hard workers like Trump who worked really hard to inherit that fortune? Or did the hard work come when he pissed it away?

An excellent reason to have an asset tax with a monster sized deductible – say $2 million! Hard to avoid – and rather progressive as it taxes those that benefit the most from those taxes.

Yeah, I’m aware. I was trying to keep it simple.

cognac

louis the 13th

I’ll chip in on the sales tax

From each according to his ability,to each according to his needs.

(Hmmm … where have I heard that before?)

Which part do they take exception to?

* Taking without regard to the ability to pay? That isn’t going to work out well.
* Allowing needs to go unmet. This is what they propose (as long as we aren’t talking about their needs), and what we oppose.

A fair tax would be a head tax – if you are a street person you pay $1, if you are a billionaire you pay $1. Fair. But you can’t run a society that way so that’s not going to be the criteria.

A fee-based system seems fair, wherein you pay for the services you receive. Except it once again ignores both need and the ability to pay. You probably could run a society that way, but not one I would want to live in.

Perhaps it would be best to argue that “fair” should be defined as “society’s needs are met by those with the ability to do so”. Sounds fair to me.

Gotta get going myself. See you guys and gals!

taxation profit is theft, and progressive taxation excessive profit is theft that punishes hard workers

Fixed it for ya!

LMAO! Take a deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep breath. Now……Hold it!
I’ll get back to you when I have a job. A really good job!

A fair tax would be a head tax

– if you are a street person you pay $1, if you are a billionaire you pay $1. Fair. But you can’t run a society that way so that’s not going to be the criteria.

that wouldn’t be fair at all, it would affect the poor disproportionately to the wealthy, the poor would be paying a far larger percentage then the wealthy

A fee-based system seems fair, wherein you pay for the services you receive. Except it once again ignores both need and the ability to pay. You probably could run a society that way, but not one I would want to live in.

this would only be fair if you got to charge the people who benefited from those using the service, for instance, I might use the road to drive to your store but you are benefitting, I might use the park to re-group but my work place is benefitting

the only really fair tax would be a percentage of wage on all items we collect tax

you can make tax deductions if you are charged more tax then others in sales tax, you would pay a tax if you were charged less

this is the only way I can think of to equalize the tax burden

it seems I have fallen in love with you and your humor over these year margaret, I will therefore amend my preference and make it a margaretta

Breaking: oil down to $100 per barrel, down $9. Gold down $37. Somebody pulled the plug on something.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/05/05/fortune-500-corporations-81/#comments

And these fuckers still complain about unfair taxation? Breathtaking.

I get this crap all the time from my conservative economist friends. Usually, they just say something about people sucking at the government tit. My usual response is to ask, ‘as an economist, are you making an analytical or a moral judgment?’ This usually results in a bit of blustering until they admit that they really don’t like the idea of poor people getting something from the rich. This leads to the next question, why? By this time we have eliminated the so-called incentive argument, so the ‘why’ forces them to admit or assert that people are poor because it’s their own fault, and people shouldn’t pay for other people’s bad decisions or life-styles or whatever. The next step is to ask them if they would feel the same way if they were suddenly laid off, or their kid had a bad car accident.

It’s mostly moral with these people. Not an ounce of quantitative analysis or judgment. The deeper analytical case for redistribution is so far beyond them that I don’t even attempt it. Madness, madness, madness …

TODAY’S REPUBLICANISM…..IS THE VICTORY OF THE “ID” OVER THE “SUPER EGO”

Today’s Republicans don’t believe that intelligence, logic, compassion or an appreciation or acknowledgment of historical facts or legal precedents are required, relevant or worthy of consideration.

Driving jobs out of America and Americans out of their homes is “just business” to them; nothing “personal”.

Corporations should be given the same first amendment free speech rights as individual citizens so they can “buy” political candidates and elections, despite the fact that works against the best interests of working class Americans and further diminishes their political relevance/influence.

Pollution, global warming and deforestation are all improvable “myths” of egg-head/tree-hugger scientists who are “socialist” enemies of “over-regulated” capitalism. The earth, which right wing fundamentalist claim is less than 6,000 years old, will miraculously heal itself! All we have to do is “pray”.

