Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

10% across-the-board. Rich or poor. Big company or small.

Posted By: : ) on 2008-09-20
In Reply to: so how much tax is "okay?" - susan

X


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Poor, poor MT. She can't pick a fight with anyone on her own board tonight and must come here to

Why all this defense of the poor downtrodden rich?
You said:
Yes, the rich get the bulk of tax cuts, that's because THEY pay most of the taxes.

I say:
That's because they make most of the MONEY. That's perfectly right. And yes they pay a higher rate which is also perfectly right because they are not paying taxes on WAGES. Capital gains and investment income - i.e. money that was not earned by hard labor - SHOULD be taxed at a higher rate. We know that if we win 20 grand in the lottery the government is going to take up to half of it, right? - we expect that. We expect free money to be taxed at a higher rate than wage income. So why are you fretting about free money for the rich being taxed at a higher rate also?

As far as tax revenues being higher now, the answer to that is ridiculously simple - many more people soared into higher tax brackets during the boom years of the Clinton administration and their new wealth is now generating more free money which then gets taxed and flows into the revenue coffers. Now are you glad about this or not? You can't say both the poor rich are being abused by high tax rates! and at the same time parade around praising Bush for his financial saavy because look, the revenues are overflowing! That's kind of schizophrenic. And besides the glow of joy is going to have to fade a bit when you consider that no matter how high revenues are, the exorbitant and wasteful spending of this administration has caused such huge deficits that your grandchildren will still not be seeing any benefit from those increased revenues.

And in addition, there are MORE people in general now, so of course tax revenues will rise with a rise in population. BushCo uses the same old tired tactic of braying about more people own homes now than ever before in the history of the country! Well duh. That's because there are more PEOPLE. More people = more total homes owned. They aren't talking percentage of the population owing their own homes. Instead they try to take credit for a simple total number that they had nothing to do with increasing.

Have to watch these guys - they know how to spin a statistic, but spin is all it is. Too bad it keeps right on fooling the worshippers.
Taking from the poor, giving to the rich
US House of Representatives approves $50 billion in social cuts
By Joseph Kay
19 November 2005


In the early hours of Friday morning, the House of Representatives
passed a budget reconciliation bill that includes cuts of nearly $50
billion over five years, primarily in social programs for the poor.
At the same time, Congress is considering extending tax cuts that
overwhelmingly benefit the wealthy in the amount of $60 billion-$70
billion over the same period.

The budget reconciliation bill modifies requirements for mandatory
spending programs, in particular, entitlement programs such as
Medicaid, Social Security, Food Stamps and Medicare. Unlike the rest
of government outlays, known as discretionary spending, which are
allocated each year in appropriation bills, spending for these
mandatory programs is determined by legal requirements. If the
reconciliation bill is signed into law, it will mark the first time
since 1997 that entitlement programs have been slashed.

The House passed the bill 217-215 after Republican leaders kept the
vote open 25 minutes to drum up sufficient support. It will now go
to a House-Senate conference committee, where negotiators from the
two chambers will work out a compromise between the House bill and a
Senate bill passed earlier this month.

The Senate version includes cuts amounting to $35 billion over five
years. While leaving out some of the most egregious cuts in the
House version, the Senate bill includes one major provision left out
by the House: the opening up of the Alaskan Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge (ANWR) for oil exploration.

The compromise will then be subject to a final vote in both chambers
before going to President Bush to be signed into law.

Major cuts in the House bill include:

* Cutting Medicaid spending by $11.8 billion. The bill would place
new restrictions on the ability of elderly people to transfer assets
to relatives so as to become eligible for Medicaid, and would allow
states to charge higher premiums and co-payments for emergency room
visits and some drugs. It would give states greater discretion to
cut services for low-income recipients who earn more than the
poverty level, including such services as eye and ear care.

* A $14.3 billion reduction in spending on financial assistance for
college students. The bill repeals a previous 6.8 percent cap on
interest rates for federal student loans, increasing it to 8.25
percent. One estimate calculates that this would lead to an increase
of $5,800 in payments for a college student graduating with a debt
load of $17,500. The bill includes other increases in taxes and
interest on a variety of loans, as well as a provision to reduce
subsidies to lenders.

* Cuts in the Food Stamp program totaling $700 million. The bill
would end a provision that automatically enrolls welfare recipients
in Food Stamps, denying eligibility to approximately 165,000 people,
mainly among the working poor. It would deny Food Stamps to
approximately 70,000 legal immigrants by extending the waiting
period for eligibility from five to seven years. Since eligibility
for Food Stamps automatically gives children access to free school
lunches, thousands of students may be stripped of this benefit. This
cut will worsen an already growing problem of hunger in the US. An
article in the Boston Globe of October 29 noted, The number of
people who are hungry because they cannot afford to buy enough food
rose to 38.2 million in 2004, an increase of 7 million in five
years. The number represents nearly 12 percent of US households.

* Other measures include nearly $5 billion in cuts associated with
child support enforcement; $577 million in cuts for child welfare
programs; a reduction of $732 million in social security income
payments, including payments to some disabled people; and more
stringent work requirements for welfare eligibility.

