E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIf you're already not familiar with the term, you'll certainly hear it over the next three months -- the Ryan budget.
What is it?
It substantially restructures Medicare; cuts Medicaid, food stamps, and transportation infrastructure; and it reduces the top tax rate from 35% to 25%. Regarding Medicare, the 2011 version of the Ryan budget would transform it from a government-run program to one where future seniors receive a voucher or premium support to purchase health insurance from private insurers. The Congressional Budget Office said the plan would force most seniors to pay more for their health care than under the current Medicare system. The latest version, however, would give future seniors the choice of purchasing private insurance or through Medicare's traditional fee-for-service model, and it received the backing of at least one Democrat, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR).
Ryan and his allies say a bold plan - reforming entitlements like Medicare and Medicaid - and slashing discretionary spending is needed to reduce the deficit and debt. But critics argue that the pain comes primarily from the poor and middle class. An analysis from the liberal-leaning Center on Budget Policies and Priorities says that 62% of the spending cuts in the Ryan budget would come from low-income programs, while 37% of its tax benefits would go to those making more than $1 million per year.
Leave a Comment:
n.b. What is the Ryan TAX RETURN?
Ryan Budget: Mitt Romney is all about Rep. Paul Ryan's 'marvelous' budget plan, that proposes deep cuts to food stamps and other safety net programs, while gutting Medicare.
The Tax Policy Center says Ryan's tax plan will cost a total of $10 Trillion over a decade.
Backhouse, Romney can't be serious. Maybe an outside chance that sources are wrong? Ryan brings zero to the table.
Paul Ryan is a Catholic? If so, he's just another hypocrite who doesn't give a damn about the poor. His policies are unChristian like.
USA Today: And for just as long, Catholic groups and theologians — and even the Catholic bishops — have been saying that in fact the GOP plan fails to meet the basic "moral criteria" of Catholic teaching.
btw, didn't we all read that the only reason Romney went to Poland was for the Catholic vote?
Ryan is obviously a "Catholic in name only"! Actually, his proposed budget proves that he isn't even a Christian, if "Christian" means "like Christ", as he robs every program that could help any of the 98%, and gives MORE benefits and WELFARE to the 2% super wealthy. He's just another one of the "Pharisees", kicking the "Publican" lying in the road. AND, he's another Romney, when it comes to being born with a silver spoon in his mouth, as he was born into money, and he never had an unmet need. Hoever, his mother had given up on him as a wastrel, but then he discovered his TRUE "god", the greedy "power" of politics.
The U.S. Catholic Bishops have rebuked Ryan's proposed budget because it doesn't meet any of the criteria to the poor and needy that are clarified in the Christian Bible. Ryan's budget is greedy and selfish, and would be much more to the liking of his idol, atheist author, Ayn Rand! So, he might as well cut the pretense of being "Christian" OR "Catholic"! Anyone who knows the "Corporal Works of Mercy" can see there is nothing "Christian"at all about his Ayn Rand budget! I really don't think he can FOOL God in this matter.
Still talking about cost of access. Does it matter to him if the waste is in government or the private sector?
Still think the best approach includes both R & D. Combine all in one paying 60% (?) of access cost for citizens and leaving personable responsibility for the rest whether you choose private insurance or out of pocket.
R wants private companies to dictate your care if you can afford it.
D wants government to control those private companies.
Insurance was born to guarantee doctors received some kind of reimbursement for services. Doctors are healthcare. Nurses, hospitals, pharma, etc. not health insurance companies.
Law of large numbers.
Everybody wants this change?
How about a government of the people by the people not a government of two parties by two parties!
Remove parties from the ballot. Have your primaries but not at taxpayer expense.
Lobby the people's government with the people's permission. Lobby by petition only.
Pick a party.
“A Nightmare on Easy Street…for Republicans,” a film by the American People:
President Obama is re-elected handily in November. The Democrats also reach a super-majority in the Senate and recapture the House.
Now the fun begins.
Hillary Clinton tenders her resignation as Secretary of State in early December,
effective at noon on Inauguration Day in January, 2013.
President Obama nominates popular and highly-regarded former U.N. Ambassador and ex-Governor of New Mexico Bill Richardson to succeed Hillary at the State Department.
Eric Holder quietly resigns as Attorney General a few months into 2013, neutralizing the animus of the Right regarding Fast and Furious while at the same time effectively neutering chief inquisitor Darrel Issa himself, an act for which Holder is awarded the Medal of Freedom.
President Obama nominates New York Governor Andrew Cuomo to replace departing Attorney General Holder, effectively opening the door for Hillary Clinton to run for and win the Governorship of her home state, New York.
With her election to the New York statehouse, Hillary fills the only remaining gap in her resume, that of Chief Executive of a large mid-Atlantic state, providing her with the day-to-day managerial expertise which so many on the Right claim is essential to any legitimate national candidate possessing presidential aspirations.
As Governor of New York, Hillary leads the way for the wholesale statewide implementation of the Affordable Care Act, establishing a paradigm for other states across the nation while simultaneously fulfilling her lifelong dream, begun as First Lady in 1992, of providing affordable quality health care to a beleaguered populace.
Having comfortably and strategically distanced herself from the day-to-day operations of the ground-breaking Obama Presidency, Hillary positions herself for her own run for the Oval Office in 2016.
Secretary of State Bill Richardson is positioned to accept the nomination of his party as Democratic Vice-Presidential candidate in 2016, thereby blunting the attractiveness of Christie’s selection of either Rubio or Cruz to a growing number of Hispanic voters while at the same time energizing the Democratic base of the western states.
Upon their historic victory, powered in no large part by the unanticipated emergence of a coalition of bipartisan women voters who see in Hillary’s candidacy their greatest near-term opportunity to shatter once and for all the glass ceiling inside the White House, President Hillary Clinton now leads the way for the nationwide implementation of the Affordable Care Act, laying the groundwork for what will become within her second term the ultimate prize of Single-Payer in the form of Medicare-for-All.
Upon the anticipated death of an aging Justice Scalia or the unanticipated institutionalization of either Justice Thomas or Justice Alito within her Presidency, President Clinton sets another historic precedent by placing in nomination the name of a humbled and grateful former President Barack Hussein Obama as Justice on the Supreme Court, the first American to have served in each of the three branches of the federal government, effectively restoring a Center-Left majority which upholds and affirms Medicare-for-All, and while so doing publishes the most succinct majority opinion in the history of American jurisprudence, invoking the age-old populist axiom: “IT’S CONSTITUTIONAL, BITCHES!”
President Clinton and Vice-President Richardson serve through 2024, by which time the United States of America has succeeded in colonizing Mars under Space Admiral Newt Gingrich and the emotionless, pointy-headed science officer “Dr.” Rush Limbaugh, selected by President Clinton for the win-win potential of the appointments. Republicans migrate en masse.
The End.
No animals were injured in the production of this 'Nightmare for Republicans'.
MSNBCMFE, you had me until the very end. Can you change that to Conservatives migrate en masse? A whole lot of us Republicans share Obama's vision, we voted for him in 2008 and more are joining us in voting for him in 2012. We just hate the Conservatives who infiltrated and then polluted our party in such despicable ways.
Done for all future publications, Keith, effective Saturday morning. Thanks for the recommendation.
Anything in and around and otherwise not THIS is fluff. Damage that may be caused by ANYTHING else that Ryan could even dream of putting in his plan PALES in comparison to that little tax rate reduction.
When people talk about "the top tax rate". we need to remember what that means. It's talking about tax on PERSONAL INCOME. It's the tax rate that a business owner or CEO or even Vice President might face at the end of the year after having REMOVED money from a business for his/her personal gain.
Understand! This is NOT money that goes back into the business to be reinvested in equipment or jobs, this is tax on money removed from the business INSTEAD of creating jobs.
And what do we encourage when we lower the top tax rate? Profit-taking. Huge obscene executive paydays. Mass transfers to the Cayman Islands. The removal of cash from our businesses and our economy.
And what do we DISCOURAGE with a lower top tax rate? Business reinvestment. Job creation. New equipment purchases. Market expansion... virtually ALL the behavior we need right now.
And what does this CAUSE? The rich to get richer. The gap between the rich and middle class to get bigger. Economic stagnation. The shrinkage of our economy. The pocket lining of the GOP elite.
For some, who call this "trickle-down" economics, this may not seem important. But those of us that realize that the narrative has been formed with misinformation to hide the rape of our system, this is THE issue.
MSNBCMFE,
Thanks for that one. A great laugh to start my Saturday morning. Would make a great miniseries.
Thanks, Frank!
Lots of recommendations for an updated version coming in from across the discussion board. Look for it in the morning and feel free to pass the revised version along for me. Hopefully it will one day land in Hillary's hands and serve as a motivator.
Ryan and his allies say a bold plan - reforming entitlements like Medicare and Medicaid - and slashing discretionary spending is needed to reduce the deficit and debt
A bold plan indeed. It does not affect the rich, and he CONTINUES giving subsidies to big oil, increasing the military budget, and not raising taxes for the 1%.
Bold only for those that believe, but that has another name.
VOTE DEMOCRAT
If America really votes for these two clowns then you deserve the consequences that come from this budget. You cannot talk about the reducing the deficit until you talk about reducing military spending.
Ryan's budget is more of the same trickle up crap that benefits the rich and hurts the poor and middle class.
Ryan as VP makes perfect sense... Romney has not convinced the extreme right he is conservative enough for them. This pick does that...
Well, since Barry cut the work requirement out of Medicaid, states are going broke and SOMEONE must do SOMETHING!
Fedup, you are clueless. That is a bunch of cr*p and you know it.
chocolatekat
They can't help it... lies are all they have to campaign on.
FedupwithFed
...Work requirement out of WELFARE, not medicaid. And he's allowing states to offer up their solutions as an ALTERNATIVE to try to get a BETTER handle on getting people off of welfare, not to let them off the hook. And wanna guess who blocked stimulus legislation that would have helped state and local budgets? Yea, well.. a clue: NOT DEMOCRATS.
When you get to the point of yelling to be yelling, why don't you just wake up and shut up?
fedupwithfed: With people like chocolatekat you see what we are up against. Some are actually dumb enough to believe the BS put out by Barry and his minions that Barry dictatorially changing the law to to take out the work requirement will actually increase the numbers of those going to work. But, then again, these are the same people who believed that extending the time on unemployment to 2 years increases the number of those who work.
