BUSH TAX CUTS! Who, What, When, Where, Why & How! Why Should We The People Prop Up Corporations, Haves & Have-Mores While Those Elitists Outsource American Jobs Overseas? Phrased Another Way, Do Corporate Profits Benefit You? And Let’s Not Forget $32 TRILLIONS Hidden From IRS In Overseas Accounts! To Begin, The Bush Tax Cuts Are REGRESSIVE: The Higher Your Income, The Greater The %-CUT: That Counteracts The Graduated Income Tax & Is Un-American For We The People!


















Angry Infidel’s Complete Text:

The `Bush Tax Cuts` Explained


06 Dec 2010

barack obama, bush tax cuts, progressive taxation, tax cuts for millionaires

by BobG


Can I give you the layman’s summary of the ongoing debate over the “Bush era tax cuts”? Most of my readers understand this intuitively, but I offer the following in the unlikely event that an intellectually honest Democrat or “Progressive” might drop by. It really is no more complicated than this:


The U.S. has a progressive income tax system.

Tabacco: “The U.S. ‘HAD’ a progressive income tax system” until Republicans undermined, undercut and sabotaged it with REGRESSIVE Legislation like the ‘Bush Tax Cuts’.


That means that lower-income taxpayers pay a lower percentage of their income than do higher-income taxpayers. Those with income up to $100,000 might pay 15% of their income; those with income from $100,001 to $250,000 might pay 28%; and those with income over $250,000 pay 35%. Those reporting under $30,000 might not pay any tax at all (not the correct rates and income brackets… just for illustration).

Tabacco: He’s basically correct on the Graduated Tax aspects and rationale. Let’s see how he does on the “Graduated” Tax Cuts – “Graduated” should apply whether you raise or lower Taxes!


Early in his term, President Bush and the Congress voted to reduce the tax percentage rates from those of a previous administration. Taxpayers from top to bottom have paid a lower income tax rate for about 10 years. That the Bush administration changed the income tax rates was not unusual; income tax rates have moved up and down numerous times for various reasons under both Democrat and Republican Presidents.

Tabacco: Could anyone authoring “The Bush Tax Cuts Explained” be more vague and less informative! See the difference between an “intellectually honest Democrat” like myself and an “intellectually dishonest Republican” like Bob G.


To secure the votes required to pass the tax rate reduction, the Bush administration agreed to a time limit; the rates would remain at the lower level for a specific time period, subject to renewal. The law establishing the lower rates is set to expire at the end of this year. Unless an agreement is reached, the tax rates will return to the levels at which they were prior to the reduction.

Tabacco: Shame on COMPLICIT DEMOCRATS, who helped pass and helped perpetuate the Bush Tax Cuts at their inception or subsequently!


(Incidentally, the “Bush tax cuts” are not the only tax benefits expiring on December 31. Unless extended, the so-called “death tax” (a tax on the value of your estate at your death) will return to the prior level of 55% from the current 0%.)

Tabacco: That reference to the “Death Tax” is what Tabacco refers to as ADD ONS to sweeten sour, smelly and unpalatable legislation. If you pour perfume on MANURE, you still have MANURE! Compromise with Political Sophists (such as the ‘Missouri Compromise’, which added one Slave State for each added Free State) can never be Acceptable or even a “Lesser Evil”!


Have we all forgotten how King Solomon handled the “two mothers” and the “one baby” in the Bible! No Compromiser was Solomon! And We The People NEVER get even “half the baby”!


You should now understand that many of the arguments by the Democrats against extending the tax rates are not valid at all. In fact, some rise to the level of outright deception:


1.  Extending the current tax rates is not a “tax cut for the rich.” It is not “giving more money to millionaires.” It is simply extending the current tax rates– for everybody– for longer than the 10 years that they have been in place.

Tabacco: And THAT is not a “tax cut for the rich”?

2.  Extending the current tax rates does not “give more money to the millionaires.” It allows them to keep more of what they have earned. There’s a difference.

Tabacco: That “difference” is one of Semantics!

3.  There is no definitive, permanent, “official” or even optimal tax rate. For that reason alone, extending the current rates cannot be called a “cut.”

