Don't be so quick to bash Bush.... sm

Conservative board.

Never a problem there.

The right wing rag I got my figures from was the IRS:

Progressivity and the Tax Burden

Our tax system, however, is highly progressive, meaning that as one's income rises, a higher proportion of that income is taxed. Thus, those in the highest tax brackets contribute more to the overall tax burden even though there are far more people in lower tax brackets.¹

• According to data from the IRS, the bottom 50 percent of income earners pay approximately 4 percent of income taxes.
  
• The top 25 percent of income earners pay nearly 83 percent of the income tax burden, and the top 10 percent pay 65 percent.
  
• The top 1 percent of income earners pay almost 35 percent of all income taxes.

The bottom 50% referred to above includes the middle class.

The $6 billion figure came from one of your own posters down in a lower thread...from the tax institute who evaluated O's plan, and the fact that it would add about a trillion (literally) dollars to the deficit.  You can scroll down and find it yourself.

Yes, $250,000 in INCOME.  That is a small business owner's PAYCHECK.  That is what is left after they have paid all their small business operation bills, and he wants to RAISE the taxes on what they have left.  It HURTS small businesses.  IF they work hard, pay their people, keep their jobs on shore, what do they get for it?  After paying whatever business taxes they have to pay, he wants to tax their bottom line AGAIN.  In my opinion...that sucks.

Don't have time to run through the whole rant right now.  More later.

According to dictionary.com, the meanings of the N-word are “deeply disparaging and are used when the speaker deliberately wishes to cause great offense.”  They go on to say, conversely, “it is sometimes used among African-Americans in a neutral or familiar way.”  Since he whispered the statement behind what he thought was a cold microphone, it is highly unlikely that Rev. Jackson intended to cause great offense and his use of the word probably falls into the latter category of usage. 

For example, the N-word can become much less offensive and even assume neutrality within historical discourse, literature, poetry, cinema theater and the like.  One could further argue that within certain contexts (i.e. rap music, conversations within the black households, neighborhoods and businesses, to name a few) connotations of the word can be construed so as to convey a sense of community…even a brotherhood, of sorts.  Language is fluid, dynamic and vital in its nature, not static or one-dimensional.  Context, message, intent, environment, speaker and audience all impact the ultimate nuance of meaning in all forms of communication. 

I agree with you and take deep offense at the use of the N-word, regardless of who says it.  However, I would like to comment on some of the other points you raised in your post.  A careful read of the actual statement shows that Rev. Jackson did not use this epithet to personally attack Obama.  Rather, he was referring to the black population as a whole.  Granted, his choice of words was extremely poor (at least from a white perspective), but the statement was not meant for public scrutiny.  It was spoken from one black individual to another, much the same was that Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s statements were made from black preacher to black congregation. 

As a white person, I do not believe I can sit in judgment one way or another regarding his choice of words when taken completely out of context, in the same way I am not qualified to criticize the sermons of Rev. Wright.  I would like to think that I am intelligent enough to understand that, having lived in the US as a white person both before and after the civil right eras (1948 to present), I have not experienced life in America the same way black people have.  They are entitled to their own “take” on their own lives.  Who am I to tell them how to “tell it like it is?”

One last point.  I am sure that much flap and bruhah will ensue over this unfortunate news.  However, the very fact that Rev. Sharpton, you, I, the media and countless others will be having this debate over our outrage and dismay is a testament as to just how effective Rev Jackson and other early leaders in the civil rights movement were in defining the key issues, defying status quo of his times, enlisting support for the cause, effectively engaging his opposition in ongoing bipartisan initiatives over nearly 4 decades and producing fruitful, far-reaching and substantial bodies of legislation from which today’s black community continue to reap bountiful benefits and blessings.  They weathered storms of protests, incarceration, series after series of setbacks and reversals, and buckets of bloodshed in their efforts to secure the civil liberties and rights that reach far beyond the black community to encompass other forms of discrimination against women, gays, immigrants and the poor, to name a few…all so casually taken for granted and so easily dismissed in the blink of an eye with one ill-chosen, unfortunate slip of the tongue. 

For those of us whose memories reach further back than the latest round of CNN sound bytes and chat room chatter, we probably would forgive Obama should he decide not to denounce Rev Jackson’s support, nor would we feel driven to force him to abandon his own pastor of 20 years for the sake of our own righteous indignation.