The fact is that there really isn't a heck of a lot that can be done about people who are bound and determined to be dumb. Just look over this site and see if there is anyone of these "brilliant" people who has posted anything about what Obama has done to improve the economy. It's been asked time and time again and no one has come up with anything. That's why I say they are willfully dumb. They are apparently smart enough to know that Obama has done nothing positive for the economy.
The Ryan Medicare voucher and forcing the elderly to find an insurance corporation to buy their own health insurance will not work without the AHA forcing health care corporations to insure everyone. If the government doesn't force insurance companies to insure the elderly they won't because there isn't a huge profit margin there.
Ryan's plan of borrowing more money to make up for reducing taxes further for him and other members of Congress and the super rich makes no sense. We have already borrowed way too much to make up for the shortfall with the Bush II wealthy tax cut.
To: Mitt Romney
From: Democratic National Committee
The entire Democratic National Committee thanks you for choosing Representative Paul Ryan as your Vice presidential candidate. This assures a victory in Florida for President Obama resulting in more than the 270 electoral college voted needed for his reelection as President. We can now spend more of our resources in Ohio, Colorado, Virginia, North Catalonia and Nevada to insure an even larger victory.
onit: I agree with you! I can't think of anything Obama has done that's positive either!
well this election brings clear choice, Obama-socialism. Romney-capitalism. it is going to get interesting.
And what is his plan for the 800-lb gorilla in the room, aka the DoD? It's just about our biggest section of the budget, but we don't talk about reducing redundancy or our overseas footprint, not to mention the wasteful "use it or lose it" unit budgeting.
We have multiple platforms designed to do the same thing, multiple uniforms for people serving the same country, duplicate administrative programs and basing facilities, not to mention moving people and their families around every few years at enormous cost. DoD is a budgeting nightmare.
Not to worry AG, Mittens seems anxious to start a war to justify defense spending.
saxon...I choose to look at it a bit more like this:
Obama - we are the United States, we are one nation, we thrive together, or we starve together!
Romney - I got mine - too bad about you...you're not my problem!
Detroit-Storm....that was his reason behind going to Poland recently. His sources told him they suspected the Poles had weapons of mass destruction hidden away.
saxon: I'd add: Obama-poverty. Romney-prosperity.
The rich , the rich , the rich. I can only hope some crazed mad man or woman end this attack on the middle class and entitlements for the rich!
Well Witchrunner:
1. Obama got Bin Laden
2. Obama saved us from another Great Depression
3. Obama saved General Motors
4. Obama ended the IRAQ war
5. Obama got healthcare passed that no other President has been able to accomplish.
6. Obama has a plan to cut the deficit, the 1% are trying to stop him.
7. Obama is a peacemaker not a war monger.
So Obama has accomplished something, he has kept us out of Syria.
witchrunner,
God save us from Mitt, Paul and the extreme rich!
The rich, the rich! A drop from 35% to 25% in taxes should tell you something. Of course, you probably won't see it. Huge cuts to Medicare and Medicaid to pay for the riches cuts. disgusting. Maybe some mad man or woman will decide to put an end to this madness of the right before November!
To vote for any Republilcan this election you must be either rich, or delusional.
Witch runner, That is because you can't think! Brain dead is what the right is counting on and the FOX network is doing everything to ensure!
Oh hell, Obama is already hurting the low income and middle class. Obama care is going to raise insurance premiums to the elderly when it takes effect next year. That is already a proven fact.
At least some of Ryans plan cuts federal waste on programs that hasn't worked since their inception .
And did you notice that the report came from a liberal analyst, which mean that person is lying thru their teeth and creating smoke and mirrors to cover up the truth. I say the report if on paper is only worthy of toilet paper.
LEFT …
[That is a proven fact]
Care to provide a link to establish that proof !!!
The Romney/Ryan budget continues to add to our debt for another 28 years before the budget is balanced and that can only happen if unemployment decreases to 3% (in his revenue plan) which our country hasn’t seen in over 50 years.
case: gee, now that's stretching things don't you think? Bin Laden? Actually, the military got him and Obama almost blew it by taking so long to decide whether to go after him after he was advised where the guy was. Saved us from a depression? How so? He hasn't had any policies that have done anything other than keep us in a recession. Remember stimulus for the "shovel ready" jobs? After spending that and more, Obama's response was "guess the jobs weren't so shovel ready after all." Said with a laugh. Saved GM? Really? Yeah, he illegally took it away from the shareholders, put $80 billion of taxpayer money into it and it's worth about $35 billion now. Yup, really did a hell of a job saving it! Ended Iraq war? Not sure he ended anything. He got the troops out and sent them to Afghanistan. Last I heard we are still fighting there and our military men and women are still being killed. Obamacare: Sure, he used taxpayer money to bribe Congress and he used bully tactics to get it passed. But, healthcare costs are already going up. It's such a great plan that over 3,300 waivers have been granted so far. Cut deficit? Surely you jest. He's increased the deficit in his 3 1/2 years by more than Bush did in all 8 of his years, and that's including the wars. Heck, conservatives thought Bush was was too liberal in spending. But, Obama has been out of sight! Obama has no plan to reduce the deficit. If he did you'd think that he would have proposed it by now. He's yet to get a single vote on his budgets, when he has one. Peacemaker? Just because his media doesn't report the fighting and deaths like they did under Bush doesn't mean that the fighting isn't going on. He expanded our involvement from 2 wars to 4. Syria: So far he's backed all the wrong people. He said nothing when there was uprising in Iran. He supported the ouster of our ally in Egypt and the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood. Will see what the end results are, but it's difficult to be to hopeful. As to Iraq, we'll see on that. His bumbling may have undone all the good Bush did there.
clwyd: You might want to investigate a little more on that tax issue. If you recall, after 9/11, our economy went south. The hated Bush tax cuts prevented the economy from going to far south and soon recovered and boomed for the next 6 years. Bush tried to get the sub-prime mortgage situation under control. He warned about it, but was rebuffed by Kennedy, Frank, et. al. His warnings turned out to be very prophetic and the 2008 collapse occurred. Oh, about those tax cuts, any idea what happened as a result? Turns out that government revenues increased and the percentage of income taxes paid by the "rich" actually increased! Ryan's budget was a "proposal." That means a starting point. Obama's only plan is promise the world to everyone for free and spend, spend, spend! I realize it's not in the lexicon of a lib, but you can have all these great spending plans in place and promise whatever you want, but if there is no money to pay for it, then the promises are worthless. As they say, if it sounds to good to be true, it probably is. The fact is that if something isn't done about medicare, medicaid, and every other aspect of the budget then this country will continue the steep decline of the last 4 years. Yet, libs don't want to address the spending explosion. That's why we need Romney/Ryan. The spending has to be brought under control and Obama will not do it.
What is the Ryan Budget?
basically it allows the rich a free license to detroy the economy (2008 recession?) and then try to install fiscal 'discipline' on the backs of the poor by cutting programs - because as they say we can't afford such programs any more.
Romney wants to cut the top rate from 35% to 25% but since with loopholes he only currently pays 14.5% what would he pay then? 31% of Romneys income was taxed as carried interest at a rate of 15%. Carried interest isn't capital gains it's the cut of profits from investing others money and only available to venture capitalists and hedge fund managers. If they make 1 billion profit investing others money and get a 20% cut that's 200 million taxed at 15% instead of normal income rates even though any other profession would pay top rates on commission income. Democrats tried 3 times to eliminate this special give away but republicans blocked it.
Agreed.
The Reich-wing leadership is complete.
Does Obama have a plan to save Social Security? If so I haven't heard it.
Obama has already reduced the FICA tax (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) which he now calls a "wage tax" to satisfy the young and buy votes. The elderly will suffer, and the chances of the young ever seeing anything from Social Security is nil. Most young recognize this and don not expect to see any benefits.
LBJ and the Democrats raided the Social Security Trust Fund (established to be a self sustaining annuity for the elderly), because they were afraid to raise taxes. They bankrupt the Social Security system as conceived. The trust fund no longer exists. Non negotiable bonds (which are worthless -- nothing more than an IOU from you to yourself, "I'll pay me when and if I want to pay me") were given. The bonds, given to Social Security are so uncollectable that they are not even computed into the national debt or deficiency figures you see published.
As of today, Social Security taxes (FICA -- look on your pay stub) come in this day and immediately goes out the next to those on Social Security (Those who paid into the Trust Fund all of their working carrier until LBJ. Those who are paying FICA taxes are not getting any retirement benefit from it. And should not expect to see any in the future. FICA will surely increase as more "baby Boomers" retire an longevity increases: therefore FICA will continue to grow for the young.
All Obama's "wage tax (sic)" cut did was to force the Treasury to draw from funds from other places, and increase the deficit to pay for the promises that Social Security made to those when it was enacted under FDR.
As of now, very few young people ever expect to see Social Security. Simply it will not be there. Ryan proposes to continue the program, as is, for all those presently on it or 55 and older. Obama"s repeated statements to the elderly that the Ryan will reduce the benefits for those already on Social Security, or change the program for those 55 and older is an absolute, out right lie, it's a scare tactic addressed the most vulnerable, and ten time worse than "I never had sex with that woman".
Those who think that continuing Social Security as it is will give their children or grandchildren something are fools (sorry). All it will do is force them to pay more and more taxes to support those growing older and they will never see anything out of it. You cannot tax people to death to pay for others and expect that there will be something coming back to you. It is a reverse inheritance. When I worked, my FICA tax was 3 to 4 times as much as I paid in Income tax. I was self employed so I had to complete and file a Schedule S & E, so I saw the figures and the was money coming out of my wallet. Those who get a W-2 don't see it, as it is buried (FICA).
The system cannot be sustained. I am not agreeing or disagreeing with Ryan except that an overhaul is mandated. Do we need a 10 year or more or less transition period, I don't know, but I know I wouldn't want to be one year from retirement age and find the benefits I paid for are cut.
Social Security needs serious thought. Obama seems to be playing games with it, lying to the elderly and reducing funding. And he has no plan.
Ryan, has been trying to put something together, good or bad, at least he is trying. We have to try !!! We cannot continue to walk around in a daze, as our President is.

