You're incorrect.
Posted By: Liberal on 2006-08-12
In Reply to: What, may I respectfully ask, does this prove? - worldfan
You wrote But first, they drop leaflets, warning civilians to leave. Really, quite a first for this sort of thing.
This may be a first for Israel, but it is a practice that has been used for a very long time in order to minimize collateral damage in wars. You need to check your facts because you are wrong that it is a first for this sort of thing.
How kind of Israel to drops these leaflets warning civilians to leave after Israel already bombed out their roads and bridges in order that they might actually do so. No. Kind probably isn't the right word. Disingenuous is a much better word.
Lebanon was in the process of being a place people wanted to visit again, in fact, a vacation destination for some people. There was not only great physical damage done to its infrastructure but to its economic potential, as well.
As far as Hezbollah, some people see them as terrorists. However, some people in Lebanon see them as part of their government, as people who try to take care of those less fortunate in Lebanon, and as people who will help to keep them safe from Israel. I personally am not willing to disregard what these people feel and know firsthand in order to believe what a neocon Bush apologist has to say, considering all the lies the world has been asked to believe since Bush took office.
Even the moderate countries over there are changing their opinions regarding Hezbollah and Israel -- the same countries that used to be our allies.
Hezbollah has promised to honor the cease fire, but they do reserve the right to protect themselves, which is very reasonable. Israel, on the other hand, ramps up the attacks and violence, making me wonder just how sincere they are. Once again, disingenuous is more like it.
I'm very sorry, but I, for one, am bloody tired of Israel apologists.
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
Incorrect. We're the target of terrorists
because we are a capitalist society. A society that allows for personal freedoms. A country that embraces all races and religious and creeds. A country that does not dictate how its citizens must act, and think, and worship. And that is unsufferable to Muslim extremits.
Do you know anything about Jihad?
You are incorrect.
To life-long friends and family who know me, no one would ever use those to terms to describe me.
But I have been called blunt and overly honest at times.
You are as off in your assessment of me as you were in your being unable to assess what constitutes humor. Apparently you also were incapable of understanding the moderator's request that you stay off this board if you can't play nice with the liberal's posting their viewpoints. Perhaps you did not notice that the title of the board is LIBERALS.
You are incorrect
I never told anyone to leave this board. I simply asked the bashing to stop. You have been provided a forum for your endless stream of liberal bashing and it is called the conservative board. Just never understood why you guys don't want to use it for the purpose it was provided. I like to see your posts on this board when free of the bashing.
You are very much incorrect
You and the death squad on this board need to get educated. You need to move beyond your stereotypes of the evil Muslims.
Jihad has a wider meaning in Islamic literature. It can be striving to lead a good Muslim life, praying and fasting regularly, being an attentive spouse and parent or working hard to spread the message of Islam.[2] Jihad is also used in the meaning of struggle for or defence of Islam, the holy war. Despite the fact that Jihad is not supposed to include aggressive warfare, this has occurred, as exemplified by early extremists like Kharijites and contemporary groups like Egypt's Jihad Organization (which assassinated Anwar Al Sadat) as well as Jihad organizations in Lebanon, the Gulf states, and Indonesia.[1]
You have this incorrect.
Your Teddy/Taiga synopsis is wrong, as is your Observer synopsis. Check the archives if you don't believe me. I don't know why the truth is so hard to portray...especially when it can all be verified in the archives. But then this is nothing new with you guys.
If you want to believe the fiction you have created, go ahead. This is a political board and if you want to make up fairy tales in order to bash someone I can't stop you.
Actually you are incorrect
GALLUP SHOCK: 49 OBAMA, 47 MCCAIN WITH LIKELY VOTERS
Misleading and incorrect....this is not a tax cut....sm
It is a one-time payout to poor people. Everything else under the sun that you buy in the future will be taxed higher.
People are so gullible.
that calculator is incorrect
It does not acct for the repeal of the Bush tax cuts, and in the end you will end up paying more. Read all the posts below from yesterday about this. Geez, do you believe everything? Like no politicians lie?
I did not state that your posting was incorrect
I posted the source of your information. That is all. I know that most of us, yourself included, feel it is important to cite sources.
Otherwise no where in my short post did I challenge the veracity of the information you provided.
incorrect information, blanket
attack on all non-right wing media, and cut and paste from neocon website, all-in-all an otherwise mildly entertaining post. I give it 2 stars of 11 possible.