For today’s mercenary self-focused deviant breed of dysfunctional near-sighted Republicans, it’s not about right or wrong, good or bad, fair or unfair, rational or irrational…..it’s about power and control, even if that means intellectual, moral, psychological and functional delusion, denial and dishonesty. They want what they want for no other reason than they WANT it……regardless of the consequences to themselves and everyone else! Somehow, that makes “them” feel good about themselves…..makes them “feel” safe.

From each according to his ability,to each according to his needs.

Funny you should bring that up. It was exactly the supposedly death-dealing comment the CPA from U Chicago gave me when we were discussing government policy. I said, what’s wrong with that? No real response.

The American mind is really fucked up. A lot of it has to do with the demises of community, so that people have little connections with others apart from family and work colleagues.

You don’t have to bring morality into it. When the income tax collection rate is low, well-to-do investors look for ways to maximize the return for their excess cash and create bubbles with boom and bust cycles. When rates are high, more capital is left in the business which can help it grow. Simple as that.

Or, “the system can’t be at fault, because I prospered within the system, so it must be the victim. whatever you do, don’t change the system because I might not continue to prosper”

I read this morning that Mexico purchased 100 tons of gold. That purchase should’ve bolstered the price somewhat. So a $37 drop is even larger than it shows…

Odd.

That is very well written. Shorter version is “they are really really dumb.” Thanks for a truth-telling comment.

I think they call it “profit taking.”

TODAY’S REPUBLICANS ARE AMERICA’S ENEMY WITHIN

Republicans ARE practicing seditious DEMAGOGUERY and anti-democracy OBSTRUCTIONISM intended to destabilize our economy for purposes of social, political and financial exploitation.

Republicans AREN’T making a sincere effort to STOP the bleeding THEIR incompetent leadership and failed policies created. Instead, they’re using inflammatory lies and false accusation¬s as a smokescreen to conceal their subversive agenda, which is to CAUSE the American economy to collapse and fail so they can blame Democrats for the consequences of THEIR calamitous mismanagement.

Republicans ARE preposterously professing that THEIR disgraceful political WHORING had nothing to do with the banking, real estate, stock market and employment catastrophes that resulted.

Republicans ARE trying to hamstring Democrats to prevent them from repairing the damage caused during a Republican presidency enabled by Republican Senators and Representatives.

Republicans ARE offering ridiculous arguments meant solely to disrupt and prevent constructive change. They’d rather create more suffering for American families than endure the consequences of humane and effective governance.

Republicans AREN’T the LOYAL OPPOSITION; they ARE the ENEMY WITHIN whose mercenary priorities have eroded their moral and ethical standards to the point that duplicity and betrayal have become their preferred modus operandi.

It’s one thing to advocate conservative beliefs; it’s another thing entirely to willfully sabotage America’s government because a beneficial Democratic presidency would not be vulnerable to the avarice, fears and bigotries that have produced and sustained the despicable Republican anti-humanity corporatism and anti-Christian faux theocracies that are poisoning and crippling American society.

Also too, does that mean gas is going to go down $.40 per gallon? Because when oil futures go up they translate that cost to the pump price right away, even thought the prices are for 3 months futures…

We think alike, mostly, except I don’t think questions in Dem ads will do it. People don’t think they vote against their economic interest. They think they vote for their economic interest. They just don’t happen to be rich at this juncture a condition they expect will be remedied momentarily. Difficult to grapple with madness of this magnitude.

I’ve had similar conversations with well-educated conservatives, who aren’t economists, but are somewhat deeper thinkers than average.

IMO it almost always comes down to a *moral* judgement-call based on some notion (pumped out by Fox, RushGlenn, the 700 Club, etc) that teh poorz are lazy slacker *sinners* sucking at the govt tit.

It’s a very very very debased & simplistic argument that doesn’t take into account other very simple FACTS, as highlighted throughout the comments here:

1. The “average” taxpayer pays more – comparatively – than the super wealthy in regressive taxes. MOST citizens, even well educated ones, really haven’t wrapped their heads around this.

2. Then there are the issues about the “public commons” likes the roads and interstates & even Railroads – where the super wealthy ENJOY a much much much higher *benefit* than the “average citizen” does based on how the roads/railroads are used for transportation of goods v. driving to work. I have an in-law who is a Trans. attorney & that person very begrudgingly is forced to admit that the superwealthy *definitely* get waaaaaaay more for their tax dollahs than the average citizen does…. but boy is the admission of this FACT very begrudging.