Tabacco: When Republicans do their song and dance, my eyes get bleary! I can’t make this stuff up! Please visit the original Article at the URL at the beginning lest you think I fabricated this stuff!

4.  Failing to extend the rates will result in a tax increase; an individual earning $47,000 will see his income tax increase in 2011 by $2,600.

Tabacco: That “return” to the basic rate would only apply to those making over $250,000 if Republicans would only be reasonable. Returning to the Original Rates is NOT an increase; it reverses gargantuan Tax Breaks for whom? As this author is fond of saying, “There is a difference!

5.  Regardless of whether or not the current tax rates are extended, those with a higher income will continue to pay a higher tax rate than do those earning less. As long as we have a progressive tax system, “the rich” will always pay more (for the same services… unless you include tax credits, welfare and other entitlements. Then “the rich” pay more for less return from the government!).

Tabacco: This last INSULT is not worthy of my commenting on it!

6.  Republicans want to do nothing more at this moment than maintain the status quo. Democrats want to raise the tax rate for one segment of the population, if not for all.

Tabacco: When Republicans lowered the Tax Rate (mainly for the Richest among us), they demolished the “status quo”; now that Democrats want to rectify that Republican Abomination, this author accuses Democrats of “raising taxes” on the poor Have-Mores while Republicans “want to do nothing more at this moment than maintain the status quo”. This is typical of Right-Wing SOPHISTRY!

7.  Extending the current tax rates will not “cost” the government $700 billion. There is no definitive or “official” tax revenue level. The government does not have a right to your money.  It is not first the government’s to “spend,” so there cannot be a “cost.”  Finally, if the tax rates are extended, the government will not receive any less tax revenue than it has in the previous ten years (as a result of the extension).

Tabacco: How’s that for Sophistry and Semantics Perversions!

8.  Extending the current tax rates will not “add $700 billion to the deficit.” As just noted, extending the current rates will not result in any less income tax revenue to the government than was received last year or in any year of the previous decade.

Tabacco: Before you continue reading, go back and reread the RED text only (excluding my GREEN comments). When you have done that, answer this question, “What Facts, Logic, Truth or Reason did you actually learn that you can use or dare repeat to those, who value your opinion?” Remember as you read the title of this Post:


The Bush Tax Cuts Explained













10 Years Later, How Bush-Era Tax Cuts Changed America


  First Posted: 06/09/11 01:15 PM ET   Updated: 08/08/11 06:12 AM ET

Bush Tax Cuts , Economy , President Obama , Unemployment Rate , Center On Budget And Policy Priorities , Great Recession , President George W. Bush , Roger Hickey , Budget Gaps , Economic Policy Institute , Government Spending , Business News


A decade has now passed since the Bush-era tax cuts were signed into law, and the topic remains as divisive as ever.


To mark the ten-year anniversary of the tax cuts, extended last year for both upper- and middle-class Americans in a deal to reauthorize unemployment insurance, the non-partisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities published five graphs illustrating how the cuts have changed America, and will continue to do so in the future.


What they find is unevenly distributed benefits. The percentage increase in after-tax income tilts greatly in favor of those making over $1 million, for one, especially when compared to Americans making between $40,000-$50,000. And at a time when the country is sunk in $14.3 trillion worth of debt, it’s adding vastly to deficit, too. Indeed, the cost of the upper-income tax cuts is roughly equal to the Social Security shortfall in that span, CBPP says.


Criticism of the tax cuts has not died, either. In a blog post this week, Roger Hickey, co-founder of the Economic Policy Institute, for example, called the cuts “another experiment in conservative voodoo economics.” And even some of those who’ve benefited most from the cuts now view them unfavorably, specifically the roughly 200 “Patriotic Millionaires” that recently wrote a letter to Congressional Republicans asking that their taxes be raised to help deficit reduction, rather than relying alone on cuts in government spending.


Below are five charts provided by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities showing different ways the Bush tax cuts have affected the nation.