Where does this budget mention slashing government waste (gsa, medicare, etc.) where does this Ryan budget eliminate social security for people earning aover $250,000 yr. - where does it mention slashing pork and the MIC / defense department by 50 % or more. In other words why arn't the sacred cows being slashed along with the average american. Haven't seen one damned thing about all of this - are we going to allow this Ryan budget to happen - I hope not because we will go into another depression faster than you can say Rack & Ruin
I have a neighbor who lost her career job because someone was distracted while driving. She wasn't rich, just a single mother who lost her husband to a war. Now 100% severely disabled with brain damage, multiple organ problems, steel plate fixed bones, she would give anything to be able to be useful as she was a hard worker, sometimes holding down a fulltime job and two part-time jobs to pay for college and teach her children never to expect society take care of them. But now she struggles to barely keep her home, unable to pay for all her meds or even go to all the doctors she is supposed to. Also she has unique dietary needs complicating things and doesn’t qualify for food stamps because she is ten dollars above the limit so when money very tight stops eating. Exactly how is Ryan’s plan going to work for her and others like her literally unable to work and barely living month to month as it is? If any more money is expected from her to “pay her fair share” what should she do? Sell her tiny home not paid off where she is already paying below current rent, find a room because she has looked and that is all she can afford, a place where she can’t have some control over the cost and when those funds are gone then what? As she puts it, “Die quietly without being a burden to society.” Amazing how a foolish selfish choice can devastate another sending them on a road to ruin.
It isn’t hard to imagine how many folks are trying to decide between paying their rent or mortgage, utilities or food daily nor the numbers that will increase if they have to meet higher co-pays or medications like my neighbor who are not well enough to work. If they can’t afford medical care, they will get sicker and die.I guess in the long run it will save the government money.Even if it has to pay for a paper casket. But who will pay for their funerals? Maybe one of these leaders can create potter's fields so when these poor folks die, they can even be buried without names.Jusr like the dark ages right on up to lots of places in the world. Save taxpayers money. Thank goodness if they are vets who are covered. I do think Ryan would rebuke Scrooge for thinking if they are going to die, then they best be quick about it and rid the world of one less burden on society. That is more likely how most Americans feel towards politicians who don’t keep their promises
Hey, maybe Ryan is planning on suggesting sticking all those homeless because they can’t afford to balance their budgets anymore, on those closed military bases. After all, there must be some reason they have been improving them and turning them into housing units with fencing around them. Might explain why the UN has equipment in Texas my brother watched loaded on trains.Throw in the mentally ill living on the streets, oh wait vets and those teen moms on welfare. Keep those little ones in there long enough and they will grow up trained to serve their country from cradle to grave. Imagine, the military would even have a steady workforce with those senior citizens, disabled and others, who can help out in times of need. Ryan could think of lots of contracts avoided by the free labor camps. Oops, did I say that word, I meant patriotic volunteers.
We can’t touch the sacred DOD cow, gotta keep feeding it a steady diet while taking the food from the poor and needy. Ryan looks bright, he will surely come up with hundreds of ways to make stone soup. And if he got real creative, just send in military doctors, why our vets know how great those are about determining real needs from imaginary don’t they? Save billions in taxpayers within a short time.That should solve tons of problems and balance the budget all in one swoop. Then the streets will be cleaned up no one will hear a peep from them. Nobody will miss them right? When Obama care kicks in with basic service no expensive procedures are even done cause those military doctors know what is best. Save even more. Now just hope nobody crashes into you, an expensive illness strikes or you get old huh! Then again all that saved cash looks tempting to go play soldier in some war games.
Do you think Ryan and Romney will require those who provide medical insurance to accept all patients regardless of pre-existing conditions with a cap on profits? It would good practice for helping our government learn what stewardship, to have a limit imposed upon it as to how much taxpayer funds it can spend to help others requesting help. I am not saying if a disaster happens we should not step in and help. But we all watched our hard earned money being wasted to rescue banks, businesses, countries instead of protecting Americans best interests.
Last of all, those who hold political office need to have limits applied to the salaries they receive from taxpayers. Both during and after they have served. No income should be given for those individuals after they have left office. Our founding fathers never intended a public office to be a source of wealth by those elected, whereby the common man and his descendents labored their whole lives in perpetuity for the privilege of being manipulated, deceived while having liberties stripped and cheated from the proper use of the rule of law meant to protect the common best interest of every citizen. So that special interests could reap wealth and destroy the equal representation of all citizens. The idea that a one-time term entitles people to a lifetime reward is ridiculous. Citizens should demand any pay increases must be voter approved and based on cost of living adjusted to that which those on assistance also receive with locked in rates for a max of no more than median average nationally. In addition members must be present for voting at least 95% of the time. No more of this massive absence when bills come up for votes and our politicians disappear. They were hired to do a job. They had better show up. Stop accepting mediocrity. Vote out of office any who fail to appear. If the average person failed to report for work like so many politicians, they would be sacked. Force our politicians to do likewise. Perhaps if those who seek political offices realize that such positions will no longer be a table at which they may fatten themselves at taxpayers expense and their leisure, but a position of stewardship, in which common people hold the reins of power instead and they are accountable, we may see more honest men step forward. We can't compel people to be honest, but we may help stop crooked men from stealing checkbooks and writing out checks to themselves using funds from the accounts of honest workers until the bank’s assets are overdrawn and its creditors go after Americans to arrange enslavement of us all.
These men who may be deciding how Americans survive this hurricane of hail, rain, floods, lightening, and winds attacking our nation, these problems we’re enduring, aren't going to have their sunny lives altered in the end. It‘s the privilege of the rich to live in their own high penthouse in the clouds. People in power rarely have to live with the choices they force on the teaming masses. But perhaps they should keep in mind the observations of a remarkable and very wise founding father during this nation’s birth. “A little rebellion every now and then is a good thing and as important in the political world as a storm in the physical world. His name was Thomas Jefferson, he wrote the Declaration of Independence. And it looks like this country is headed towards another delivery due pretty soon. But unlike his generation, there will be a lot more then 6% who might be willing to assist in the delivery. He also stated,“The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. What country ever before existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? The tree of liberty must be watered by the blood of tyrants and patriots every now and then. It is its natural manure. Liberty always fails as government grows.
wind dancer, you bring up a host of questions all of them very good ones. As I mentioned in another post Republicans are all about business , Wall Street and politics. The Democrats at least so far are more about humanity. That said we have to convince the roughly 6% undecided voters to vote Democrat across the board. I take comfort in the note of desperation I hear from the right wingers on news vine I believe they are running scared.
There, I fixed it.
In order to comprehend what the "top" tax rate is and how it affects individuals, you first need to know what the structures are for Corporations. Which based on your sentence you don't.
First off, a CEO works for a C-Corp and thus works for the "Shareholders" of that C-Corp. Shareholders are those individuals who invest in a company for various reasons. A CEO is taxed on his "Salary" Just like you and I. He is taxed on Dividends he receives from the company shares (Common Stocks) which is at a lower rate than Salary income. This is why Warren Buffett is taxed less than his secretary. He receives "dividends" as his payment. C-Corps do not have to pay a CEO a salary. Their compensation depends on the contract signed. CEO, President, Vice President are just a title, and how that person is taxed is based solely on his compensation from the C-Corp. When a C-Corp makes a dividend the profit is taxed twice. Once when the corp earns it and pays its tax on it and second when the shareholder receives the dividend and pays the tax on it. Dividends are paid after the Corp pays tax. A CEO cannot remove money from a C-Corp. There is no such thing as a distribution.
S-Corps have Capital Stocks that usually is 100% owned by the company's owner, but in rare circumstances more than one person has invested money into the company and owns a proportional percentage of that S Corp. They do not pay corporate taxes. The stocks pay no dividends and the owner has to pay themselves a Salary before any distributions from the company's profits can be made. The owner is the President of the company, they don't have to have a Vice-President and there is no such thing as a CEO. The "net" earnings of the S corporation are passed through to the owner(s) of the company and reported on their individual income tax returns. The distributions are not subject to FICA tax and are not considered self-employment income subject to self-employment tax. A distribution to a shareholder that is in excess of the shareholder's basis in his or her stock is taxed to the shareholder as capital gain. Tax laws limit the amount an S-Corp can distribute. This is why CPA's keep in business, their job is to closely monitor the profits & losses throughout the year and from prior years. Their taxes & penalties can be substantial if they over distribute.
Then you have Partnerships, a whole different set of rules & regulations apply.
So before you can criticize the taxes paid or not paid by corps you need to first understand the difference between the two.
So right! and how does first read have the ryan budget as the headline, and not post it?
Then the stupid opinion about it with no evidence....
any moron that would vote for obozo and his team of criminals is just plain stupid, and should be deported to france. they need some slaves over there to pay for the entitlements now that the millionaires are leaving.
just like new york, mass, cali and all those liberal bastions. people leave for the red states because they are better for business.
the proof is there to see, unless you dont want to look.
romney ryan the road and bridge to NOWHERE!!
same bush policies=same results!
Obama/Biden 2012 Americas Choice!
Clearly, there needs to be spending cuts in order to reduce the deficit and begin paying off the huge debt. The one thing that can be leveled at the President is that during the last 3 1/2 years, he simply hasn't adressed this aspect enough.
That being said, for the republican posters here, explain how this budget actually does that? Seriously, can you look at the proposals in good conscience and say that they both adress the issue and are in the best interest of the majority of Americans?
The masochistic part of me would like Romney to win, and store up all these discussions and arguments, and wait for 4-8 years over his term. What I believe we would see is a further promotion of the wealth gap expanding to obscene levels, unemployment reaching double figure percentages, whilst growth stalls. People unable to access healthcare (as the AHA is rescinded), widespread poverty, reduction in overall funding for social systems, while a military budget balloons even further, and finally, the end deficit would remain the same or higher, and total debt would increase at a much greater rate than now.
You don't want Obama, and you know what, I don't want the Obama that has sometimes reared his head this term. But he has achieved some positive things, and of course bad. Romney has NOT suggested even a single positive, realistic or worthwhile policy. He hasn't said this will be the budget definitely, on most issues he remains as vague as he possibly can. It would be a disaster if he is elected, especially if the country decides on House and Senate to also be held in GOP hands.
I thought Republicans claimed they wanted "debt reduction" but with more and more tax cuts to the rich, Republicans would be creating just the opposite - MORE debt and still no plan whatsoever to pay any of the bills they made during the LAST Republican Administration!
Obama/Biden 2012
Saving Congressman Ryan
Never gonna happen. He wants cuts to low income family program as Mark M. wrote, just so he can take care of the rich.
Are we sure it's Ryan? It just doesn't make sense considering today's political climate.
Pat,
You're right that it makes NO sense logically and politically.