Moderator is watching but you are incorrect.
The OP is not advocating but entertaining a valid thought about a past medical condition.
Moderator
Religiously politically incorrect? (sm)
The name of this site is MTStars. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I take that to mean it is a place for medical transcriptionists to come and voice their opinions about many subjects. Please see list of subjects to the left. What I didn't realize is that this board is exclusive of anyone who is not a christian or has a different view other than those posted. AGAIN, my post had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, I repeat NOTHING to do with religion. And by the way, I have used the term *bible thumping* once on this board, and that was because it was a direct quote from another poster (a christian).
MODERATOR: Could you please change the name of this website to RELIGIOUSLY POLITICALLY CORRECT MTSTARS!!!!
The transcript and a bonus (the incorrect spelling is not mine)
|
If you can't see our menu, your pop-up blocker is enabled. Click here to see the site directory. |
Saturday, Oct 01, 2005 |
|
|
|
 |
Quotes And Statements |
|
|
 Statement By Bill Bennett, Sep. 30, 2005
From the Desk of William J. Bennett September 30, 2005
On Wednesday, a caller to my radio show proposed the idea that one good argument for the pro-life position would be that if we didn't have abortions, Social Security would be solvent. I stated my doubts about such a thesis, as well as my opposition to such a form of argument (the audio of the call is available at my Website: bennettmornings.com).
I then stated that such extrapolations of this argument can cut both ways, and cited the current bestseller, Freakonomics, which discusses the authors' thesis that abortion reduces crime.
Then, putting my philosophy professor's hat on, I went on to reveal the limitations of such arguments by showing the absurdity in another such argument, along the same lines. I entertained what law school professors call 'the Socratic method' and what I would hope good social science professors still use in their seminars. In so doing, I suggested a hypothetical analogy while at the same time saying the proposition I was using about blacks and abortion was 'impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible,' just to ensure those who would have any doubt about what they were hearing, or for those who tuned in to the middle of the conversation.
The issues of crime and race have been on many people's minds, and tongues, for the past month or so--in light of the situation in New Orleans; and the issues of race, crime, and abortion are well aired and ventilated in articles, the academy, the think tank community, and public policy. Indeed the whole issue of crime and race is not new in social science, nor popular literature. One of the authors of Freakonomics, himself, had an extended exchange on the discussion of these issues on the Internet some years back--which was also much debated in the think tank community in Washington.
A thought experiment about public policy, on national radio, should not have received the condemnations it has. Anyone paying attention to this debate should be offended by those who have selectively quoted me, distorted my meaning, and taken out of context the dialogue I engaged in this week. Such distortions from 'leaders' of organizations and parties is a disgrace not only to the organizations and institutions they serve, but to the First Amendment.
In sum, let me reiterate what I had hoped my long career had already established: that I renounce all forms of bigotry--and that my record in trying to provide opportunities for, as well as save the lives of, minorities in this country stands up just fine.
Bill Bennett Interview on Fox News' Hannity & Colmes Regarding Race, Crime, Etc.
Courtesy of Fox News Channel/9-29-2005
First, our top story tonight is the controversy surrounding radio talk show host Bill Bennett. Yesterday on his radio show, Mr. Bennett -- Dr. Bennett was quoted as saying. I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could, if that were your sole purpose, you cold abort every black baby in this country and your crime rate would go down...that would be an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. So these far-out, these far-reaching, extensive extrapolations are, I think, tricky.
The comments have drawn criticism today from Senate minority leader Harry Reid who said he was appalled. Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy who called them racist and from House minority leader Nancy Pelosi who said they were shameful. Bill Bennett joins us now in an exclusive interview to talk about these comments.
Dr. Bennett, we appreciate you coming on tonight.
DR. BILL BENNETT, MORNING IN AMERICA HOST: Thank you.
COLMES: Might give you an opportune to put them in context and explain.
BENNETT: Sure. Well, the context was a radio show that I was doing yesterday, and the topic was abortion and we were talking about bad arguments in regard to abortion. A caller suggested he was opposed to abortion because he said if there were more babies there would be, eventually, more tax payers and a larger GNP, a smaller deficit. I said you want to be careful with that kind of argument because someone could postulate a situation where child's not likely to be a productive taxpayer. I said, arguments in which you take something that's far out, like the GNP and try to connect it up with abortion are tricky. I said make the case of abortion on the basis of life and protecting life. I said abortion is invoked in another way; you could make an argument that if you wanted to lower the crime rate, you saw the quote; you could practice abortion in very large numbers. You could do it in the black community; you could do it in other places. This is, by the way, the subject of a book for economics by a professor at Yale.