Mitt Romney–Glenn Beck


Tabacco: Sorry, Huffington, but they knew what they were doing. Saying, “They got it wrong” is letting these Selfish Capitalists (there I go being redundant again) off the hook! These guys have a multitude of “Think Tanks” working full-time to invent new ways of scamming the system – when they benefit themselves, they did NOT get it wrong. They got it the way they intended!


Why is it that when Political Leaders such as Romney and Beck propose legislation that favors themselves and their Have-More cohorts, nobody uses the terms INSIDER INFORMATION, SELF-SERVING, HYPOCRISY, ORGANIZED CRIME, BLACKMAIL, RICO (RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS ACT) to name a few!



A picture is worth a thousand words for most people; however, some words are worth a lot more than other words. – Tabacco

Tabacco: It would be both simplistic and misleading to suggest the Bush Tax Cuts were the sole reason for our Economic Crisis – after all, those Cuts have been active for 10-years. Don’t forget Foreign Outsourcing, Derivatives to mask credit risk, Low-Interest Mortgages for those who could not afford them, Hiding $32 Trillion$ In Offshore Assets, etc. etc. The Rich are neither simplistic nor lacking in Scams.








The Chart That Should Accompany All Discussions of the Debt Ceiling


By James Fallows


inShare876Jul 25 2011, 10:58 AM ET

It’s this one, from yesterday’s New York Times. Click for a more detailed view, though it’s pretty clear as is.

Tabacco: If Tea Partyers are so “National Debt” conscious, why do they prefer the BUSH TAX CUTS over the OBAMA REVISED BUSH TAX CUTS?

It’s based on data from the Congressional Budget Office and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Its significance is not partisan (who’s “to blame” for the deficit) but intellectual. It demonstrates the utter incoherence of being very concerned about a structural federal deficit but ruling out of consideration the policy that was largest single contributor to that deficit, namely the Bush-era tax cuts.

An additional significance of the chart: it identifies policy changes, the things over which Congress and Administration have some control, as opposed to largely external shocks — like the repercussions of the 9/11 attacks or the deep worldwide recession following the 2008 financial crisis. Those external events make a big difference in the deficit, and they are the major reason why deficits have increased faster in absolute terms during Obama’s first two years than during the last two under Bush. (In a recession, tax revenues plunge, and government spending goes up – partly because of automatic programs like unemployment insurance, and partly in a deliberate attempt to keep the recession from getting worse.) If you want, you could even put the spending for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in this category: those were policy choices, but right or wrong they came in response to an external shock.

The point is that governments can respond to but not control external shocks. That’s why we call them “shocks.” Governments can control their policies. And the policy that did the most to magnify future deficits is the Bush-era tax cuts. You could argue that the stimulative effect of those cuts is worth it (“deficits don’t matter” etc). But you cannot logically argue that we absolutely must reduce deficits, but that we absolutely must also preserve every penny of those tax cuts. Which I believe precisely describes the House Republican position.

After the jump, from a previous “The Chart That Should…” positing, an illustration of the respective roles of external shock and deliberate policy change in creating the deficit.

UPDATE: Many people have written to ask how the impact of the “Bush-era tax cuts,” enacted under George W. Bush and extended under Barack Obama (with the help, as you will recall, of huge pressure from Senate Republicans), is divided between the two presidents. I don’t know and have written the creators of the chart to ask. (They have responded to say: it indicates the legacy effects of the changes made by each Administration. For instance, neither Bush nor Obama is credited with the entire cost of Pentagon spending or entitlements, but only the changes his Administration made, up or down. By this logic the long-run effect of tax cuts initiated by Bush is assigned to him, as any long-run effect of savings he initiated would be too.)

But to me it doesn’t matter. As I said above, the point of the chart really isn’t partisan responsibility. It is the central role of those tax cuts in creating the deficit that is now the focus of such political attention. Call them the “Obama-Extended Tax Cuts” if you’d like: either way, a deficit plan that ignores them fails a basic logic, math, and coherence test.






Complete text from The Washington Post:


Ending Bush tax cuts for rich would save about $80 billion in 2013, analysts say

Alex Wong/GETTY IMAGES – JULY 14: U.S. President Barack Obama speaks to supporters in the rain in Glen Allen, Va. On the last day of his two-day campaign across Virginia, Obama continued to discuss his plan to restore middle class security and urged Congress to act on extending tax cuts to middle class families.