But this is a guy (Romney) that is used to having his "dismantlers" by his side... and here he is... the perfect match... ready to dismantle medicare, medicaid, social security, health care, and any other non-military non-rich-supporting program they can find.
it does make sense, but only in a convoluted way:
Romney staffer accidentally defends Romneycare while discussing Priorities America ad. The Dark Overlord Karl Rove tells Mittens he must show an act of fealty to atone. His handlers the Koch Bros. decide that with two weeks of bad news they need to drive the news cycle by doing something that will take the heat off. The Tea Party is getting less enamored with Mittens everyday, so something must be done or they will put their own loonies on the ticket. Mittens is in a bad spot, he must pick his VP now to avoid further damage, and he must appease the overlords and the Teabaggers. The only solution he thought was viable (and I mean the Koch Bros thought was viable), was to pick this guy.
It seems to me that Mittens isn't a chess player. This is "Check" with "Mate" in 3 more moves. Game over Mittens, go home (pick one, just glad you don't have one in your "home" state)
So that no one is confused about these new right wingers:
They want to eliminate SocSec., Medicare, and unemployment benefits.
In fact, these Republicans/Tea partiers don't like the cost of any government: They hate financial regulation, the cost of clean air, the cost of food monitoring, the cost of public supported health care, or the cost of infrastructure.
(They had conceded that they can only bring up a few items at a time, or else they will scare away middle America. But the nomination of Ryan suggests they are simply impatient and are in a race to 3rd world status. They will strip away every protection you have won over the years.)
It's an interesting case they make. Let's dismantle and eliminate the costs of government. We'll fend for ourselves, like the good old days (that never were as good as imagined). Only the wealthy and healthy and young survive their Darwinian USA.
This foolish rhetoric ignores the heart of their own complaints. Apparently they see no costs to an unbalanced society, where the poor already vastly outnumber their wealthy friends and have been armed to the teeth by their NRA supporters. And, is it really cheaper to clean up an economy in tatters -- I mean under a real depression? Do we wait for an ocean of oil or a sickened population? Once the environment, the plants, the animals are dead . . they're dead. But these fools hate anything that taxes the money they extract from America's resources, its workers, its citizens.
We're living through yet another example of conservative wishful thinking. Ask the Japanese who cheated to avoid the cost of environmental controls, or the Middle East rulers who let their people starve while they piled up excess wealth. The future will only be as bad as you make it by trying to avoid the real costs of progress. But that's the conservative way, isn't it? Create a disaster and find some way to blame anyone but the guy in the mirror. Cowards? Fools? Greedy? or just stupid? And I don't mean them . . . I mean us . . . for refusing to vote with our brains. It's time to recognize this isn't a vision for America. It's a vision for economic and environmental disaster.
The demonizing by Obama will now begin.
Ryan's plan will be criticized for daring to address the unsustainable Debt/Entitlements, while Obama, in his Budget projections, totally ignored the looming debt problems, and projected the National Debt increasing to over $26 Trillion in less than 10 years, more than $10 Trillion above the current level (and $16 Trillion above the level at the end of fiscal 2008).
Ryan will also be criticized for 'starving the poor', even though his Budget calls for a reasonable average INCREASE in Federal spending of about 3% per year.
All the Democrats want to do is keep up their policy of "Borrow and spend", and demonize anyone that proposes a responsible alternative.
Well, either way, I hope that either medicare, social security, and medicaide all be dismantled or the economy implodes under the weight of the national debt. Why? That much sooner to start the inevitable revolution and then a rebuilding of this country the way it was originally envisioned. Whether this country elects Obama or Romney, really doesn't matter, we're all doomed.
Romney just slit his own throat as far as ever becoming President of the USA. Ryan has scared even stable Repub voters and Romney taking him as a running mate has just sealed his doom.
Since he has aligned with Ryan, and thus his whole 'Ryan Plan' approach, he is specifically stating that he is so rich and powerful that not only will he refuse the demands of the little people for his Tax Returns, but also clearly supports a tax plan that will cut his own low rate of taxes by nearly 1/3, place a greater tax burden on the middle class and poor, and remove programs that, frankly, over half of the US population is dependent on these programs due to the effects of companies like Bain, WalMart and others who either shipped the jobs overseas or pay so low of wages that their workers HAVE to get foodstamps etc just to survive...while working!
Romney/Ryan is a sinking ship!
America now has the lowest rate of upward social mobility of all the G8. The poor social safety net in America is the cause of this. Republicans want to make it worse. Canada has almost twice the rate of upward mobility of the US and much less crime. This is due to the strong safety net. Family net worth is now higher in Canada than in the US. Perhaps it is time to learn something. Some people will always abuse the social safety system, but the benefits to society are the elephant to the abuser's flea.
Ryans plan doesn't affect the elderly until 2022 for 2 reasons. They count on younger workers belief that these changes will reduce the deficit,(which isn't true because they pump any savings into increased military spending) and that current elderly republicans are as self serving as themselves and won't care if future retirees can afford health care as long as theirs isn't touched. They know they'd have no chance of winning or passing this plan if those on medicare today were forced into health plans costing double what they pay today. How can any elderly person vote for a man with this plan if they wouldn't accept it imposed on them?
Ever stop to think that if Obama is really the "food stamp President", Romney will be the "no food President"?
says who pat? why dont you show us all exactly where ryans budget says that?
of course you and every other liberal with your 4 year liberal arts diploma knows what the budget says or does short and long term right?
thought so. just ignore me and post some more suppressive dribble to enslave the middle class.
king obozo. hero of the stupid.
Have you read the budget plan or are you listening to the reporter. Ryan's plan does not really cut Medicare. What it does is offer an $11,000 per participant voucher to buy insurance. The person can purchase conventional Medicare or buy a replacement plan.
With younger people also in the insurance pool the cost should be less than $11,000. This would allow for the person to also have a HSA. The deductible should be less than under Medicare for an alternate plan as with millions of participants the rates should be comparable to group insurance.
The Medicaid plan does the same with $11,000 per person to buy insurance and set up a HSA. This also eliminates the stigma.
Just so you know under Obama-care with the plan to gut doctors payments for services, 43% of doctors said they would not accept Medicare. This will provide fewer options to participants than Ryan's plan.
Romney says he is after all discretionary spending. Farm programs, energy programs, the whole deal.
Not true! He won't be cutting ANY of the WELFARE programs of the super wealthy, which include: the BILLIONS of dollars of
"Subsidies", "Grants", "ExcessiveTax Deductions" (that Romney and all the super-wealthy count on, so that the REST OF US have to pay THEIR SHARE of our country's bills),"Bailouts", ~~ etc. NONE of the super-wealthy Congresspeople are going to vote AGAINST their OWN "WELFARE" checks.
Why invest in the poor and old? They don't contribute to the bottom line. We have an aging population and the poor produce more mouths to feed.
This is capitalism.
Why contribute to the poor and old? Because it's better for capitalism. If you put money into the pockets of those who need it they actually spend it. If you put money into the pockets of the rich they squirrel it away offshore and don't pay tax on it.
Ever look up "Are Mormons Christians"?
Seems like they recognize Jesus as a nice guy but just that he is another man and not part of the trinity of God as in other Christian religions.
So now with Ryan onboard neither one of these guys will have a problem with taking from the middle class and giving more to the 1% to bring them up to the "poverty level" in their sphere of existence.
MDB123
LOL. Nothing but monetary burdens... like fully depreciated assets that have no more calculated value... maybe he'll find a way to donate them to some other country and take the final deduction... after all, he's never seen a balance sheet he couldn't exploit.
@OBXRon- Yes, they love the poor so much that they want to make more of them.
Romney's "I don't care about poor people" quote is really going to haunt him now...
So wrong - williard has never supported cutting the trillions that are wasted on arms dealers.
Plans to eliminate subsidies to gentleman farmers paid not to plant, Oil company subsidies, ethanol subsidies and corporate loopholes have already been voted down by republicans as tax increases in violation to the Norquist pledge. Apparently eliminating these loopholes for the rich would be a tax increase while eliminating the home mortgage deduction and the exemption on taxes for employer health plans that mostly benefit the middle class don't count.
@ sandy. only one guy made more poor people, and thats the hero of the stupid....KING OBOZO. 100 MILLION AND COUNTING ON WELFARE
50 MILLION AND COUNTING ON FOOD STAMPS.
ONE OUT OF 5 IN POVERTY.
we gotta get rid of this guy!!!!!!!
hey, hows the new communist in france workin out!!??
lol!!!!
With your own PERSONAL SHIELD, one can only "guess" that you are in the top 2% that have never had problems with the COST OF BASICS neccesities of life.
Healthcare savings (and not paying for all the indigent care, as we had done for years in our inflated healthcare bills) has already been resolved in our new Affordable Care Act. Healthcare has changed so drastically in the last 15+ years that this person is referring to, that his bravado was null and void a long time ago. Thus the need for our Obamacare addressed all those rip-off schemes. The reason we were all so drowning in propaganda to "hate" our new healthcare insurance is that an enormous number of people were harvesting great profits from their investments in the various healthcare corporations' profits from all the rip-off schemes. As a life-long registered nurse, I can list MOST of the scams off the tip of my tongue!
You just wasted 15 years of your life if you can't understand that the Ryan Plan is a death sentence for the low-income people and the elderly of this country while it ensure that the very wealthy get tax big cuts. Maybe you don't care at all since you surely are among the whealthy.
The Ryan Plan is "Romneyhood" or "RomneyRyanhood"
Anyone willing to discuss how to solve our debt issues? And Medicare, SS, etc? We all know taxing the 1% is not sufficient to pay for it all. So what are the answers? Perhaps more effort needs to go into that and not just bashing both candidates.
Yes it is called a bullet to the head or a suicide pill. Good luck with either!
I worked in Health Insurance. Out of all the current models for Medicare, fee for service sector is the LEAST effective distribution of dollars for benefits out of all of all of the Medicare modalities. In addition, private insurance adopted the Diagnostic Related Grouping matrix as a method of payment which is , basically a stipulation of only paying so much per illness incident. That methodology was developed by Medicare. Medicare A and B have the best, industry wide bang for the buck, over private for profit insurance and non profits. The current use of arcane methods in health insurance, like the LACK of adoption of one form for medical claims makes insurance claims processing too expensive. Turn the actuarial function over to the CDC , instead of the insurance companies, for a compilation of information , not only to provide them , the insurers statistical data, but a national database on health and disease trends that could be turn to helping us become a healthier nation by preventing key heath issues, not trying to avoid paying for them. Loosen the restrictions for doctors to do medicine again , and, if a drug treatment is non traditional but non experimental, let those methods cure or aid or provide palliative treatment for chronic diseases, which may help in preventing excessive hospital visits or in patient stays. These solutions are easy. The lack of imagination and greed rift is the system prevents these types of changes, to the detriment of all.