House passage of these draconian measures demonstrates the
determination of the ruling elite to continue its assault on social
programs. Hurricane Katrina, which laid bare the persistence of
poverty and the growth of social inequality, as well as the
devastating consequences of decades of neglect of the social
infrastructure, is being used as an excuse to accelerate the very
policies that compounded the disaster.

The position of the Bush administration and the Republican-
controlled Congress is that the tens of billions appropriated for
immediate hurricane relief and reconstruction in New Orleans and
other Gulf Coast areas must be offset by a more determined assault
on entitlement programs for working people and the poor. At the same
time, there is to be no retreat in providing tax windfalls for big
business and the rich.

This was spelled out in a summary of an earlier version of the bill
published by the House Budget Committee, which stated that the bill
was intended to provide a down-payment toward hurricane recovery
and reconstruction costs and begin a longer-term effort at slowing
the growth of entitlement spending and stimulate reform of
entitlement programs, many of which are outdated, inefficient, and
excessively costly.

Speaking before the right-wing think tank, the Heritage Foundation,
Tom DeLay, the former House majority leader who was forced to step
down after being indicted on corruption charges, made clear that the
budget was intended to spearhead a permanent rollback of social
programs. He said the budget would not only provide the nation
immediate fiscal relief, but also institute permanent reforms of the
way our government spends money and solves problems.

Last month, Bush urged Republican congressmen to push the envelope
when it comes to cutting spending. On Friday, he welcomed the House
bill and called for Congress to quickly pass a final version for him
to sign into law.

The ultimate bill as agreed by the conference committee will likely
include many of the cuts in the House bill. Senate leaders,
moreover, have vowed to reject any bill that does not include the
opening up of the ANWR, which has been a major goal of the energy
industry and the Bush administration.

At the same time that Congress is negotiating these cuts in social
spending, it is preparing the passage of a separate tax cut
reconciliation bill. The two bills were deliberately separated in an
effort to obscure the connection between tax cuts for the wealthy
and cuts in social programs.

Early on Friday, the Senate passed a bill that would cut taxes by
$60 billion over five years. This includes $30 billion in cuts
resulting from an extension in exemptions to the alternative minimum
tax. It also includes $7 billion in tax cuts for corporations as
part of Bush's so-called Gulf Opportunity Zone—a scheme to use the
hurricane as an opportunity to give handouts to businesses. The
Senate rejected any windfall tax on record oil company profits;
however, it did include an accounting rule change that is expected
to increase taxes for oil companies by about $4.3 billion over five
years.

The House is considering a companion bill. However, its version
would focus on extending tax cuts on dividends and capital gains
that are not due to expire until 2008. These taxes are paid
overwhelmingly by the wealthy. Once the House version is passed, the
two bills will go to a conference committee. Bush has vowed to veto
any bill that includes the accounting change for oil companies.

There is some nervousness within the political establishment over
the budget process. House Republican leaders were forced to delay
their budget bill for a week as they sought to win enough support
within their own party to push the bill through, and the final
version slightly pared down some of the cuts in Food Stamps and
other programs.

The two measures—the one cutting social programs for the poor, and
the other providing tax cuts for the rich—constitute such a blatant
redistribution of wealth from the bottom to the top that several
Republicans have opposed the measures. Congressional elections are
only a year away, and the mounting popular opposition to the Bush
administration has caused Republican representatives to fear losing
their seats.

On Thursday, the House voted down the appropriations bill for the
departments of Labor, Education and Health and Human Services, after
the defection of a number of Republicans. The bill, which includes
cuts in various pet projects for representatives as well as in
social programs such as rural health care, may have to be modified
or attached to the defense appropriations bill in order to push it
through.

In spite of this nervousness, the consensus within the ruling elite
is that social programs must be cut one way or another. Democratic
opposition to the size of the current cuts notwithstanding, both
parties agree on this basic policy, which has been ongoing for more
than a quarter century.

The Democrats are themselves proposing no significant measures—
whether for jobs, housing, health care or education—to deal with the
acute social crisis exposed by the Hurricane Katrina disaster,
underscoring their abandonment of any policy of social reform.

The current budget reconciliation process is in many ways a
continuation and deepening of cuts initiated by the Clinton
administration, which ended welfare as a federal entitlement. The
1996 budget act, moreover, permanently barred legal immigrants from
receiving Food Stamps. In 2001, the Bush administration modified
this provision to allow legal immigrants to receive Food Stamps
after a five-year waiting period. The House is now proposing to
extend the waiting period to seven years.

The bulk of the tax cuts for the wealthy enacted under Bush were
voted in with the support of the Democratic Party leadership, while
at the state level Democratic governors are overseeing massive cuts
in Medicaid and education programs.

The new budget bill places in sharp relief the fact that the entire
political system is an instrument of big business, dedicated to
increasing the wealth of a financial aristocracy at the expense of
the working class. It is one more _expression of the crisis and rot
of the profit system.