By Lori Montgomery, Published: July 19


A Republican proposal to preserve tax cuts for the nation’s wealthiest households next year would cost about $80 billion more than a Democratic proposal to extend the cuts solely for middle-class taxpayers, according to official estimates released Thursday.


The GOP measure, introduced by Senate Republicans, would devote an additional $50 billion to retaining the George W. Bush-era tax cuts for taxpayers in the top two tax brackets. Reducing the estate and gift tax, which disproportionately benefits the wealthy, would eat up another $31 billion, according to cost estimates by the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation.


All told, the Republican measure would add $300 billion to next year’s budget deficit, the JCT said.


A competing Democratic proposal to extend the Bush tax cuts only on income under $250,000 would increase the deficit by about $223 billion next year. Democrats would devote an additional $27 billion to extending a variety of other middle-class tax cuts, including a credit for college tuition and an expanded credit for the working poor, bringing the total cost of the measure to about $250 billion.


The Bush tax cuts, enacted in 2001 and 2003, are set to expire Dec. 31. Democrats have threatened to let them all go unless Republicans abandon their push to preserve the cuts for taxpayers in the top brackets. With the release of the new cost estimates, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) questioned the wisdom of that position.


“The American people deserve better than to have the President and his allies threaten to melt down our economy for what amounts to [a few] days of federal spending,” said Hatch, the senior Republican on the Senate Finance Committee. “With 41 consecutive months of unemployment over 8 percent, it just makes sense to extend this tax policy for a year so we can enact meaningful, pro-growth tax reform.”


Democrats countered that the one-year savings from ending the cuts for the rich may not be much, but that those savings would grow over time, bringing more than $800 billion into the U.S. Treasury by the end of the decade.


“If we decouple the tax cuts for those earning above $250,000 they will be gone for good. Over ten years, that will reduce the deficit by $800 billion compared to what Republicans want to do,” said Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.).


The Senate plans to consider the tax measures next week; neither is expected to pass. The debate is designed instead to let each party air its position on taxes heading into the November elections.


Neither party is calling for a permanent extension of the Bush tax cuts. Instead, both sides are seeking a one-year extension that would give lawmakers more time to enact a complete overhaul of the Byzantine federal tax code in 2013.










Josh Walling and Randi Cartmill with their children, Jacqueline, Josh and Ryan. Josh Walling says his family, whose household income is below the national median, would lose a substantial amount of money if the Bush tax cuts expired.


Complete Text of Middle-Class Norm

Bush Tax Cuts: The New Middle-Class Norm

July 10, 2012


The first in an occasional series, Fiscal Cliff Notes, which breaks down the looming “fiscal cliff” of expiring tax cuts and deep automatic spending cuts set to hit around the first of year.


How Taxes Would Rise By Income Group

If the Bush-era tax cuts expire at year’s end for all income groups, here’s how much Americans with different annual income would be affected, on average.

Source: Tax Policy Center

Credit: Alyson Hurt / NPR


Middle-Income Impact, If The Cuts Expire


1/2 = The reduction in the child tax credit. The child tax credit would drop from $1,000 per child to $500 per child.


50 percent = The tax increase on the first $17,500 of taxable income for families and couples and $8,750 for single individuals. The 10 percent tax bracket would disappear if the tax cuts are allowed to expire, meaning the first $59,300 of taxable income for families and $35,500 for individuals would be taxed at a 15 percent rate.


$1,800 = The average estimated tax increase to be experienced by people in the middle of the income distribution (range $33,500 to $59,500).*


95.9 percent = The percentage of middle-income taxpayers expected to see their taxes go up if the tax cuts expire.*


4 percent = The average percentage decline in after-tax income for middle-income households if the tax cuts expire.*


*Source: Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center Microsimulation Model


Much of the political focus when discussing the Bush-era tax cuts is on the wealthy, but they’re not the only ones who would be affected if the tax cuts are allowed to expire at the end of this year.