If it's such a good plan why not do it immediately? Why wait 10 years to double the amounts seniors pay from 6,000 to 12,000 a year? Your certainly a loyal republican, as long as yours is left alone to hell with those approaching retirement.
What a shame. Mitt gained the top 1% of the vote only to lose the bottom 99%
The Ryan budget cuts all the programs that could help the middle class, the elderly, an/or the poor, including the END of Medicare, as we know it, and gives more WELFARE to the super-wealthy.
Hey.........the wealthy need that extra boost in income..........didn't you hear that filet mignon prices are going to skyrocket because of the price of corn to feed the cattle..............guess the 1% will have to switch to a cut of Kobe beef instead of TX steak.
says who? show everybody what you mean!
It amazing me that some people think that the Dems. actually care about poor people. Don't they know that everything is about oil rights and satisfying the powers beyond. Presidents are picked and they are like puppets controlled by those powers that control the financial heights of the world. I am just wondering how all these people (both our honorable Presidential candidates) can be the only picks in this world? I think everyone has covered Romney already but it is a such a mystery why people would support someone that has spent millions to seal his college records. We are not allowed to see how he paid for his school and the papers he wrote. What is he hiding? Oh, and how could people support a man that has always honored such worthless, anti-American people as (rev) Wright or Satan himself, Louis Farrakan. Now really, is this what we want for America. I know Bush had brought our country down but this man has bombed our deficit lower than ever in history. You would think there might have been a little improvement instead of pushing it to the worst ever. Oh, and I know already Bush did it. And, our running mates over the years: Dan Quale, Sarah Palin, John Kerry, and Joe Biden probably all have high school educations if the truth was known. There has to be a better choice for all of us, somewhere. And, Obama has not been the first black president. He "is" the first bi-racial president. But, then that does not sound as good does it? He even lies about his race. I knew he was bi-racial the first time I set my eyes on him. He can't hide that one. So, people face it we have a choice between Willard and Bad Odor (B.O) and that is what we have to decide. Who is the best of the worse? We better try something new (some kind of new change)(whoever it might be) or our children will resent us the rest of their lives for supporting these idiots. Surely there is something better out there??
Wow your not really very sharp are you? Every ones college records like medical records are sealed as are Romneys. Stating he spent millions sealing them is absurd. Why aren't Romney or the pacts demanding Obama release his college records? Because Obama would simply agree if Romney released his past returns. Never going to happen. Has Romney released his school records including papers he wrote? The answer is no mainly because no presidential candidate has ever released them and no rational person cares.
Most of President Obama's records are published on Wikipedia, and, I daresay, his grades and scholarly achievements would make YOU blush in shame, IF you have any pride, as would ANY of his multiple accomplishments! You will not ever see the day when you or MOST people could ever achieve anywhere near what our President has accomplished in his lifetime because his achievements have been awesome and are already recorded for history. President Obama will go down as one of our greatest Presidents!
Too bad his scholistic honors have not translated to having an economic answer. You can say what you want about he or she did what to make it not happen. Obama had a super majority for 2 years and failed to give an answer to the economy, or even pass a budget. He is the most irresponsible president in my lifetime and fails to live within the nations means. He has to stop blaming others, and face reality. I cannot possibly vote for a president who cannot pass a single budget.
Petaltown - by your diatribe - tells me you have never passed an English test - also tells me you probably have not read a book in years
Also tells me you are not a thoughtfull person - just a wildly ranting hateful - unknowing of any facts - just self consumed of hatred - you tell me why
However - anytime a see a paragraph that covers your kind of run in on words - I consider it a rambling of either a hateful or demented mind - and choose to ignore it - ergo you are ignored
Maerzie, I'm not sure Obama will be listed as one of our greatest presidents ever, but compared to what he followed, he does look pretty great.
8 years before George W we had a Rhodes Scholar, and following 8 years of W we have a Harvard law professor who is a constitutional expert. When you compare George W to Obama, it makes Obama seem like the greatest president ever.
To those that claim Obama has no economic prowess, I'd like to point out that he did keep auto industry afloat, passed an economic stimulus that helped many police, teacher, and firefighters stay on the job. Job growth is positive, and all this in a time when bad economic news is coming in from AROUND the world. Spain, France, Greece, all facing bailouts, China's growth near a standstill... yet our GDP continues to slowly grow... I don't think Romney/Paul will do any better in office, given the global economic situation.
Ray, you mught want to speak to all of the NON UNION retirees who absolutely had their pension plans decimated by Obama's actions. Of course, the UAW members had their pensions left alone.
Romney is toast as far as far as I am concerned. He doe's NOT care about the people.
Ryan is also the worst possible person as VP. I was a republican, now I am totally independent. They should be cutting out the money that both parties have been and are still giving away to people like Karzai in Afghanistan and the other people who hate us.
They have NOT mentioned spending on our infrastructure. They have NOT mentioned eliminating all the unnecessary embassy's in the world. They have NOT mentioned eliminating the handouts to the wealthy and the people in the world who hate us like the Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt and all the other anti american "states". Ryan and Romney care only about the rich. The rest of us paying their salary do not matter to them. I do NOT like the present administration either and I will probably use the "WRITE IN" voting option come November.
For crying out loud, we'll be paying for Bush's wars long into the future, (AND blaming the Democrats for the unbudgeted debts of the wars and outrageous tax cuts for the wealthy!), and still, the Republican investors are always calling for MORE wars!! Course, none of THEIR kids ever volunteer to go over and get killed! And, IF there is ever a draft, they find ways to get deferments! Wars have always provided LUCRATIVE investments!
Paul, what about President Obama's Jobs bill that would create jobs for people and repair our infrastructure. That bill has never been brought up for a vote in the House because they are too busy voting on abortion bills, contraception bills, and, of course, trying to repeal the Affordable Health Care Act. President Obama could come up with a bill that would benefit every man, woman and child in this county, and the Republicans would vote no, no, no, no. They could not care less about the country or you and me. It's all about their rich cronies that have bought and paid for them.
Those bills are the only ones that Reid allows to be voted on in the Senate in order to make the house look bad. The house has pushed numerous bills forward only for all of them not to be allowed on the Senate floor by Reid. But stimulus bills do not help the economy. They only increase the future burden of debt and make problems much worse 2~4 years down the road. The very reason we are facing a recession is because Bush kicked the can down the road with a stimulus, and now how do we deal with the problem that has not been answered?
Maerzie, Look at the positive side of the Bush/Cheney wars- Haliburton made a ton of money in no-bid contracts. Plus look at all the support that comes from the GOP who support our troops with bumpber stickers.
Every Republican needs to stick those "support or troops" stickers up their ass, because they will never support our troops with a tax increase to pay for the Bush wars.
Cleffy -
FYI - The stimulus was passed by a democrat-controlled Congress and signed by Obama. TARP was passed by a democrat-controlled Congress an signed by Bush with approximately half of the funds withheld until Obama was inaugurated.
The stated cuts in social programs of 120 billion would be more than offset by Romneys plan to raise military spending by 260 billion. People thinking republicans are fiscal conservatives are delusional, they merely have different priorities on spending. Bush started 2 wars and implemented a medicare drug program all unfunded. Cut revenue by over 1.5 trillion in tax cuts and bailouts mostly to the rich. Amazing that all they have to do is bash the wasteful spending on the poor and then spend like there's no tomorrow on wars and military spending and cutting taxes on the rich or creating more loopholes for them to benefit.
Please remember that both party's carry a large measure of responsibility for the wasteful spending such as the wars and nation building. Four years ago the present administration promised to get us out of Afghanistan and Iraq. We are still in both of them - we have approximately 17000 of our people still in Iraq and our present administration even expanded our military presence in Afghanistan and he spent wildly by supporting the Nato participation in Libya. Please remember that the USA is the biggest contributor to NATO as well.
In other words, both party's are NOT representing the citizens of the USA, they are representing the rich and themselves. We the people are just the suckers paying their salary's and their wild spending habit.
Bush was proof of your comment, "Larry-367607"! His "conservatism?" ran our debt up so high, it will never get paid off. Republicans always CLAIM to be "conservative" and wanting "less government", but it's all "TALK", just like their pretense of so much "Christianity" that is NEVER carried over into their "ACTIONS"! They are only "conservative" in spending when it doesn't affect THEM, as their party collects more "WELFARE" than any "needy" people ever see. Likewise, they only want "less government" when it affects THEM. As far as making laws that affect the middle class (anyone making LESS than the $250,000 EACH) and the poor, the laws are rampant, including all the new legal inventions for voter suppression! Remember the saying: "Actions speak LOUDER than words"! Republicans are ALL "WORDS" because they believe they're fooling someone?
There was no reason (besides Bush's infantile revenge) to even BE in any war, "Paul nosaint"! Do you not remember when he stood at the podium on national TV, and said: "Saddam Hussein tried to kill MY Daddy!"?? which was the ONLY reason for the enormous waste of innocent lives and money!
AND, don't forget the little games of trying to get our hands on someone else's oil, oil rights, and pipelines? Oil is MONEY, and greed supersedes all reason and morality for some people!
Maerzie - Bush was an abstentia President - we all know who was calling the shots and that was the vile Cheney
Bush was a figurehead and if Romney gets elected that's all he would be - Ann would have her horses and ROMNEY WOULD STRUT AROUND LIKE A PUPPET ON A STRING
That's the Republicans wet dream!
B A Jackson, The Republican wet dream was when the planes hit the towers, giving Cheney a green light to take us into Iraq for his company Haliburton. Their wet dream continues to be a nightmare for the rest of us. Many people will think I'm overreaching here, but I'm pretty convinced with the latest information, that 911 was not a surprise to everyone.
More PROFIT in spending on defense than on social programs............those dam poor people don't contribute much to campaigns as we get from Halliburton..........spend more on unwanted planes, tanks and aircraft carriers...........we gotta stay safe because there is a new war right around the Republican corner.
I agree that the spending liberals are the republicans. They took Clinton surpluses and turned them into deficits, then started two wars without ever looking for peace that we the people could not afford, they almost collapsed our banking system with 1% get rich off the poor tricks. Then they passed unfunded tax breaks. I have no respect for the republicans or any of thier take from the poor and give to the rich plans. Now president Obama had to try to fix this mess the republicans made and it cost us money and the republicans and complaining.