I said, however, if you were to practice that, widespread abortion in the black community or any other community, it would be ridiculous, impossible, and I appreciate you putting it on the screen, morally reprehensible. So I think morally reprehensible, when that is included in the quote makes it perfectly clear what my position is. A number of the people whom you have cited as condemning me have not made the inclusion of that remark, and so they make it seem, Alan, as if I am supporting such a monstrous idea, which of course I don't.
COLMES: Here's my concern. The root cause of crime, one would debate, it seems to be poverty. And from your remarks, I wonder if people might interpret it as saying the root cause of crime is race. And that debate about is it race is it poverty? What really is the root cause? And race affects people of all races and creeds and I think that's why...
BENNETT: Poverty. Poverty affects people of all races. Let me tell you what bothers me first, because I'm always candid with you. What bothers me is that last night on your radio show, you were all over me, Alan. And, you know, I was really surprised. You know me, you've known me for a long time and the fact that you would give credence to the notion that I would believe such a thing is very disturbing. I've had 1,000 opportunities when people have said to me what about that Alan Colmes, isn't he a jerk or a liberal this -- I've always said he's always a gentleman, he's nice to me. I run a radio show in which we don't yell at people, we don't make fun of them. We have liberals and conservatives and we deal with sensitive and important public policies issues and we do it in a responsible way. But people need to follow the argument and the argument I was making here is entirely plausible. The causes of crime are very complicated. But there is a very big literature, as you know, about single parenthood in crime, about race in crime, and about poverty in crime. And we've been talking about all these things lately in the context of New Orleans and other things.
COMES: Let me talk to you...
BENNETT: There are real things in the real world, and there are people who believe we should take such monstrous steps.
COLMES: Let me talk about what I said on my radio show.
BENNETT: I do not.
COLMES: Dr. Bennett -- Bill, because you know, I do consider you someone -- we've been good to each other. I like you. I think you respect me.
BENNETT: Yes sir.
COLMES: I was really shocked.
BENNETT: Have been.
COLMES: And I plaid what you said and the whole context of what you said. Frankly, I was just shocked by it. I don't believe you're a racist. I don't think that you believe those things. I was just shocked by what I heard and I -- basically there was a lot of callers calling up and commenting on it after I played your comments. And a lot of other people were shocked that you would have -- in the context you said it, say the things you said.
BENNETT: Well, you know, to put forward a hypothesis, a morally impossible hypothesis to show why it is morally impossible and reprehensible seems to me is a standard way of talking about public policy and a standard way of teaching. You know, I've taught philosophy for years and one argues in the hypothetical all the time. People have said such outrageous things, Alan, about race and this is not unknown to our history. It's certainly not unknown to our history -- to the history of Europe, recently. It's not unknown to the history of Islam. And what we have -- you've got to be able to make an argument and say look, you may be thinking you're going to achieve some good end, but you can't use a monstrous means to do it. You know, this is like a Swift's modest proposal for people who remember their literature. You put things up in order to examine them. I put it up, examined it, and said that is ridiculous and impossible no matter who advances that idea.
COLMES: All right, we got -- Sean will be with you in the next segment. There are some statistics, you know, that talk about how African- Americans are treated disparagingly in the criminal justice and, you know, we could debate whether or not there really is a greater prejudice against African-Americans and whether they are incarcerated disproportionately.
BENNETT: Yeah.
COLMES: But look we got to take a break and we'll continue with you...
BENNETT: Those are big complicated questions...
COLMES: And later, there more political fallout on Capitol Hill today over the indictment of Congressman Tom Delay. We'll take you behind closed doors to one of the most powerful members in the House.
And then Nation of Islam leader, Louis Farrakhan, says the suffering of hurricane Katrina has actually brought black Americans together. Is he using the crisis for his own political gain? You don't want to miss this.
And FEMA made a hasty deal in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and it's costing taxpayers $236 million. We'll get to the bottom of this shocking story coming up on HANNITY COLMES, tonight.