Post is about tax burden of rich, poor,
I will not concede your suggestion that there was NO surplus under Clinton. If the amount of in question, so be it, even though I have seen that figure in multiple sources and have provided the link to them repeatedly. Fact is that GW inherited a surplus in the hundreds of millions. Even if he started from zero (which he did not), he still created a deficit of $400 billion, so no matter how diligently you try to suggest that there was no surplus under BC (a delusional notion), fact remains that the public has every right to compare JM (who voted with Bush 90% of the time) and GW when it comes to lack of fiscal responsibility. Observations about relationship between tax burden and distribution of wealth are valid economic principles and cannot be knocked out by the spin machine.
working poor and middle class need defending not rich
Believe me, the rich do not need to be defended.  They are getting along just fine and can pay for the best defense in the world.  Debating about how the rich should have their money, on and on..if anyone needs defending, it is the working poor and the middle class whose salary for the past five years has gone down, not increased. 
Rich or poor, cheaters are cheaters. And closing
I hope he not only makes the big rich companies FINALLY pay their fair share of the taxes, I also hope they have to pay through the nose for selling out American workers.

The President's speech made my day!
Poor Poor Rush. Hey, how is AIR AMERICA
nm
Many rich are rich because they too are hard
xx
What you say about his company
love Tom Sawyer
the company we keep ??

Speaking out as William Ayers becomes an increasingly controversial figure in the presidential campaign, a woman charges the former Weather Underground radical locked her in his attic apartment when both were college students and intimidated her into having sex with his brother and his black roommate. Read the latest now on WND.com.
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=77407



WorldNetDaily
http://wnd.com


Yup, you got company on that one!.....nm
nm
It is the same company, old-timer....
do what I said. Google it. ACORN has a poltiical arm as well as an affordable housing arm. It is the SAME company. They are under indictment in Missouri for voter fraud and under investigation for what has been described as the largest mass voter fraud in history in Detroit. Obama was their lawyer in Chicago and defended them in voter-related issues. He also did training for these folks who go out and try to register new Democratic voters. I am not saying he trained them to commit fraud...what I am saying is that they have been indicted in Missouri and are under heavy investigation in Detroit.
global company
http://www.gm.com/corporate/about/global_operations/asia_pacific/chin.jsp
Poor, poor Obama......sm
and I bet you don't think that huge press conference, surrounded by the adoring media masses, pandering to poor me (O) being taken advantage of....you don't believe that was political grandstanding?


Tsk tsk.






No Oil Company Profits Left Behind

What counts more in Bush's America?  Oil company executive bonuses/company profits or education?




Ga. Schools to Close Two Days to Save Gas


Georgia's Public Schools to Close for First Two Days of Next Week to Conserve Fuel After Rita


By DICK PETTYS


The Associated Press


Sep. 24, 2005 - Most of Georgia's public schools will be closed Monday and Tuesday, taking two early snow days, in an effort to conserve fuel in the aftermath of hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

Gov. Sonny Perdue asked for the closings on Friday, estimating that closing all of the state's schools would save about 250,000 gallons of diesel fuel by idling buses, plus an undetermined amount of gasoline by allowing teachers, staff members and some parents to stay home. Electricity also would be conserved by keeping the schools closed, he said.


If Georgians stick together, work together and conserve together we can weather whatever problems Rita brings our way with the least possible inconvenience, Perdue said.


All but four of the state's 181 school districts said they would comply with the governor's request.


One of the four, Floyd County Schools, refused to join the effort because it already planned to close for a weeklong break starting next Friday. Closing would give us two days of school next week, district spokesman Tim Hensley said.


As he did in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Perdue also asked residents and ordered government agencies to limit nonessential travel and use commuting alternatives including telecommuting, car pooling and four-day work weeks.


If demand is reduced, he said, we will have enough market power to hold prices down. All together, we can influence demand within our state.


Tim Callahan, spokesman for the 61,000-member Professional Association of Georgia Educators, said he worried that Perdue's announcement would prompt panic buying.


I wonder if it's going to create the type of panic that we saw a few weeks back that drove prices over $3, said Callahan, referring to the long lines and record-high prices following Hurricane Katrina.


During the price escalation, Perdue and the legislature suspended the state's gas tax, saving motorists an estimated 15 cents per gallon. While several other states considered taking similar action, Georgia was the only one to suspend the tax.


The state's monthlong gas-tax holiday expires this Friday, but Perdue has ruled out extending that tax break because the state's $75 million gas-tax surplus has been drained.


AAA reported the state's average price for regular unleaded was $2.59 per gallon as of Wednesday, but increases of up to 28 cents per gallon were reported Friday.




Does your husband work for a company
or is he independent? Do you live in a rural area, small town or city?
You know what they say . . . misery loves company!!
xx
Bush and Company ignored the red flags!
The Bush administration was notified about Moussaoui wanting to learn to fly but not to land, and they totally ignored it. There was a lot intelligence information prior to 9/11 that was ignored, yet some people on this forum continue to thank George Bush for keeping us safe. Personally, I think Bush deserves much of the blame for 9/11.
GM considering Chapter 11 filing, new company

CHICAGO (Reuters) - General Motors Corp, nearing a Tuesday deadline to present a viability plan to the U.S. government, is considering as one option a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing that would create a new company, the Wall Street Journal said in its Saturday edition.