I see all the nutcase liberals got up early this morning and started the lies. Just like obama who is slamming everyone of romneys choices for VP ahead of time. The man is so afraid of losing his meal ticket, airplanes and helicopter that he is gonna lie his way right out of the white house. The guy who said his wife died from cancer because he lost his job is the one who is gonna find out what slander is all about, and don't forget obamas campaign staff who got caught in the whole lie on tape In case you dipsticks don't know it , it is a crime to purport such lies during a political campaign!!
Obama has done nothing except to destroy this country. It's too bad you people aren't smart enough to know that. Or perhaps you don't want to lose your'e food stamps, welfare or as my 4 yr old grandson calls it, obama phones!! Nothing but leaches who want everything for free. Get a job! Oh that's right obama is trying his best to destoy the public sector jobs. You can only hope you get a union welfare job that is gonna destroy the country with its large pension plans. Don't believe me dumbazzez, just look at the cities who are going bankrupt!!!!! Also General Motors still owes the taxpayers billions of dollars, I believe around 40 billion. So obama hasn't saved the auto industry. He put them on welfare too. Get youre facts staight liberal liars!!!!!!!
Also obamcare is the biggest tax increase there is uless your'e on welfare then you get that for free too. If it is not repealed there will be millions of lost jobs, but then some of you people are too stupid to do the math. Millions of small business who can't pay for thier employees insurance will be closed down because they can't afford to pay the 2,ooo dollar tax per employee. Check the facts before you want something as screwed up as this bill. It's all about taxes!!!!!!! Of course if youre on welfare you don't care about that either. Obama has cut millions of social security raises since he been ion office. Now that is an election year he's talking about giving them a raise after cutting them over the last 3 years!!! Wake up people this man is a fraud!!!! If you want youre country back, the strongest country in the world. Vote obama out!!!!!!!
tim:
Yes, the extension to the Bushes tax cuts was voted down by the House (you know, the Republicians).
My health is my responsibility not the government's. If there were no health insurance and no government medicare, we all could afford to take care of ourselves because medical cost would come down based on supply and demand just like every other commodity, services in America.
If you choose to buy a new car rather than pay your medical bills? If you choose to drink alcohol till you are diabetic, If you choose to eat fatting foods till your arteries are so clogged liquid plumber could not clear them. It's not my responsibility to take tax dollars I could use for my health care to take care of those people, it's that simple.
Hey George - just wanted to offer a few thoughts. First off, as you can see from the name, I'm a Canadian but I enjoy watching American politics (makes for very good television in my opinion).
One thing that has always confused me about America for the last 40 or so years is why people wouldn't want to chip in to help others when it comes to their health. Isn't a few dollars out of pocket worth fellow community members being well? (To be clear, by a 'few dollars' I actually mean about ten thousand that me and my fellow Canadians each pay with pride every year). Taken to the extreme, wouldn't you want to share the costs of keeping the more unfortunate members of your community alive?
Having said that, you have presented a cogent argument outlining your position. As I understand it, you are basically saying that an individual's health should be an individual's (financial) responsibility as a function of the health risks they choose to take or not take.
However, I'm curious to know where you would draw that line? What about speeding 50 mph over the limit? What about speeding 5 mph over the limit? What about eating 2 Big Macs a day? What about eating 2 Big Macs a month? Never mind the scores of health issues that really can't be attributed to personal choice (accidents, genetic issues, etc.). I think it would get pretty tricky to try and define where that line is? If nothing else, regardless of your choices you are pretty likely to start your life and end your life in a hospital somewhere.
Wouldn't you rather live in a community that proudly shares all these burdens? A community that works together (and sacrifices together) to help the sick and the poor as opposed to letting them suffer? I have to believe that you would want to live in a place like that. Wouldn't you?
"You can judge a society by the way it treats its most vulnerable citizens" (Aristotle)
George
I recently was on vacation. The second day I started to have a lot of pain and had to go to the emergency room. Turns out I had to have an emergency appendectomy. Cost..just over $50,000. That's right. One night in the hospital. Had I not had insurance I would be dipping into my retirement. I'm lucky. I have good insurance, I had the funds. But I wonder just how many people could do the same. I'm betting the majority of the 99%.
In our country the biggest reason for bankruptcy is medical bills. No person should have to worry about medical bills at the same time they are dealing with illness.
You may think that your health is your responsibility and I don't disagree. But far too many people don't have the resources to purchase insurance. And even some of those folks have preexisting conditions that preclude being accepted. Insurance companies think that they have a right to take your premimums but that they should never have to pay out.
The true nature of any society is displayed buy the way it treats it's less fortunate. You and those who feel like you have a 'I've got mine, screw you' attitude. Be careful, at some time you too may need help and it wont be there.
As for me, I will gladly pay higher taxes to help others. Because I'm human and I value all people.
George : "It's not my responsibility to take tax dollars I could use for my health care to take care of those people, it's that simple."
It's so sad that this is apparently the moral mentality of the right. Why are we, the wealthiest nation on the planet, the only industrialized country that doesn't provide healthcare for its citizens? I guess it's OK for George to have healthcare funded by tax dollars, but "those people" don't deserve it?
As with the previous two replies to the original posting, I agree that a nation's most valuable resource is its people. This is a commodity that should not be sacrificed for anything, especially not to offset a tax cut for the wealthiest who truly don't need it. Why is it that the right decries the left as "entitlement seekers" when they themselves are receiving some of the larger shares of government welfare?
And no, this has nothing to do with "redistribution of wealth," socialism, marxism, communism, "class warfare," or blind hatred for the rich. It's all about compassion for your fellow citizens and making sure everyone does their part, whether you make $30,000 or $30,000,000 every year.
What a great "Christian" country we live in. Take responsibility for me (until I need help from someone else) and to H with all the low life scum that can't find a job because of the economy.
"Christian conservative" = ?
There are plenty of extremely hard-working poor in our country today who don't have access to healthcare and rely on Medicare and Medicaid to help them. So many jobs no longer offer healthcare to their employees, or only hire on at part-time positions so they won't have to cover the cost of healthcare... to say that we could all afford to take care of ourselves if we just didn't "buy that new car" or "drink that alcohol" is really vile and stereotypical thinking. So many of us work 2-3 jobs just to make it to put food on the table... and even then we may need food stamps just to help out for a while so we can feed our families... This country is supposed to be all about cooperation, collaboration, and decency... when did THESE values go by the wayside??
It's always great when younger people think because they've had no health problems they never will. As someone who had a ruptured appendix some years ago which left me with a $37,000 dollar hospital bill luckily i had insurance. Your opinion will change as you get older, hopefully the people electing our leaders than will be better than the ones you support now. Amazing that anyone could think only people who abuse themselves get sick or that at a time when a simple surgery could cost 10's or 100's of thousands of dollars anyone could simply put off buying a new car.I wonder if diagnosed with a serious illness tomorrow your opinion would change? Amazing also that people who declare our country as being the greatest yet think we can't afford a health care system that every other industrialised country in the world does have.
Right wing Christians used to call themselves the moral majority. At least even they apparently saw the hypocrisy of such a title.
I strongly suggest that we all use the "WRITE IN" option on the ballot come November.
I realize that the "WRITE IN" vote is not always accepted by various states, but maybe it will send a real message to both of these worthless presidential candidates if there are plenty of "WRITE IN" ballots. Of course, it will also depend on the news media picking up on our "WRITE IN" ballots.
yeah well Obama got some bad news and of course it came on a Friday, when the CBO estimated, that by 2022, you know how Obama was touting his plan would cover 30 million people, well they were off by oh 30 million, as 30 million people would still be uninsured by 2022 and The Affordable Care Act really wouldn't make a huge dent in who are covered, as currently 90 % are covered by health insurance and the Affordable Care Act would only up it by about 2 %. Plus all of you bemoaning Ryan's budget, at least we know what his budget would do, we don't know what Obama's would do, because he hasn't passed one in 3 1/2 years in office, and oh yeah Obama also appointed Bowles-Simpson, but when they brought up that Social Security needed to be reformed, he basically threw them under the bus. Look we need entitlement reform and also just reform all together as right now excluding medicare, mediacaid and social security, there is over 100 million people receiving some sort of welfare help, and this president is the food stamp president, because in 2000 when bush was in office, only 17 million took food stamps and now were up to 45 million. Look people liked to bash Bush for wanting to privatize social security, when it was never mentioned that is was clinton and the dems who first mentioned that but instead of people controlling that money it would be the government controlling and putting it in stocks. Plus I love also how they say oh now Ryan will be vetted, you mean like the same way Obama was by the media
Didi you read your own post?
Bush is the "food stamp president"! No other president in history has done as much to reduce gainfully employed US citizens to the level where they required food stamps.
Here's a chart that shows the number of Americans on food stamps by year. In 2000, when Bush took office, there were on 17 million on food stamps. That number had actually been decreasing since 1995. During the entire George W. Bush administration the number of people on food stamps increased dramatically. Then, when Bush's disastrous housing policies, including the "American Dream Downpayment Act" trashed the American economy and threw millions out of work, the number grew even higher.
No, my friend, Obama is not the "food stamp president". George W. Bush is the true "food stamp president". If Romney is elected, he will do even better at forcing Americans into requiring food stamps to live.
EEngineer
Good luck trying to have a factual discussion with a republican. They seem to have a very foggy memory of the economic situation, especially toward the end, of 2008. Must be Obama's fault that we were losing close to 800,000 jobs per month amid a financial crash before he was sworn into office...
EEngineer,
but with the Ryan budget, those people won't be on food stamps. They will just die. Fine way to balance out the equation by Republican standards.
Interesting you list the number on food stamps when Bush was elected and Obamas currently. Amazing you'd charge the 11 million added under Bush to Obama. Biased much? Lie much? There was 17 million in 2000 but 28 million at the end of his term the biggest jump for any president ever. Hard after Bushs train wreck of the economy costing over 5 million jobs, 11 trillion in net worth and 400 billion in revenue not to have many of those 5+ million newly unemployed ending up on welfare, food stamps or medicaid especially when most of those going on food stamps was during 2009 while still under the Bush budget. Latest data show food stamp recipients are dropping something that never happened under Bush.
when you leave your comment about the ryan budget, put your yearly income with it!!!!! we will see the rich is for it. just another dollar in their pocket so they can live better!!!!!! romney or ryan knows not one thing about the middle class or the poor!!!!!! or care what they need. put them in office and you can kiss the middle class good by forever.they just don't know or care to know what makes the middle class work. they have their heads so fare up their wealthy asses they cant see the poor or middle class.