Tabacco: It’s POLITICAL BLACKMAIL plain and simple! If Democrats take away the Rich Folks’ BIG TAX BREAKS, then Republicans will see to it the Middle Class loses its little tax breaks also. Republicans always play DIRTY POOL!


The vast majority of American taxpayers would take a hit, including Randi Cartmill and Josh Walling, who live in Madison, Wis., with their three children.


The family’s household income hovers a little below the national median, in the $40,000 to $50,000 range. Cartmill says the tax cuts have helped the family’s bottom line.


“I remember when they went into place and being pleasantly surprised by how much more money we got back,” she says.


In part, that’s because the tax cuts doubled the tax credit for each child from $500 to $1,000. The cuts also created a new tax bracket for the lowest levels of income, which gives most families an $875 break. If these cuts were to expire, the Cartmill-Walling family’s after-tax income would drop by about $2,500.


“That’s a substantial amount of money,” says Cartmill.

Tabacco: Significant to Middle Class folks, but not to Haves and Have-Mores! POLITICAL BLACKMAIL is a Republican Standby!


The SOLUTION to GOP POLITICAL BLACKMAIL is to force Republicans to RAISE MIDDLE CLASS TAXES by ending our Bush Tax Cuts. Democrats ALWAYS BACK DOWN! Democratic Politicians feed at the LOBBYING TROUGH too, you know! But these Democrats are not weak; they use this “apparent Weakness” to cover their own behinds when Dems act like Republicans!








Don’t bother to read the following Post complete text! The GOP will stand firm, Obama won’t veto, everyone will keep their Big or little Tax Break, and the National Debt will continue to expand exponentially until Doomsday, which will only affect the Poor and Middleclass – Republicans will blame us and see to it!





“Generally … what we do with our tax refund is we use that as kind of our savings in the bank for [if] the car breaks down or the water heater goes or whatever and we have a big expense all at once.”


The way Walling sees it, that’s like a 5 percent cut to their income on top of other blows they’ve taken as a result of the tough economy.


“I don’t think my wife was explaining quite how hard it is, you know, but that’s pretty much where it’s at,” Walling says.


And they’re not alone.


The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center estimates 96 percent of taxpayers at the middle of the income distribution would see their taxes go up “an average of about $1,800 a year,” says Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the center.


“That will reduce their after-tax income by about 4 percent,” Williams says. “Four percent if you’re spending every dollar you’ve got makes a noticeable dent in your budget.”


To give a sense of the other side of the ledger, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation, extending just the higher child tax credit over the next decade would add almost $270 billion to the deficit.




For those, who adhere to the Concept that “A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words”, I include additional pictures:










And, if this applies to you or you are just a voracious Reader, “Tax Watch for the Rich” or for those, who want to be Rich but have no chance!






Tabacco: In the opening Article posted under this Post, that author said,


Can I give you the layman’s summary of the ongoing debate over the “Bush era tax cuts”? Most of my readers understand this intuitively, but I offer the following in the unlikely event that an intellectually honest Democrat or “Progressive” might drop by. It really is no more complicated than this:


Tabacco responds as follows,


Can I give you the layman’s summary of the ongoing debate over the “Bush era tax cuts”? Most of my readers understand this intuitively, but I offer the following in the unlikely event that an intellectually honest Republican or “Conservative” or subset “Tea Partyer” might drop by. It really is no less complicated than this.


Right-Wingers want you to think the Complex is Simplistic so they can AVOID FACTS & FIGURES!


Tabacco focuses on these RELEVANCIES the Right-Wingers always avoid. It ain’t SEXY, but it is NECESSARY & ESSENTIAL!


Republicans/Conservatives/Tea Partyers/Right-Wingers etc. avoid details, facts, logic and who-what-when-where-why-how because details and facts would circumvent their deception goal!


Tabacco is in none of those categories.


See the difference!



Tabacco: I consider myself both a funnel and a filter. I funnel information, not readily available on the Mass Media, which is ignored and/or suppressed. I filter out the irrelevancies and trivialities to save both the time and effort of my Readers and bring consternation to the enemies of Truth & Fairness! When you read Tabacco, if you don’t learn something NEW, I’ve wasted your time.