"One plan includes a Chapter 11 filing that would assemble all of GM's viable assets, including some U.S. brands and international operations, into a new company," the newspaper said. "The undesirable assets would be liquidated or sold under protection of a bankruptcy court. Contracts with bondholders, unions, dealers and suppliers would also be reworked."


Citing "people familiar with the matter," the story said that GM could also ask for additional government funds to stave off a bankruptcy filing.


GM declined to comment, the story said.


General Motors and Chrysler LLC face a Tuesday deadline to file restructuring plans to the government in exchange for receiving $17.4 billion in federal loans.


Automakers have struggled as U.S. auto sales have tumbled amid a recessionary economy. U.S. auto sales in January tumbled to a 27-year low.
GM has been in talks with bondholders and the United Auto Workers union to get an agreement on a restructuring that would wipe out about $28 billion in debt for the auto maker, sources have told Reuters. However, it appears unlikely a deal could be reached by the Tuesday deadline, they said.


GM has already announced plans to cut 10,000 salaried workers worldwide, or 14 percent of its staff, impose pay cuts for most remaining white-collar U.S. workers and has offered buyouts to its 62,000 U.S. workers represented by the UAW.


In addition, it is trying to sell its Hummer SUV and Swedish Saab brands and is reviewing the status of its Saturn brand.


GM to Offer Two Choices: Bankruptcy or More Aid


General Motors Corp., nearing a federally imposed deadline to present a restructuring plan, will offer the government two costly alternatives:


commit billions more in bailout money to fund the company's operations, or provide financial backing as part of a bankruptcy filing, said people familiar with GM's thinking.


The competing choices, which highlight GM's rapidly deteriorating operations, present a dilemma for Congress and the Obama administration.


If they refuse to provide additional aid to GM on top of the $13.4 billion already committed they risk seeing an industrial icon fall into bankruptcy.


Some experts and members of Congress say bankruptcy reorganization ...


Used to work for ocean company
Pirates have been rampant for many years, mostly in African and Asian areas. Most ships, both Navy and private, are armed and trained to deal with them. Heck, when there was a swim call, 2 crewman would sit on deck, armed, to shoot any sharks that might come into the area.

But, everyone is right, something needs to be done, and should have been done years ago. I have been out of the business for almost 7 years. You really didn't hear too much about it before, but it happened, a lot.
Gunmen kidnap 25 at Baghdad company...sm
Instability and civil war. This does not come as a surprise. We should have a limited role, if any, in civil war in Iraq.
-----------------------------------
By Aseel Kami and Omar Ibadi

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Gunmen wearing uniforms of Iraqi security forces kidnapped 25 people from an office in central Baghdad in broad daylight on Monday, police said.

The gunmen pulled up in 15 four-wheel-drive vehicles and kidnapped employees and customers at the office on a street in Arasat, once a thriving commercial district that has seen many businesses close due to violence ravaging the country.

Some witnesses said the offices were those of the Iraqi-American Chamber of Commerce and Industry and al-Rawi mobile telephone company.

I was on the first floor of the Iraqi-American Chamber of Commerce and they took all the men downstairs. They were in camouflage army uniforms. They handcuffed the men and blindfolded them, said a witness who asked not to be named.

Me and five others were left behind because all the cars were full.

Police said among those kidnapped were the head and 11 employees of the chamber, which represents companies seeking to boost trade between postwar Iraq and firms in the United States.

Two gunmen stayed outside and the others entered the building. They dragged the employees and put them in the cars, said another witness.

President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki have agreed to send thousands more troop to tackle sectarian and insurgent violence in Baghdad, where criminal gangs and kidnappers feed off the instability.

FAILED SECURITY CRACKDOWN

Maliki has already launched a crackdown but it has failed to ease communal violence which has raised fears of civil war.

More and more neighborhoods are being carved up along sectarian lines in the capital, once a melting pot of Iraq's sects and ethnic groups. And a growing number of shops and businesses have closed, including many on Arasat Road.

Officials have acknowledged that sectarian militias and insurgents have infiltrated security forces and vowed to tackle the problem.

Underscoring concerns over sectarian strife, Iraqi Defense Minister General Abdel Qader Jassim and General Babaaaker Zebari, general commander of joint forces, urged army personnel and civilian employees of the military to avoid sectarianism.

Joining the military and implementing national obligations need loyalty and people should discard party, sectarian and racial affiliations and stay away from politicizing the army, they said in a speech released on Monday.

In typical bloodshed in Baghdad, gunmen killed Fakhri Salman, a brigadier in the Iraqi National Intelligence Service, said an Interior Ministry source.

Maad Jihad, an advisor to the health minister, was also killed in the Mansour district, the source said.

I believe the phone company can still find the caller....sm
or at least the number from which the call originated. Phone records are accessible to law enforcement agencies when there is a reason for investigation.
You hit that right on, BB. Talk about misery loves company!!

WC is not a government program - it is insurance that the company's pay
nm
So are you saying the company took the case pro bono, but paid Roberts.
If he wasn't paid, he did the work pro bono.
Swiftboating continues; you're in good company.


Walter Cronkite may be next...

Cronkite: Time for U.S. to Leave Iraq

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television WriterSun Jan 15, 6:47 PM ET

Former CBS anchor Walter Cronkite, whose 1968 conclusion that the Vietnam War was unwinnable keenly influenced public opinion then, said Sunday he'd say the same thing today about Iraq.