(NEWSBREAK) (COMMERCIAL BREAK) SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: And this is a FOX News Alert. You are looking live at the hills of southern California where wildfires are blazing out of control and are threatening to destroy private residences. We have 3,000 firefighters working at this hour to control the blaze, but as you can see from these live pictures, they're still burning pretty hot. We're gong to keep you updated throughout the hour. We'll bring you new pictures as we get them and let you know as this developes. We hope they can put that out. I was out in southern California in Hope Ranch when this happened. It is devastating.
Also coming up tonight, now that Tom Delay is out House majority leader, at least temporarily, will issue like immigration reforms, spending on the federal level will suffer. We're going to ask one of the men who is stepping into part of his leadership position.
And there is some late-breaking information tonight about the man who is prosecuting come to Tom Delay. Is it a publicity stunt for a movie being made about him? We'll tell you about this tonight.
First, we continue with the host of Morning in America. Bill Bennett is back with us.
Bill, first of all, I have known for you many, many years. I know your faith, I know your character, I know who you are. You're a former secretary of education, former drug czar. This notion that Bill Bennett as is being alleged by prominent democrats has any racist bone in his body is appalling to me.
BENNETT: Yeah.
HANNITY: And I'm glad to hear you say what you said here. I want you to respond to those democrats that are grandstanding, the same ones that had Robert Bird, the former Klansman as their leader. The ones that didn't speak out about Congressman Wrangle's Bull Connor remark.
BENNETT: Yeah. Yeah. Well, let's see, you got Kennedy. I will -- I'll not take instruction from Teddy Kennedy. A young woman likely drowned because of his negligence. I'll take no moral instruction with him. That's much worse than legal gambling what Teddy Kennedy did. He should make no judgments at all about people. He shouldn't be in the Senate. As far as racist and all this other stuff, I'll put my record up with Howard Dean, with Harry Reid.
When I was drug czar, you bet, we were working on the issue of black crime, Alan and Sean, because there was a lot of crime in the black community. And you know who most of the victims are? Their black people. Yeah, black violence -- black-on-black violence is very serious. I went to about 120 inner city communities. That's where the senate wanted me to go, that's where the Senate wanted me to go, that's where I wanted to go. We went after public housing and we went after the bad guys. And you know what? We got the bad guys. And drug use went down. And we raised the price and lowered the purity of cocaine. And we arrested four of the most powerful drug dealers in the world. And got a lot of these guys off the street. And I am very proud of that. Because when we went into the inner city black community, the people said to me, Mr. Czar, or Czar, or Mr. Benet, you get those people off the street and protect us. And we did our best to do it.
Before that, when I was secretary of education, I took on what I think is one of the great civil rights issues of our time, which is educational opportunity and educational choice. The stupid ghettoized curriculum we have, the fact that these black kids go to lousy schools and aren't allowed to choose the schools of their choice because they don't have the money and don't have the opportunity.
I've been at this for 25 years and I have been called everything in the book, but I will stay at what I do because I believe it.
Let me just tell you, when it comes to abortion, my wife's program, best friends, has kept more young women from having abortions because they don't get pregnant because they take her good counsel...
HANNITY: Let me...
BENNETT: Than the entire black caucus. She has done more for inner city black girls than the entire black caucus. So I will not bow my head to any of these people. I will not give up the ground of compassion and sympathy. But I'll tell you, we have real issues and we have got to talk about them candidly. And if you don't think there are people who are making draconian proposals about abortion and this and that and the other thing, you know, you don't know the nature...
HANNITY: Let me ask you this. I want to ask you about the nature of debate in this society.
BENNETT: Sure.
HANNITY: I go back to the Bill Maher issue. I don't like -- I don't even like Bill Maher. We disagree on just about everything. But Bill Maher said one statement and his entire history of support in the military was cast aside and people focused on one thing. I said wait a minute, that's wrong. Here's Bill Bennett, here's Trent Lott. One statement, there's no room to apologize, explain, put into context, revise or extend one's remarks because people want to hop on it. We now see the democrats trying to do right now with you and trying to put you in a position of characterizing you, or categorizing you as something you are not. What does that tell you about debate and free speech in the country today?
BENNETT: It's bad. You know, if you could do an analysis -- it would be interesting to do an analysis. All day I've been reading reports and statements by people about me, Sean, and it's interesting, some use the whole quote and are fair, some don't. And that tells you something. But the problem, I think, on the liberal side, the democratic side is they attitudinize, they condemn but they don't have a program.