3. And then perris & Margaret has made all the arguments about what progressive v. regressive taxes are and how they affect us.

The wealthy have USED the “lucky ducky” argument for years in such rags as the Wall ST. Journal (even before Rupert bought it)… whining and crying endlessly about the percentage of the population who so ENJOY not being fed. taxed. Of couse, such self-serving victimizing articles never ever discuss what it’s like for citizens who *earn so little* that they don’t pay any or much in fed taxes. It’s baloney and a lot of lies besides.

Then I hear a lot of conservatives whining and crying about the dollar value of what the super-rich allegedly pay in taxes. Whether the figures quoted are accurate or not, it *sounds* like a lot. But such arguments are made in a vacuum and in no way really highlight how those sums are achieved and what it means in terms of what the super-rich actually “take home” after paying these fed taxes.

Lot of crap flying around out there.

A certain segment of the population has, per usual, bought the fictional fantasy fairy tale that we serfs should all feel fewwy sowwy for these poor benighted super rich folks just because Donald Trump said so.

It’s bogus, but duly noted that the rightwing thinktank talking points are being pushed out at their usual rate.

Gasoline has its own futures market, and obviously they are linked. There is no way of knowing if this drop will stay or bounce back tomorrow. If it stays down, gasoline should follow. You are right, it tracks immediately on the upside and drops slowly on the downside. Also, we are heading into summer driving season with higher demand, which supports the gasoline futures prices.

EDIT: From WSJ earlier in the day:

Light, sweet crude for June delivery shed $7.12 … Front-month June reformulated gasoline blendstock, or RBOB, fell 14.46 cents, or 4.4%, to $3.1779 a gallon.

Remember, if McPalin had won the election, this dickish Randoloid would have an office in the White House right now.

Apologies to all, but this just can’t be left alone.

And what of the dickish Randoloid in there now, that with BIGGER MAJORITIES IN BOTH HOUSES of Congress that’s been seen in at least a generation, signed that Randoloid bill known as the Obama tax cuts, which not only extended the Bush Randoloid tax cuts, but actually lowered the Estate Tax even further than any year under that past Randoloid in the White House.

And you can’t blame it on the Republicans when the Democrats had huge, HUGE majorities in BOTH Houses of Congress. That is you can’t blame it on the minority Republicans unless you’re willing to blame the original Bush Tax Cuts on the minority Democrats. You can’t have it both ways.

You can claim one is corrupt and the other corrupt and crazy and justify it however you like, that still leaves one that supports the Democratic Party one that is supporting corruption. Does that sound like you BT? Because it sure doesn’t sound like the BT I’ve grown to love around here.

Again, sorry to all. I’ll leave again. Best to stop reading as well, LOL, since I guess my willpower to restrain from posting isn’t always enough.

Ha. Even if you split this country’s wealth evenly across the population it would only be a matter of years before it would end up with the same hands.

The country is wasting resources on the weak and its holding the entire population back.

Yes, there is still part of me that is grateful that Sarah Palin isn’t in the White House.

Guilty.

Define weak.

I like the progressive tax idea even better.

those unwilling take care of themselves

Ever notice when meaningless talking points comprise a comment? A reasoned debate amongst those with opposing viewpoints, where facts, ideas and info are exchanged, is always welcome. Not particularly interested in useless assertions that amount to empty-caloried blather.

Reflect upon your “useless eater” logic when you too become disabled, sick or old. By the way, if the Koches were real business folk, they wouldn’t need to depend upon the taxes we pay with which they lord over all their corporate welfare queenliness.

there are very few of those who aren’t wealthy in this country

if you think eliminating that amount of people who are poor will have even a measurable affect on where taxes go, you are sadly, sadly mistaken

now if you eliminate the corporate parasites and wealthy parasites that want us to take care of them instead of paying their own bills, then you would be correct and it would have an immediate, incredible impact

so we agree

sort of

If, as you state, the country is wasting resources on those unwilling to care for themselves, how many of those people are there, where are they and who makes the determination that one is unwilling to care for him/herself?

I doubt he can stand by his own definition, if he did the vast majority of the wealthy and mega corporations would be eliminated

the wealthy and the mega corporations do not contribute as much as they cost this country, at one time they might have produced a positive return but that is no longer the case

No?