It's my belief that we should get out now, Cronkite said in a meeting with reporters.

Now 89, the television journalist once known as the most trusted man in America has been off the CBS Evening News for nearly a quarter-century. He's still a CBS News employee, although he does little for them.

Cronkite said one of his proudest moments came at the end of a 1968 documentary he made following a visit to Vietnam during the Tet offensive. Urged by his boss to briefly set aside his objectivity to give his view of the situation, Cronkite said the war was unwinnable and that the U.S. should exit.

Then-President Lyndon Johnson reportedly told a White House aide after that, If I've lost Cronkite, I've lost Middle America.

The best time to have made a similar statement about Iraq came after Hurricane Katrina, he said.

We had an opportunity to say to the world and Iraqis after the hurricane disaster that Mother Nature has not treated us well and we find ourselves missing the amount of money it takes to help these poor people out of their homeless situation and rebuild some of our most important cities in the United States, he said. Therefore, we are going to have to bring our troops home.

Iraqis should have been told that our hearts are with you and that the United States would do all it could to rebuild their country, he said.

I think we could have been able to retire with honor, he said. In fact, I think we can retire with honor anyway.

Cronkite has spoken out against the Iraq war in the past, saying in 2004 that Americans weren't any safer because of the invasion.

Cronkite, who is hard of hearing and walks haltingly, jokingly said that I'm standing by if they want me to anchor the CBS Evening News. CBS is still searching for a permanent successor to Dan Rather, who replaced Cronkite in March 1981.

Twenty-four hours after I told CBS News that I was stepping down at my 65th birthday I was already regretting it and I've regretted it every day since, he said. It's too good a job for me to have given it up the way that I did.

Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
*****************************
AND MURTHA:

Web Site Attacks Critic of War
Opponents Question Murtha's Medals

By Howard Kurtz and Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, January 14, 2006; A05

Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), the former Marine who is an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, has become the latest Democrat to have his Vietnam War decorations questioned.

In a tactic reminiscent of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth assault on Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) during the 2004 presidential campaign, a conservative Web site yesterday quoted Murtha opponents as questioning the circumstances surrounding the awarding of his two Purple Hearts.

David Thibault, editor in chief of the Cybercast News Service, said the issue of Murtha's medals from 1967 is relevant now because the congressman has really put himself in the forefront of the antiwar movement. Thibault said: He has been placed by the Democratic Party and antiwar activists as a spokesman against the war above reproach.

Cindy Abram, a spokeswoman for Murtha, said, We certainly believe that the questions being raised are an attempt to distract attention from what's happening in Iraq. As for how Murtha won the Purple Hearts, she said: We think the congressman's record is clear. We have the documentation, the paperwork that proves that he earned them, and that he is entitled to wear them proudly.

Cybercast is part of the conservative Media Research Center, run by L. Brent Bozell III, who accused some in the media of ignoring the Swift Boat charges, but Thibault said it operates independently. He said the unit, formerly called the Conservative News Service, averages 110,000 readers, mainly conservative, and provides material for other Web sites such as GOPUSA. We won't run anything against anybody if we don't have the goods, he said.

Former representative Don Bailey (D-Pa.), who was quoted in the article, confirmed his account to The Washington Post yesterday.

In a conversation on the House floor in the early 1980s, said Bailey, who won a Silver Star and three Bronze Stars in Vietnam, Murtha told him he did not deserve his Purple Hearts. He recalled Murtha saying: Hey, I didn't do anything like you did. I got a little scratch on the cheek. Murtha's spokeswoman would not address that account.

Bailey, who lost a House race to Murtha after a 1982 redistricting, said Jack's a coward, and he's a liar for subsequently denying the conversation. That just really burned me, he said.

While saying he has only responded to reporters' questions and is not bitter toward Murtha, Bailey said the congressman's approach to Iraq is not responsible and that it just turned my stomach to see Murtha acting as a spokesman for veterans.

He said he shared the information with Republican William Choby, who ran against Murtha four times beginning in 1990 and made the Vietnam decorations an issue. Choby raised the issue again during Murtha's 2002 reelection campaign.

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, citing Marine records, reported that year that Murtha was wounded during hostile actions near Da Nang, Vietnam: In the first incident, his right cheek was lacerated, and in the second, he was lacerated above his left eye. Neither injury required evacuation. The Cybercast article cites a 1994 interview in which Murtha described injuries to his arm and knee.

The article included a 1996 quote from Harry Fox, who worked for former representative John Saylor (R-Pa.), telling a local newspaper that Murtha was pretending to be a big war hero. Fox, who lost a 1974 election to Murtha, said the 38-year Marine veteran had asked Saylor for assistance in obtaining the Purple Hearts but was turned down because the office believed he lacked adequate evidence of his wounds.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said, The Swift Boat-like attacks on an American hero, Congressman Jack Murtha, are despicable and have no place in politics.

In November, when Murtha called for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the congressman was endorsing Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic Party and called his stance a surrender to the terrorists. Days later, President Bush called Murtha a fine man and said they simply disagreed about Iraq.