You know, the president -- I hope the president pays for this program in New Orleans, but he's got a program, and it's some interesting ideas about enterprise zones and school choice, and giving people opportunities, you know, with the loans and the green lining and they ought to be tried. Because these are ideas that might actually help the poor as opposed to maintaining the welfare state, which does not help poor people at all. It's destroyed a lot of families and it has created circumstances in which more poor people and more black people have had to suffer. What's lifted, the economic life and reduced crime in the black community has been hope and opportunity and education and enterprise.
HANNITY: Let me ask you one last question.
BENNETT: And that I think is much more, I have to tell you on this side of the aisle, I want to politicize this because there are good people on both sides.
HANNITY: Explain. I want you to explain, though, for people that see that one quote, that read that one quote, what do you say to them?
BENNETT: What I say to them, Sean, is if they were given the impression that I, you know, am in favor of such a horrible idea as, you know, my critics are suggesting, they need to look at the whole quote. I don't believe that. And I'm sorry that people have misrepresented my views so much that that has given folks that impression. You're right about a person's life. I've got a life, you know, take me in the totality of my actions and I'll tell you, I will stand with my record.
One must be very careful one gets into these arguments and we try to do it. But, you know, we try on this show to do serious and controversial issues. And it's a big country and it's a free country. We don't put liberals down. We don't put people down with whom we disagree. We talk about serious things in a serious way. And if you're not allowed to talk about these subjects, then it's not the country it's supposed to be.
You've got to be able to condemn these horrible ideas as I did.
HANNITY: Bill Bennett, appreciate you being on the program.
BENNETT: Thank you. Thank you guys.
HANNITY: Thank you very much.
And come upping next, Tom Delay will be fighting charges in court. So, you will be fighting for the GOP (SIC) in Congress. We'll talk to one republican leader next.
And who was the man going after the House majority leader, Tom Delay? We have late-breaking information tonight that he is allowing film makers to make a movie about him. Is this all part of a script? We'll give you the details. Much more to come.
|
|
|
|
You are correct, I got one word of the title of his book incorrect,
and for that I apologize. However, the information I quoted from the book is correct, "Frank" is a communist. But, the fact remains, I never called Obama a communist. If I knew he was, I would not hesitate to call him one. I do know he is a socialist, and I call him one.
No need to ridicule and call others ignorant to make a point. It somewhat dulls any point you try to make.
You're entitled to your opinion. I guess it depends on what side of the spectrum you're on.nm
x
We're not defending Bush we're pointing out the obvious
All you see in your view is Bush, Bush, Bush. Nobody else exists. You have yet to answer any of the questions I posed yesterday. We're not the one obsessing about Bush. I'm sure you'll counter that with I don't owe you any answers! It's really telling that for five or six days this board was mute about the Israel/Lebanon situation. You were too busy posting trash news about Bush like nothing was even happening, but I know that the left has wait for its talking points. You all cannot formulate opinions on your own. You have boilerplates ready to go though. *This is Bush's fault because _____________ but you have to wait on Howard Dean, Bill Clinton, etc. etc. to fill in the blanks for you. It's not just a phenomenon here but with all the left. You can count on at least two days of silence when something unforseen breaks out in the world, because they have to retreat to their bunkers to get their talking points straight, but it will always start with *This is Bush's fault because....
Hey, if they're smoking cigs, they're paying for SCHIP.
xx
They're too lazy to show patriotism......they're waiting
xx
So you're not racist but you're most definitely SEXIST and AGEIST!!!
"Someone more in our age group..."
"She should be taking care of her family."
Your true colors are showing, and they're truly ugly.
Just because they're LOSING doesn't mean they're VICTIMS.
What is it with people these days? You think that just because Hamas is getting its fanny handed to it that that magically makes them victims, and we should all weep and throw cash at them?
From the dawn of time, lesser civilizations have fallen to stronger ones.
It's why the human species survived and the neanderthals didn't.
It's why Rome conquered the Celts.
It's why the Barbarians conquered the Western Roman Empire.
It's why the British conquered the American Indians.
It's why the Spanish conquered the Aztecs.
It's why the Muslims conquered Israel the first time. But, since their societal progres seems to have permanently parked in the Stone Age, now Israel is conquering them right back.
Deal with it.
You're right. They're simply not worthy of a reply.