My husband and I are probably in the 1%. But we both were born into 'working poor' families. We are thankful for the opportunities being born in the US has given us. Looking at our income it will cost us not quite $500 a month. But since we bring home almost $40,000 a month, well guess just how painful that is? NOT
I happen to like good roads, good infrastructure, police, fire protection, schools, all those pesky things that governments provide. Even at our income we couldn't provide them for ourselves.
'Fair Share' is an odd phrase and really shouldn't be used to define taxes. Those of us who have benefited more from living here owe it to the less fortunate to kick in more. That's how a successful society works. And make no mistake. The President was right, nobody get there alone.
dsb
Congratulations on achieving success through your own hard work, yours is a story of inspiration. It's difficult to fathom that there are people who make literally 100's if not 1000's of times the amount of money you pull in every year, and they feel that they cannot survive paying the same tax rate as someone making $30,000 per year.
I too enjoy a good road, fire prevention, protection from crime, education, etc which our tax dollars provide. I wish the vastly wealthy held the same perspective and sense of responsibility.
dsb, thank you!
The only concern I have is if people can get others to contribute to a 'BILLION DOLLAR' campain............. What's wrong with this picture... I don't think this is what our "Four Fathers" had in mind when they were writing our Consititution or The Bill of Rights!
Breaking new says it will probably be announced in Virginia, in front of The USS Wisconsin, that Romney will pick Ryan for his Veep, but I don't buy it.
If it was Ryan, they'd announce it in Wisconsin. They are announcing in Virginia, so I still believe it will be Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell.
The whole USS Wisconsin thing is a ruse to throw the pundits off track.
is when Romney goes to the GOP Convention, with his Veep running-mate and The GOP asks Romney to step down so they can nominate someone who actually has a chance to win.
Bruce- is when Romney goes to the GOP Convention, with his Veep running-mate and The GOP asks Romney to step down so they can nominate someone who actually has a chance to win. There is already a 50% chance that this will happen, but if his numbers drop another 9 points, the 50% will rise above 75%.
If Mitt Witt does not release his tax returns, he may be asked to step down, but if he does release his tax returns, he will surely be asked to step down.
Ron Paul 2012
Larue, I believe you have uncovered the fly in Romney's ointment here! Nice!
The Ryan budget is based on Ayn Rand's philosophy, which is totally opposite the bible's Sermon on the Mount and Sermon on the Plains. Ayn Rand hated religion. Rand's teachings were derived from her upbringing in communist Russia, when Stalin became the leader-who coincidentally was Fred Koch's boss (father to the environment and middle class hating Koch brothers). Could be why Ayn Rand is so popular with the right wing lunatic fringe.
The Ryan budget is more Romneyhood-taking from the poor and middle class and giving to the rich so they can tinkle down their money overseas. The budget is anti Christian, and not in keeping with the values upon which our nation was founded. Why do Romney and Ryan hate Christianity? Is it because of Ayn Rand's teachings?
The Ryan budget is a modest first step in returning the American govt to fiscal responsibility and following the Constitution.
The budget is Christian contrary to the comments of ignorant marxists who obviously don't know anything about Christian doctrine.
This is idea of govt welfare and social programs is a humanist/socialist view of Christianity and is of the spirit of the Anti-Christ. Helping the needy for Christians must come from the heart and be done as unto Jesus Himself (Matthew 25, Isaiah 58, and others). You and Obama advocate something very UNCHRISTIAN which is socialism by wanting it to be done by compulsion and theft. It amounts to asking Christians to sin by putting our trust and transferring glory to man/government instead of God. Christians are required out of love that has been poured into our hearts to demonstrate Christ's love to others and in so doing, glorify God. The ONLY way that this can be done through government is in a theocracy, and NO ONE wants to see that.
Having the govt seize our property and redistributing it to glorify man/govt is a sin and contrary to the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles
and in 2 Corinthians 9:6-15
Isaiah 58:6-9
Rev Larry Robinson
God has placed three institutions on earth to enact His will on this planet. They are the Family, the Church, and the State. Each institution is to be under God and has it's own responsibilities and authority. To which of these three institutions has God delegated the responsibility of helping the poor?
Paul, in his no-nonsense style, comes directly to the point about helping the poor:
"If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever." 1 Tim. 5:8 [NIV]
The primary responsibility for helping the poor falls on their own family. A family is close to the situation, so they know the real need. They know if their family member is in genuine trouble or if they are only faking it to get out of working. It is much harder to commit welfare fraud when the watchful eyes of the family are in charge. They know if Will Welfare is in trouble because of drinking, gambling, or laziness or if he is a hard worker who has fallen on hard times.
“The family is the primary agency of social welfare in every civilization.” Dr. Gary North
“It is the responsibility of the head of each household to care for those members of his family who are in need." Dr. Gary North
“The family bears the major responsibility for financial [and other] aid, and no other institution or group must usurp this responsibility.” David Chilton
Are there limits to the family's responsibility in helping the poor members? Do they have to repeatedly be taken advantage of by an irresponsible member? What is the balance? God never requires us to support evil and sin; therefore, there are limits to a family's responsibility to look after family members.
No family is required to support members who fall into the categories below:
1. A family member who is lazy and refuses to work no longer has the right to help from the family. He needs to suffer the consequences of his actions. His hungry stomach must be allowed to drive to work and self-discipline. The family has no mandate to help a member who refuses to be a productive member of the family or society.
Paul is back and to the point again:
"For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: 'If a man will not work, he shall not eat.'" 2 Thess. 3;10
2. A family member who follows unwise financial policies and refuses to change has no right to expect the family to support his irresponsibility. If he is constantly going into debt, “investing” in foolish or get-rich-quick schemes, or doing other unwise things, the family should attempt to teach him good financial management. It may even involve managing his finances temporarily for him until he develops the self-control and self-discipline to manage it for himself. If he refuses to accept such help in getting his finances under control, the family no longer has a responsibility to help him.
3. A family member who disrupts the family life has given up his right to help from the family. A family member who is in rebellion to family standards, is disrespectful to family members, or lives a lifestyle that hurts other family members is no longer required to be supported.
4. A family member who undermines the religious teaching of the home has no right to support from the family. If he talks against the family beliefs, tries to convince other members to leave their faith, or otherwise undermines the family faith, he no longer has the right to the help and support of his family
Sometimes families, for a variety of reasons, are unable or unwilling to help its poor family members. The secondary responsibility for helping the poor belongs to the Church and private charity organizations. Like the family, these organizations are more in touch with the real needs of the poor and less like to be deceived by the lazy and undeserving.
It is important to note that the Church and private charity organizations are funded through voluntary contributions. This is not socialism where one person's money is taken by force [tax] to be given to someone else. The donors will naturally require their hard-earned money to be spent responsibly in helping the poor. If they see an individual church or charity organization wasting money or spending it on the lazy, they are motivated to warn the organization and withdraw their money if a solution is not reached. This introduces a needed level of accountability in the management of money on the behalf of others.
Under no circumstances is the civil government responsible for helping the poor other than - as with everyone else - providing a safe environment in which they can live and work. Remember, the civil government has no money of its own. The only money it has is the money it takes from its citizens either through taxes or inflation. Therefore, for the government to be involved in welfare is forced wealth distribution. It is stealing from some citizens to give it to others. While God commands charity, He gives no human institution the right to enforce His charity laws. He has declared that He Himself will be the enforcer.
"Do not mistreat an alien or oppress him, for you were aliens in Egypt. Do not take advantage of a widow or an orphan. If you do and they cry out to me, I will certainly hear their cry. My anger will be aroused, and I will kill you with the sword; your wives will become widows and your children fatherless." Ex. 22:21-24
Rev Larry Robinson
Well, bud, if we all have to live under your God then we might as well kill ourselves because there isn't any difference between hell and heaven.
Roy,
Try reading comprehension- I was responding to the claim by Brian J who said:
Nothing in my post called for forcing people to "live under my God". And you will one day find out there is a huge difference between heaven and hell.
Rev, how many times did you say "family"? You think everyone has a family? Not everyone is as fortunate as you, your family, your ilk and your bloated philosophy.
"Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government."
-- James Madison
"I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit."
-- President Grover Cleveland vetoing a bill for charity relief (18 Congressional Record 1875 [1877]
"I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity. [To approve the measure] would be contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded."
-- President Franklin Pierce's 1854 veto of a measure to help the mentally ill.
I don't see anything in what you have gone through that suggest like the Ryan budget states to take money from medicare-giving grandma useless vouchers all so that Romney and Ryan can get tax breaks to invest overseas. I don't believe taking money from the poor and middle class to give charity to the rich is necessarily christian. Welfare for the wealthy is such a good campaign slogan for Romney!
Brian
Who does allowing people to keep more of THEIR OWN MONEY "take from the poor and middle class"?
Only if you mean ending unconstitutional marxist redistribution of wealth programs
Jesus NEVER taught that govt should take from people through compulsion and threat of force to help others
Hmm, we have a system of taxation in this country. It is used to fund a standing army, education, and other governmental expenses. When you reduce the revenue government takes in, cuts have to be made. If it was decided for instance, that the best thing government could do is to give all the wealthy donors to a party's campaign for office a huge tax break, then it has to be paid for since tax cuts do not pay for themselves. If you then take the money for that tax cut from programs such as medicare, then you are essentially robbing the poor/middle class to pay for welfare for the wealthy. Or, as it's commonly called-Romneyhood! Marxist re-distribution of the wealth of the middle class to the rich is the essence of Romneyhood.
Only in the convoluted mind of a liberal is allowing people to keep more of their own money taking from those the govt redistributes it to.
IT'S NOT THE GOVT'S MONEY.
It's NOT THE POOR'S MONEY
IT'S NOT THE MIDDLE CLASS'S MONEY
Doing what is right and letting people keep their own money is NOT welfare.
Larry, thanks for all the bible versus, you did manage to leave out a couple that talk about false prophets, lets say, like Joseph Smith for example. A true Christian does not consider the Book of Mormon to be in line with the bible. Most Evangelicals believe Mormonism to be a cult founded by a false prophet.
FYI, Mittens is a Mormon and a lifetime member of this cult.
Larry...... You make a lot of sense. Too bad the world is so large there is no way it can be run like a family. I know many people that are lazy and don't want to work. I am afraid for everyone's future, I just don't think we will have the kind of world that we are used to anymore. Bad things always catch up with you at the end. Maybe we are ready to join hands and work together to rebuild a better world. Nearly all of us have some kind of talent to contribute. We should stop writing nasty comments about the candidates and come to some sort of agreement. I don't know a lot about politics but I do know that Obama could never get any bills to pass through the Senate. I believe all people deserve the basic needs in life.