The Cybercast article appeared shortly before a segment scheduled for CBS's 60 Minutes tomorrow in which Murtha predicts that the vast majority of U.S. troops will be out of Iraq by year's end.
© 2006 The Washington Post Company

FOR DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES WHO OPPOSE THE WAR:

Bush to use speech in Kentucky to promote Republicans

January 11, 2006

LOUISVILLE (AP) -- President Bush will have an eye on the fall elections Wednesday when he heads to Louisville, Kentucky, to give a speech on Iraq.
Tuesday, the president told a veterans group that voters should punish any Democrat whose Iraq War rhetoric gives comfort to our adversaries. He said loyal opposition is one thing, but defeatism is another.


Amazing, a large, successful company with a heart and soul, putting America first?? Congrats to Int
nm
I have to take a small exception....
I understand why there was no half staff declaration for Katrina victims and there was for VA Tech. There is a difference in a natural disaster, where loss of life is expected to some degree (not condoned, not accepted, but expected) and a crazy going nuts and murdering 32 people in a heinous horrible bloodbath. I can see why the half-staff for VTech. There has never, as far as I have known, been half-staff for victims of natural disaster, and Hurricane Andrew killed many as well. Although there was no paper half-staff declaration, I did hear personally on many occasions President Bush use some of the same words in talking about the Katrina victims...and he did declare a national day of remembrance for the Katrina victims, which he did not do for the VA Tech victims.
Small and slanted...?
I saw the video. How can a video be small and slanted? It was broadcast on several channels though certainly not CNN. How can that be slanted? A video is what it is. The country producing it did not dispute it, France and Germany did not dispute it. Please tell me how that can be slanted. It is also a fact that they found the intact 747 in the Iraqi desert. That WAS reported on CNN. How can that be slanted? It was there. What possible other purpose could it have to be there? I can see you ignoring a video of two men, but a 747???

You are wrong about the unrest...most of the unrest in Iraq is foreign fighters. If you would watch one of the small and slanted reports as you call them, if only occasionally, you might actually get the BIG picture you keep referring me to. Several of the sectarian fighters have now turned on the foreign fighters instead of each other. Hopefully more of that will occur.

I suppose it will be easy enough for you, if we pull out of Iraq now, to just let the Sunnis and Shias have at it and take all the innocents who just want to work and live with them, aka Viet Nam. For whatever reason, whether you agree with it or not, we are there and the situation is what it is. We can turn tail and run like we did in Viet Nam, or we can finish it.

As to facts to form theories...your facts and theories are no stronger than mine. And again I say...it should not be a far right, a right, a liberal or a far left thing. It should be an American thing. I am an American first. I don't give a good gosh darn about politics. I do give a good gosh darn about this country and keeping it safe for all of us, no matter what direction we lean in. Would that we all felt that way.
I am teaching a small ESL

course in grammar.  Two examples I use


President Bush flew BACK from vacation to sign the Terri Schiavo legislation.


President Bush flew OVER the Katrina victims.


 


It seems to help them understand better.


 


 


small business
Me and DH own a small recreation business, and quite frankly, a few years ago, when the gas prices started getting out of control is when our business started hurting. We are taxed individually, not as a corporation, so I don't see anything in O's tax plan that would hurt us. Maybe help us a bit. Most small business owners aren't making a large fortune, those are the big corporations who have so many dam@ loopholes anyway!
Just like you buy his very small relationship with
!!
Just one small question?
What about your tax dollars going to support ILLEGAL aliens?  You okay with that?    My husband and I paid a little over $15,000 last year in taxes, 85% of our Social Security benefits were taxed because of our other income. I would hardly consider us freeloaders and I wouldn't mind a little tax cut myself.    Get real, none of us are going to get a tax cut and all of working (and retired) AMERICAN taxes are going to go up.  Thank your Republicans as well as the Democrats.  They all put us another $750 billion and counting in debt.  Somebody is going to have to pay it or you can start worrying about communism when China forcloses on their loans!!!!!!  You people need to take the shades off your eyes.
How about Rev. Otis Small
from Trinity Church (Rev Wright's former church). Obama says he is the wisest man he knows. Oh my gosh, this is beyond scary! Whatup indeed!!!
small message
It's easy to be gracious and appear to reach out to the other side - when you are the winner! I only fear what the OBama masses would have done if their candidate had lost .. a lot more than booing during the concession speech I fear.

I do agree on the republican party comments, however.

But I also think there were a lot of uneducated people who really thought through WHAT OBama said and consider how and when he was actually going to do any them, and even further, exactly how they will be paid for?

oh well. I will support him - he is our new president .. and will also do a lot of praying for our government ..

Small message ..
I will be fair..

I am patriotic ..

I (so far)am guaranteed freedom of speech and the freedom to have ideas of my own ...

I will not sit back and act like he is My Lord and Savior and I should worship his feet or the ground he walks on.

I will give him a chance .. truly

Just my 2 cents.
Small, harmless example
From a journalist, not an opinion personality:

Neil Cavuto:

– We do not pick and choose these rallies and protests. We were there for the Million Man March, even though, as I pointed out, it turned out to be well shy of a million men. [Fox Business, 4/11/09]

and

– You seem to pick and choose what events and protests were worthy. Million Man March, worthy, even though it wasn’t a million men, it was half a million. We covered that because we thought it had a worthy message too. [Fox News, 4/8/09]

Fox News could not possibly have covered the Million Man March.