What does medicare cost a month? unemployment insurance? welfare? social security. Corporate welfare too. So yes we agree.

no affect on taxes right????

medicare is paid for by the recipients, it’s pay go, as are all of the other “pay outs” you mention and employers pay less in wage then they would if those payouts weren’t there, they gain from these programs, programs we voted for and are happy to pay for

the real problem that you are missing, those pay outs are stolen by corporations in the guise of “tax cuts” which are nothing but redistributions of middle class assets

our economy is more robust and everyone makes money when the middle class has more to spend, the more comfortable the middle class in spending money teh MORE the economy prospers

you are under the influence of propaganda which tells you when a corporation makes more in profit they provide more in jobs or benefits, that is patently false and the more profit they drain from the economy the less robust the economy will be

got it?

I don’t think you will and I am off to another thread

You think those pay go benefits are flush? You think what gets paid into medicare is really enough to cover you on the back end? Its all heavily subsidized by other users.

redistribution of middle class assets? Love it. The middle class has to start paying taxes before they can be redistributed….

That transfer of wealth is never mentioned by those who like to complain most about “transfer of wealth.”

no, they are not flush, they yeild positive return, for instance social security yeilds outright positive return, other programs yield residual positive return

and yes, there is far greater return over all even in the programs that are not “flush”

now, you take corporate welfare and yes, you are right, there is negative return when they don’t pay as much as we do

in case you did not know it, (and you clearly do not), wealth comes from labor, labor does not come from wealth, before there is product there must be labor, before profit there must be jobs, before wealth there must be profit

they take from the labor class, the labor class does NOT take from the wealthy

but carry on, advocate against yourself, your child, your wife, your grand kids

now I am really off for this thread, have to finish at my place of business

by

Sorry. The Yield isn’t that great….

From the Associated Press

December 31, 2010

Your Medicare taxes won’t cover what you’ll cost

WASHINGTON (AP) — What you paid in Medicare taxes shows up on your W-2 income tax form every year. So when you retire, you want your money’s worth. . . .

Edited by Moderator. When bringing information from other sources and in order to keep FDL within Fair Use standards, limit the amount of cut and paste and provide a link

The rich like to cry and moan because they pay the lions share of the progressive income tax. When they say the bottom 47% pay no taxes they are lying. FICA, sales tax, property tax, State and local tax, gasoline tax are all taxes too.

As a percent of income, the rich are paying about the same as the rest of us.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/24/the-other-taxes-who-pays-them/

Scroll down for a handy little graph.

I think you would appreciate this: “Alan Simpson Just Asked Me To Leave Rich People Alone” (by David Swanson, Apr. 27, 2011)

Also MoveToAmend.Org isn’t just about consciousness raising.

Good point. Certainly there are many taxes other than federal income tax. Some of these hit lower income folk disproportionately.

Exactly. The rich hate the working class. Is hatred a good tax policy?

Excellent and timely remarks in my opinion. It can’t be said too often. Thanks Old Fat Guy.

Remember Jamie Leigh Jones’ treatment by Halliburton? Here’s something worth doing to deal with the out-of-control rich: End Forced Arbitration (petition by PublicCitizen.Org).

It’s interesting how the Right now uses the same negative connotation it applies to ‘liberal’ on the idea of class warfare and wealth redistribution. As if it can only be from the lower, essentially powerless classes, toward the upper ‘we own government’ class.

Agreed, thank you, it can’t be said enough. Personally, I’ve given to numerous FDL efforts, but I will NOT join FDL until it explains one plausable circumstance that would warrant any Democrat voting for Obama in 2012. NEVER in our lifetime has a President of either Partyu shown such disdain for the American middle class. FDL understands this. Yet, I’ve yet to see any poster to FDL argue that Obama should be Primaried.

And then there’s this:

Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” Matthew 19:23-24

And I’ll bet Holtz-Eakin brays loudly about his Christianity.

Yet, I’ve yet to see any poster to FDL argue that Obama should be Primaried.

Then you haven’t been paying attention.

Find someone who, 1) is willing to challenge Obama, and 2) is capable of winning a primary.

If you think the number of people who visit the Lake are capable of unseating Obama in a primary then you’re living in a different universe than the rest of us.

Your statement is, however, a great excuse for not joining. Keep using it, but I’ll repeat what my 9th grade English teacher, Mrs Cooley, told us the first day of class, “Of all human inventions the excuse is the most worthless.”

Your statement is also great for maintaining a whine. Waaaaaaaaah.