Larry, if you believe that the income tax is unconstitutional, then you need to have a chat with the Supreme Court. They have held it to be constitutional on several occasions. While we do respect those who have earned their wealth in this country, we hardly worship them as job creators because most send their money overseas.
Nor should we, for as Christ said," And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God."
Perhaps we should pity them for an eternity in hell. Unless they follow Christ's precepts, "One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.,"
Larry:
I see, so if we had the chance to ask Jesus his thoughts, you are insinuating that he would be a free market capitalist, but definitely not a socialist? Really?
I agree he would likely renounce Marxist forms of philosophical communism, based upon their rejection of the role of religion. Which, I suppose leads me onto the way that you seem to lump socialist, liberalism and communism together (as many here do). Liberalism as interpreted by most across the world (with U.S. definition being a departure) encourages freedom of expression of religious faith, and greater individual liberty outside government interference. This is in stark contrast to the other two.
Either way, what you have said, taking selective passages from the bible to support this budget and goals is not just pathetic, but also infuriating. I was raised Catholic, most of the rest of my family still are. The messages I gleaned from the bible, and retain even now that shape my moral and ethical compass are undoubtedly derived from this early education. "Love thy neighbour", "Treat others as you would have them treat you", the story of the good samaritan, the embracing of the poor, sick and societal pariahs (eg Mary Magdalene) are all the positive message that I actually respect, even though I am now an atheist.
The Jesus of the Gospels, in my opinion, could not look at this situation, and the desire to reduce the top rate of tax on the rich, as well as reducing Medicaid and Medicare spending as in keeping with his message. Yes, he didn't suggest 'lazy' people will be ushered into the kingdom, but he did send the message that we should help those in need, which you actually acknowledge yourself in the noble advocating of charity. I agree, we should all give more in charity.
This budget grants the richest Americans an even greater share of the pie. Most of those will not use that extra 10% to hel[ the sick, dying, incapacitated or even poor. They will pocket it, and accumulate it. Both social systems may contradict certain passages in the bible, but the nature and underlying message of Jesus is very much in line with a government devoting resources here, rather than a bloated military budget. Reduce spending overal, yes. Reduce tax on those working hard but earning less, yes. Give a tax break to the rich and cross your fingers that they'll help other, NO.
You may be a Christian, but the mixed messages you are putting out show a distinctly poor christian attitude.
Come on you guys! We got to pay all those debts off from the WMD wars and Wall Street investment gambling deals(WWII for short). You all are just being so un-American! The Wall Street crowd just loves this country to death! Come on now let us all sing a verse of "God Bless America"! You got your American flag label pin on? I thank God everyday for people like Ryan and Romney. The RR train boys will ride all those old wrinkle people and loud poor people to their grave sites! Need to thin out the surplus population every now and again, right?! The rich deserve their privilege. Old, poor and ugly people just don't deserve anything! They need to go away and leave us real Americans alone! God will deal with these depots!
@ Roy
I hope you are just being sarcastic, because if you aren't, you should be ashamed of yourself. We are ALL children of God, regardless of our appearance or income. I suppose you think that I should also be "rode to my grave-site", because I am poor? Well let me tell you something, before you start your judging and preaching. I have a degree in Environmental Engineering with a 3.3 GPA, and I have busted my butt working and going to school my whole life. The only thing causing me to be poor is the fact that there are no engineering jobs available in this messed up economy. Despite my low-income, I can bet that I am smarter and better looking than you. I am a 5'3" woman and I weigh 110 lbs, because I work-out everyday and eat apples, because that's all I can afford to do with my free time. But, I have 6-pack abs and my face is acne-free, and wrinkle free. I look like a model. Do I still qualify for "being rode to my gravesite"?
I wonder how many years of tax returns Paul Ryan had to give the Romney campaign? If more than 1, why do the American people deserve less from Romney? When do we get to see Mitt the twit's last 9 years? One wonders what horrid tax exemptions and schemes lurk in those returns.
only morons and marxist voters need to see a candidate's tax returns
there is NO requirement to release your tax returns to the public
How much a person earns is not part of the qualifications for president- although I certainly prefer a successful person to failures or community organizers
We the People deserve to see at least 10 years of 10 returns by potential candidates for the highest office in the land. 12 like Mitt the twit's dad released would be even better. As his dad stated:"Releasing a single return wouldn't prove anything. It could be a fluke, or even a cynical manipulation designed to make the candidate look good. What really mattered was how a candidate managed his personal finances over the long haul." Romney's dad had it right.
FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, Humphrey, Nixon, McGovern, and Carter all refused to release their tax returns as candidates. FDR refused to release his as president until after his death.
Larry Robinson, Praise be to Allah and her glorious Vagina. You just compared Mittens the Mormon Romney to FDR, Truman, JFK, and Jimmy Carter. You also compared him to Nixon which is the only fair comparison you made. Mittens only claim to be president is based on his experience at Bain Capital, which we learned was nothing more than an LBO that was a pioneer in outsourcing jobs over seas. FDR came from a wealthy family as did JFK, but neither of these fine men had offshore bank accounts to avoid paying taxes. That is why we need to see Mitt-Witts taxes. Nothing too far back, but 12 years like his father reccomended.
Well. I'll be danged.
morons...marxists
Larry really is a Christian. Thanks for confirming what I've believed about religion since my eyes were opened.
Larry R,
You are a fox with lamb skin! You seem to espouse christanity and support for Romney/Ryan but your language for the opposition is disgusting (no christanity there).
I suppose you've never cheated on tax returns. Anybody that makes at leat 6 digits a year cheat. I don't care who you are. Obama is only in office because he is good at speaking. He does'nt know anything thats why its worse now than when he got in office. I'm a democrat but I would never vote for him. Who cares what they do with the tax returns. We need to quit paying the drug addicts and lazy people welfare. They need to work like everybody else. Instead they do drugs, sell drugs and we pay for the houses they live in and the fancy cars they drive. Now Obama wants all the illegals here too. Maybe everybody should show tax returns, lets see how many honest people there are out there. NOT MANY!!
moonlv - I guess - you found one who didn't cheat - Hey fellow working for twenty years with a six figure income - I never cheated - I always felt honor bound to pay my fair share
So can I know say to you shove it?
Moonlv
We don't cheat. Never have. In fact, we don't even take our charitable donations as a deduction. Why? Because that's not real charity. It's a tax dodge. And yes, we do make 6 figures.
You don't deduct $77,000 for a horse, have Caymans, Swiss and Bermuda accounts and pay a 15% rate on carried interest? Shame on you.
Really Paul Ryan? This is reality not some fictional Ayn Rand novel , Catholic? I wonder if he is into Scientology as well? (prays to L Ron Hubbard for alien intervention) Both sides have economic recipes for disaster , yet the "Path for Disparity" seems a short track for Civil War. Good luck starting a business when the neighborhood is on fire.
Really Paul Ryan? This is reality not some fictional Ayn Rand novel , Catholic? I wonder if he is into Scientology as well? (pray to L RON for alien intervention) Both sides have economic recipes for disaster , yet the "Path for Disparity" is a short track for Civil Unrest. Good luck starting a business when the neighborhood is on fire
bee,,,that was just as stupid the 2nd time.
Ryan has a plan unlike the democrats that have had control of the senate for the last 6 years and the house for 4 years out of six. It has been almost 4 years since those same idiots have even come up with a budget even with control of all 3 branches in the first 2 years of king obama. Democrats never talk about that proposal their prophet hussain obama put out that was voted out with not ONE vote(democratic or republican) for it. Even under law these phoney lieing libs do not put anything up because they do not want the American people to see their true colors, yet as puke obama, they blame everything on the "do nothing" congress that has only been there less then 2 years and have passed 30 bills plus that pertain to this countries problems, yet that COWARD dingy harry ried will not let these same bills come up for debate in front of the American people less a vote. But that LIAR of a speaker has time to stand on the floor and spew about his unnamed imaginary "friend" that claims false charges about a republican presidental opponet like the no class scumbag ried really is!
some of you republican kooks are so insane you can see how desperate and racists liars you are...2nd grade educations might make your momma proud, but you sound like fox broken recorders....hillbilly racists. carl rove is a little imp demon sent by your demon repub party of hate. vote against yourselves stupid.
murphy andrew - I guess you never heard about fillibusters - so quit your crap - in the Senate - you need sixty votes and one unidentified person can hold up that vote
Are you really that obtuse that you had no clue what was going on
And don't ever on the face of this earth demean my President with your word PUKE - or I might find out who your neighbors are since you so ashamed to give your real name and use your anonymous name with your vile denigration of our president and tell them what a jerk you really are
But then again you probably are a paid Karl Rove troll - sounds like the liars he employs to spread his venom
penistuch,,Yet after your degradeing and chastizeing what counterpoint have you brought to the table? Go back to yoor obama santioned "occupy" meeting and I won't tell your mommy about you using the computer. Barbie,,You had control of 2 branches in the last 2 years of Bush( ya kow when things really went downhill) yet you and your prophet king obama blamed every single thing on him. Are you going to turn me in to king obamas "truth squads"? You would of fit right in Germany in the late 1920's. The difference between us is I post the truth unlike your no-class cancer ad supporters and all the "unnamed sources" that socialist lib MOOCHER democratic no-class liars spew!
Barbra,,,Just look at your post before this one and your lib buddy talked a lot worse thenI did and degraded a womens part. You don't chastize him yet since I do not believe the same way you do, you want to "find out who my neighbors are". Pretty sad for a party that is for the "little people" right after you brag about making 6 figures for the last so many years. You are based on lies, class warfare and everything else I post. I figure after showing you real facts, as usual, you will disappear.
dipsh!t murphy.
Repubs had control of House and Senate from 2002 to 2006. Who was President then?
And just what did they do?
You guys just love showing your idiocy don't you?
frankeeepunk,,,yeh, I just miss that average unemployment at 4.7% and gas under $1.50 a gallon back then. Get back to me when ya grow up and get a brain.
And barbra has left the building(and all common sense).
Yep Ryan has a plan to take from the poor,needy and elderly and give to the wealthy
clayton+ barbra jr
With the Senate in the majority as you say, how can they accomplish anything at all when the Republicans continually fillibuster everything? We are all getting sick and tired of all the politicians playing games - but especially sick and tired of the Republicans in the House voting NO to everything for fear of Obama having any success and the Republicans in the Senate fillibustering everything for the same reasons - this is not democracy and it sure as hell isn't what I voted for when I marked my ballot - I am so disgusted with the Republicans and their blatant disregard for this country and the needs of its citizens.