Tabacco is not a blogger, who thinks; I am a Thinker, who blogs. Speaking Truth to Power!


In 1981′s ‘Body Heat’, Kathleen Turner said, “Knowledge is power”.

T.A.B.A.C.C.O.  (Truth About Business And Congressional Crimes Organization) – Think Tank For Other 95% Of World: WTP = We The People



Subdomain re Exploited Minority Long Island community



This entry was posted in Bush, class+war, compromise, deregulation, disaster+capitalism, GOP, hypocrisy, knowledge+is+power, Obama, outsourcing, political+ping+pong, Politics, socialism4richcapitalism4poor, sophistry, takebackamerica, warpeace and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to BUSH TAX CUTS! Who, What, When, Where, Why & How! Why Should We The People Prop Up Corporations, Haves & Have-Mores While Those Elitists Outsource American Jobs Overseas? Phrased Another Way, Do Corporate Profits Benefit You? And Let’s Not Forget $32 TRILLIONS Hidden From IRS In Overseas Accounts! To Begin, The Bush Tax Cuts Are REGRESSIVE: The Higher Your Income, The Greater The %-CUT: That Counteracts The Graduated Income Tax & Is Un-American For We The People!

  1. admin says:


    This morning I decided to check out whether or not Bob Griggs, the blogger, who leads off my Post, had told the Truth, the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth – he DID NOT!

    Question: What is the current estate tax rate and limits?

    The estate tax, or inheritance tax as it is sometimes known, has long been regarded by its critics as an onerous example of socialistic wealth redistribution. Supporters argue that it prevents families from amassing fortunes and creating an American aristocracy like those found in the older European countries. Regardless of your viewpoint on the estate tax, you will have to deal with it if you are fortune enough to have amassed wealth. So, what are the current estate tax rate and limits?

    Answer: The answer is complicated. Prior to the estate tax reduction, estates were taxed at rates beginning at 37 percent and going as high as 55 percent. Generally, the estate tax only applied to assets exceeding $1 million.

    Included in President Bush’s tax cuts, however, was a provision to phase out the estate tax rate over the next few years. For families with large real estate holdings such as farms that have been held for generations or small businesses, this stroke of good luck will ensure that assets are passed onto posterity without Uncle Sam taking a majority of the bounty. This would be accomplished in two ways: 1.) by raising the amount exempt from the estate tax rate, and 2.) lowering the estate tax rate itself.

    According to the IRS literature, an estate tax filing need only be made if the value of an estate exceeds the following amounts:

    2005: First $1,500,000 in assets
    2006-2008: First $2,000,000 in assets
    2009: First $3,500,000 in assets

    In addition, the maximum estate tax rate applied to the amounts in excess of these figures are as follows:

    2005: 47 percent
    2006: 46 percent
    2007- 2009: 45 percent

    In 2010, the estate tax rate drops to zero percent; if you die in that year, your heirs would not pay taxes, even if you passed on $20 billion!

    One caveat: Congress ensured that the law sunsets in 2011. That is, on January 1st, 2011, the estate tax rate will return to its pre-Bush levels. Practically speaking, this means the difference between dying on December 31, 2010 and January 1, 2011 can mean 55 percent of your estate if you are person of means!

    TABACCO: This will teach me once again to NEVER TRUST THE RIGHT-WING, even when they present us with STATISTICS! “37%-55%”, not 55% – and we are talking LARGE ESTATES & VERY, VERY LARGE ESTATES. Most of us We The People don’t even qualify. So Griggs “Death Tax” was about the Rich and Super-Rich.

    I checked Bob G’s figures and found them incomplete and a lie. Again, the Right-Wing makes SIMPLICITY out of COMPLEXITY – that’s what made me suspicious and caused me to check it out first thing this am. I thought, “Why would someone, whose estate was less than $200,000, pay the same rate as someone, whose Estate was $10 million$?” That of course cannot be – even with Republicans running everything!