So you and your buds bash us on *your* board and suddenly, once you reach this board,

some respect?


You publicly post on the other board that you *try not to visit the bog of eternal stench.*


Well, doesn't look like you are trying all that hard. Or is that another example of Conservative honesty, like your buddy on the other board lies 3 times before suddenly deciding to be *up front* (in her own words) about the whole bogus line of crap she was spouting.


You and your 2 friends don't respect anyone unless they're a member of your little club, think exactly as you think, belong to the same political party as you belong, and believe in the very same little narrow SUBsection of one particular religion.


That's what I interpret from YOUR WRITTEN WORDS.  Your posts don't show respect.  They only show twisted *facts*, ignorance, anger and hatred.


You can't be *respectful* on your own board but suddenly, when you come here - HERE - the place YOU call *the bog of eternal stench* you suddenly discover some respectability during your mouse click from there to here?


Please.  Some of us aren't as stupid as you think we are.


You're becoming quite a bore.  You and your friends stated you don't want us on your board, but you're not happy unless you're picking a fight.  You and your *gang* told us to leave and not to post on *your* board.  Maybe that should work both ways.


Out of ALL the problems with radical Conservatives, maybe the most annoying thing is that you don't believe in equality at all.  You believe in SUPERIORITY.  Somewhere along the line, someone made you think you were special and above everyone else.  Sheesh!  You're not happy unless you're dictating to everyone else in the country what they're allowed to do in their own personal lives regarding life, death, science, etc. You even think YOUR GOD IS BETTER than everyone else's.


You want to make the rules, censor people and tell them which boards they can and cannot post on, but YOU want to invade them all and spew your ignorance and hatred. 


In my heart, I believe there are sincere, honest, intelligent Conservatives out there who are capable of a sensible debate.  I've seen them.  (I hope you don't chase them away, too.)  But and your crew don't fall in that category, and this will be the last of your inane posts I will subject myself to.


Talk about stench. Just read your very own posts.


Can we bring the board back to the true reason for the board

Can we get the political board back to the true purpose of this board – to share opinions of why we like our candidate.  Not bash and cut down others because they don’t agree with you.


I stayed away from this board for the past couple days because anyone who had anything positive to say about Sarah Palin got slammed, bashed, kicked down, etc.  After awhile I found it all too draining, and was not seeing any reason to come.  Yes, I did see some of it towards people who favored Barack Obama, but if you read the posts again it is mostly towards anyone who favored Sarah Palin/John McCain.


I thought the political board was for posting information regarding politics and candidates.  What I have seen for the past few days is that it has been an attack board.  Especially if you have anything positive you want to share about Sarah Palin.  You say something good about her and you get attacked, you answer back, and you get attacked more, and then when you get mad and pretty much say stop attacking me, they come back with this “Geez, I’m allowed to have an opinion”.


Another thing I am tired of seeing is the slanderous, hate filled, really off the wall comments about Sarah Palin.  The latest was something about her daughter actually had her baby.  Talk about just bizarre comments.  I thought what’s next, she’s an alien from another planet?  The more I kept reading the more the comments were getting just really weird and bizarre.  Of course nobody ever having any proof of any of these allegations.  I then came to realize that the posters were just trying to get a fight going.


I also saw posts that had nothing to do with politics but attacking a poster named Sam.  Again, probably trying to get another fight going for no good reason and on things that have nothing to do whatsoever with politics.  I’ve read “Sam is like an annoying nat that you sway away”, “Sam, please let me know where you work” or “she must have her quota” or “sam is to the politics board as oracle is to the”  This childish rhetoric is getting old.  I’m not defending sam she is a big girl and I can see by her posts she can take care of herself, but my point is that this has nothing to do with politics.  If you want a fight maybe you could request that the administrator create a separate “fight and degrade” section.


I’ve read the administrators post a couple different times called Beware of Flaming.  She/he said as long as we realize that not everyone is going to agree we shouldn’t wear our feelings on our sleeves and a little more oversight on here would be good.  Let people express his or her opinion and move on.  If you don’t like someone just ignore that person. “It’s not rocket science, you know” (I liked that statement)


I consider posting on this board a privilege and not a right.  If you don’t agree with something and you post that you don’t agree and state the facts why (and are civilized about it) that’s one thing, but when you bash and degrade others without showing proof and just want to start fights and belittle others it just seems a bit juvenile to me.


I come to the politics board to hear ideas and stuff (facts) about the candidates.  That is how I’m learning about each one, but I don’t want to read people attack other posters for no good reason.  I'd like to hear about Obama/Biden & McCain/Palin, but I want to hear facts.


If you like to fight so much why don’t you pick on people that you can fight to face to face. 


Breaking out my small violin
I hope by the time you go through any real persecution you will have grown some skin. 
And he wasn't after any small change either. I think..sm
the prolife, anti-gay hoopla is just a front for some of em.