They're not tax breaks....they're tax credits
xx
I'm snotty, you're rude...we're even....
My dearrrr....not everyone in this country pays taxes. So you are wrong there. Obama said "spread the wealth." From his own mouth. The interview in Canada...economic parity and redistribution. Words from HIS mouth. If you believed those words from his mouth as much as you believed other words from his mouth, you would know he is a socialist. Selective memory is a wonderful thing ain't it??
You're right. They're all wack-jobs... nothing
so they try to make themselves feel important by standing around on street corners with their posters and their dollies.
Most of them are just buffoons, good for nothing other than being laughed at by the rest of us. But the ones that totally lose all reason, and go so far as to shoot people (in a church of all places...) is pretty off the deep end.
You're a liar. GT didn't curse. You're a filthy liar, but you are a gift from God.
God sent you here to as a constant reminder of the kind of person I DON'T want to be and if I ever have a bad day when I feel temporarily stupid, all I have to do is read your posts, and I realize there are those out there who are much worse off than I am and for them it's not temporary.
They're doing to this board what they're trying to do
to the whole country. They're trying to take it over. They want to control which God you believe in, who you love and what you do with your body, be it regarding life or regarding death. If you don't voluntarily agree to turn your free will over to their control, they will hunt you down and nag you to death (since they can't do anything more violent on a message board). It's obvious they are sick, sick people and need major help.
But they ARE like watching a car wreck and are sometimes hard to ignore.
I've thought about it, and for me personally, the very best thing to do is ignore them and for 2 reasons:
1. Ignoring them and not reading their posts makes my visit on this board much more pleasant. I already know I'm not missing anything because there isn't one post on this entire board written by them that has contributed anything of value or intelligence.
2. If we all refuse to read and respond to their posts, they might give up and go find another board to terrorize. I doubt that, though, because they've taken over this board and simply don't have the CLASS to leave. They take pride in their bully on the playground mentality and are proud of their ignorant behavior. They will probably just continue to pat themselves on their backs on this board. The only thing that might startle them and cause them to stop is that the NUMBER of posts on the Liberal board are starting to increase heavily as a direct result of their posting. In the past, they've used the Liberal board's lower numbers to trash us for not being as interesting, when, in fact, the CON board must be pretty boring if they are always choosing to be HERE instead.
Like I said, I've decided that I'd like my visits here to be pleasant, so I'm just going to stop subjecting myself to their cesspools of attacks. They've proven their posts aren't worth wasting time reading, so I'm just going to stop and will feel much better as a result of stopping. 
Your not you're. I hope you're not an MT. nm
.
They're children, though. They're not
adults. Mom and Dad need to know these things even if only to possibly prevent problems later.
You're welcome.
If I find anything, I'll be sure to post it, but I doubt he's going to be saying much. I think he understandably wants to distance himself as far away from this administration as he can.
I wish he would run for President. I'd very proudly vote for him in a heartbeat! I'd finally be able to vote for the best candidate instead of the least worst one.
I agree with you, and I admire and respect him very much.
So I take it you're on your
so you don't mind your grandchildren paying their fair share, right?
Bush Tax Cuts = Tax Shifts
UFE Report: Tax Burden Shifting off Wealthy onto Everyone Else
$197 Billion in Tax Cuts to Top 1% of US Taxpayers as Big as States’ Budget Shortfalls of $200 Billion
BOSTON — A new report, entitled “Shifty Tax Cuts: How They Move the Tax Burden off the Rich and onto Everyone Else,” from United for a Fair Economy (UFE) indicates that between 2002 and 2004, the Bush tax cuts to the top 1% of US income earners redirected billions of dollars in revenue that could have eliminated virtually all of the budget shortfalls in the states.
“Congress had the option to send aid to the states to prevent $200 billion worth of service cuts and regressive tax increases,” said Chris Hartman, UFE’s research director. “Instead, they gave tax breaks totaling roughly the same amount to multi-millionaires and the rest of the top 1%.”