    I am leaving the following message @http://www.bobgriggs.com/the-bush-tax-cuts-explained/

    Bob G:
    Even your “death tax” reference is incomplete and misleading: 37%-55% is the range, not a flat 55% as you inferred. http://beginnersinvest.about.com/od/estatetax/f/estatetaxrate.htm

    I published on Bush Tax Cuts yesterday and republished your Post (with editorial comments of my own – it needs that badly). And “It really is no more complicated than this:” is another FALSEHOOD!

    If Right-wingers, Conservatives, Republicans/Tea Partyers or just plain Good Folks, who read this blog, want to read substantiated FACTS and FIGURES, GO TO:

    Tabacco (Truth About Business And Congressional Crimes Organization)

    To My Tabacco Readers: But I cannot guarantee the Bob G will publish my comment!

  2. admin says:


    FACT CHECK: Romney’s deficit vow lacks specifics
    FACT CHECK: Romney offers deficit pledge without detail and partial telling of Bain story
    By Calvin Woodward, Associated Press | Associated Press – Fri, Aug 31, 2012 12:07 AM EDT

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Mitt Romney promised voters Thursday night that he would cut deficits and put America on track to a balanced budget as president, but he left voters to take it on faith that he could deliver. The details behind that pledge, and the painful spending choices involved, are conspicuously lacking in his agenda.
    TABACCO: The only way Romney or any other Republican President would ever “cut deficits” is on the backs of the Middle Class and Poor! That’s why Romney won’t be SPECIFIC about HOW he would do it! You know he would NEVER TAX THE RICH! When you CUT ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS, you effectively RAISE TAXES ON THOSE, WHO BENEFIT FROM THOSE ENTITLEMENTS: MIDDLE CLASS & POOR

  3. admin says:

    S. Andersen!!

    I would love to publish your Comment, but all you did was make unsubstantiated ASSERTIONS. And your intent is very clear – you have an AGENDA!

    Try again! This time attempt to substantiate the inference you make by blasting Obama. You are attempting to throw my Readers into the Republican Camp by default. This won’t work here. You have to justify both your ASSERTIONS and your MANIPULATION ATTEMPTS!

    That’s why most of Comments published here are mine! Most come from complimenters with an Agenda and a WEBSITE. This one comes from an Individual with an Agenda! I invite Foils, Republicans, Right-Wingers and the like to Comment here – but you’d better have some INFORMATION to impart and SOURCES, NOT JUST KVETCHING & MANIPULATING! I’m onto you. I am sending you an e-mail to advise you of this Comment so you can respond – that is if you have some content worth publishing!

    Tabacco (Truth About Business And Congressional Crimes Organization)

    PS You might begin by showing that my Comment immediately above is wrong and how it is invalid:
    “TABACCO: The only way Romney or any other Republican President would ever “cut deficits” is on the backs of the Middle Class and Poor! That’s why Romney won’t be SPECIFIC about HOW he would do it! You know he would NEVER TAX THE RICH! When you CUT ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS, you effectively RAISE TAXES ON THOSE, WHO BENEFIT FROM THOSE ENTITLEMENTS: MIDDLE CLASS & POOR”

    Sophists ignore what I say, then go on to make propaganda assertions. That will NOT WORK HERE!

  4. Florida CPA says:

    but not keeping them it is a tax increase.

    • admin says:

      Duh! You don’t say! I had no idea!

      And this guy is a CPA, who drinks the Kool Aid daily! Of course we should raise taxes on the RICH! That’s how it used to be when we actually had a “Graduated” Income Tax! They spend our Tax Dollar$ on WARS FOR THEIR OWN CORPORATE PROFITS, then complain when we want to REINSTITUTE that “GRADUATED” part of the original Income Tax! That’s called CHUTZPAH! The FILTHY RICH only get to run things because we DRINK THE KOOL AID and decline to THINK FOR OURSELVES!

      Let’s all RAISE OUR GLASSES and TOAST THE FLORIDA CPA! Thanks, CPA, if you hadn’t commented, I might never have realized that eliminating the BUSH TAX CUTS for the RICH is a TAX INCREASE – ON THE RICH!

      Thanks again,


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>