Kind of like *yeah yall keep that song and dance going over there, while I get this money over here.*
I live in a very small town. sm

My state is a red state, but my hometown newspaper carries one column and that is Molly Ivins.  You don't get much further left than that.  I agree.


A couple of small things...
Intolerance is not something I associate with being liberal. Perhaps I need to adjust my thinking.

My compassion extends to all those hurting and in need, just like yours does. However, as you well know and seem so jaded by, one person cannot focus on every area, every part of humanity, every issue. You must choose your issue and throw all your energy into it. I would say that the anti-war arena is pretty well covered, wouldn't you? The anti-abortion arena, however, is not. And that is where I am moved to place my focus. Because there are people affected by war who CAN speak for themselves. They DO have the ability to at least try and protect themselves. Unborn children do not have that luxury. They are totally at the mercy of others, and if you want to talk about a horrendous way to die...there is no more horrendous way to die than being aborted. In a way, it is the ultimate betrayal if someone does not defend the most vulnerable among us. That is why I chose that issue and that is why I will speak out against it with my last breath.

You call me supercilious, yet post something like the nature of conservatism to have lack of empathy? A rather broad brush stroke I would say. How you can criticize something else for having no empathy and turn your back on the unborn...there is NO balance in that to see.

There is no spin, piglet. The facts are obvious. You have chosen to exclude the most needy and vulnerable and even go to the extreme of being highly critical of me for doing so. No spin there.

It is obvious you call things the way you perceive them, and have intolerance for any who do not agree with your perception. Again, that is not a trait I associate with liberals. And again..perhaps I need to adjust my thinking.

No one is asking you to apologize, piglet. These last few posts...amazing. If it were aimed AT liberals I would swear it WAS Ann Coulter. Especially the "I call things the way I perceive them, I don't sugar coat it and I won't apologize for it." VINTAGE Ann Coulter. :-)
She is what small-town America is all about
Loved the speech, love the candidate!!!
Those small-town values are
EXACTLY what the big bad world needs to take it on.  Resolute, firm in beliefs, freedom, country first. 
As an IC, I'm considered a small business, so
but not really sure which will benefit me the most. ICs must all think like small businesses and consider taxes based on that, not as individual taxpayers.

I actually don't agree with either one on all tax issues, so I'm still on the fence. I doubt Barack will be able to enact and MAINTAIN the tax cuts he has promised. I agree with giving seniors a break on taxes when they are on a limited budget, for example, but Barack has said seniors making less than $50K. That means if they make $49K (which is more than I make, BTW), they don't have to pay ANY taxes?? Lower that amount a tad and I might see it as reasonable, but a senior making more than me, receiving senior discounts, Medicare, etc., and then not having to pay taxes. Seems a little off balance somehow.

And simplifying tax preparation isn't one of my top priorities, I have TurboTax for that. A lot of his other tax proposals pretty much mirror McCain's so I don't see much difference there, like the R&D, small biz, etc. I like his ideas on taxes, but IMO, his website is full of promises that he will have a VERY hard time fulfilling.

I like that Barack addresses credit card practices. I feel this is a BIG problem. Good creditworthy people are getting screwed by shady practices of credit card companies left and right. I don't see where McCain has addressed this.

I like McCain's summer gas tax holiday, lowering gas prices in the summer, since historically, gas prices always climb through summer especially around the holidays. I also like his HOME plan, as this would make the people truly affected by subprime loans eligible to trade their mortgage. But probably what I like most is McCain's view on healthcare - restoring control to the PATIENTS. I know people that live in countries with Government provided healthcare, and they do not have any more control over that than any of us with paid insurance policies do. I feel the only way to change this issue is to crack down on the insurance companies, force their hands to make premiums more affordable, make them honor their premium terms, limit their restrictions on patients and pre-existing conditions, and do not allow them to tell patients what procedures they can and can't have and what doctors they can and can't see.
If it is a small business, then it is exempt from this - nm
x
I agree, it is not everyone, it is actually just a small portion (sm)
of people who are showing their racist bents..the problem is that some of them are angry and dangerous. And I know there are many races in our country but this particular "battle" is between white and black... and it goes both ways.
It is happening now on a small scale....
we have one refundable tax credit now that I know of...the earned income tax credit. What Obama wants to do is expand that dramatically, and that is most definitely new. That credit does not stretch to that entire 30-40% of people who don't pay federal income taxes. Obama's plan WILL. Because those people comprise part of that 30-40%. How can he give a tax CUT to 95% of Americans otherwise? THAT is my point. Why on earth tax small businesses and yes, even large corporations MORE, so you can give people on welfare a refundable tax credit check?? In my opinion, extending refundable tax credits to people already on the government t*t is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Yes, we have a refundable tax credit now that benefits some persons. What Obama proposes is taking that from where the earned income tax credit is all the way to the bottom. That is his starting from the bottom theory. How many times have we heard that?
Not yet. Voting at about 4 p.m. EST. I live in a small
town. We have two separate voting places with 3 machines at each place, so hopefully not a long line, but I will stay there until my vote is in. Cannot wait.
Maybe if small businesses like MT companies

receive a tax credit as a reward/incentive to keep jobs INSIDE the USA, that policy will help American MTs.


That's Obama's policy.