The report identifies five main areas of shifting tax burden:
FEDERAL TO STATE — a 15% shift in tax burden between 2000 and 2003
PROGRESSIVE TO REGRESSIVE — at the federal level, a 17% decline in the share of revenue from progressive taxes and a 135% increase in the share of revenue from regressive taxes since 1962
WEALTH TO WORK — A tax cut on unearned income — such as inheritance or investment — of between 31% and 79%, but a tax hike on work income of 25% since 1980
CORPORATIONS TO INDIVIDUALS — a 67% drop in the share of federal revenues contributed by corporations and a 17% rise in individuals’ share
CURRENT TAXPAYERS TO FUTURE GENERATIONS — record deficits that shift the tax burden to our children and grandchildren
“When President Bush and Congress trumpet, ‘Here’s a tax cut', we say, ‘Taxpayer beware!’ said Chuck Collins, United for a Fair Economy co-founder. “Unless you are super-rich, it’s a tax SHIFT, not a cut. Non-wealthy taxpayers will pay for these tax cuts with increased state and local taxes or cuts in public services.”
“Between 2002 and 2004, a full $197 billion in new tax breaks went to the top 1% of American taxpayers,” Hartman commented. “This is money that has disappeared into the pockets of the very wealthy, making it unavailable to solve ongoing budget crises at the state and local levels.”
“I got a rebate check last summer for $400,” said Collins. “Then my eight-year-old’s public school asked me to contribute money to replace worn-out chairs for the students. At the same time, I found out they laid off the librarian because of budget cuts. What good is a $400 tax cut when parents have to cough up additional money for chairs and books or else see their children go without?”
The report concludes that the total federal, state and local tax burden has become increasingly the responsibility of middle-and low-income families in recent decades, and that revenues being generated by taxes are not sufficient to pay for existing public services. Work in particular is being taxed at a higher rate than investment. “I do a lot of work in predominantly Latino areas of Boston,” said UFE Education Specialist Gloribell Mota. “Residents there are the working poor — they have jobs and pay taxes — yet are getting pennies in tax cuts and seeing health care services they depend on slashed.”
“The Bush administration has followed a strategy of starving public services by pulling tax money away from education and housing and giving it away to multi-millionaires,” said Karen Kraut, UFE’s State Tax Partnership director. “States are suffering as a result, and people are going without essential services in order to fund the lifestyles of the rich.”
The report calls for tax reforms to improve the fairness of tax distribution and ensure adequate revenues. Concerned Americans are urged to pass resolutions in their cities and towns to stop the tax cuts and restore local services that have been affected, to call and write their congressional representatives to take action to stop the cuts, and to sign the Tax Fairness Pledge at www.ResponsibleWealth.org/taxpledge.
The co-authors of the report are Chuck Collins, UFE Co-founder; Chris Hartman, UFE Research Director; Karen Kraut, Director of UFE’s State Tax Partnerships; and Gloribell Mota, UFE Education Specialist.
United for a Fair Economy is an independent national non-profit that raises awareness of growing economic inequality.
You're not getting it
if the Attorney POCKETS most of the winnings how are they any better than the greedy corporations? Since you think one is more morally ethical than the other eventhough they may both be doing THE SAME EXACT THING....then the debate has ended as far as I'm concerned.
I never said don't come over there, you're the one
x
You're welcome.
Have a great day.
You're welcome.
I didn't know it existed, either, but I think it's a really great site and wanted to pass it on. Some of these guys have said they're afraid to speak the truth and feel they're taking a chance by doing so. 
You're welcome, gt.
You're welcome and you're right.
You're right.
It's clear the ONLY people who have true freedom of speech and freedom of thought in this country are Bush disciples. In addition, they have the freedom to lie to the rest of America.
Don't despair. It won't be long before a Pat Robertsonesque appointee thug of Bush will be seizing my computer, bugging my phone and knocking at my door, ready to lock me up simply because I express my distaste for a President who is incapable of telling the truth to ANYONE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD, as he wraps himself in the Holy Bible and American Flag. His enemies aren't *terrorists.* If they were, I wouldn't be able to get on a plane now with a knife again.
His enemies are Americans who have the audacity to pay attention, think freely and voice their opinions.
My freedom of speech, free thought, expression, religion, ETC. is about to come to a screeching halt very soon.
You'd better hope you continue to obey the master, remain in step and NEVER stray from the flock. Otherwise, the next freedom-ending screech I hear could be YOURS.
Yes, you're right; I'm sure
their eye on me as well! What I find most pitiful is YOUR lack of outrage. Too much Kool-Aid, I guess. What will it take before you see what **King George** has done and continues to do to this country?
Huh? You're not going to believe this.
Or maybe you will...but for me it falls into the category of WHAT THE???????!!!!!!!!
Labored logic
Democrats have been buzzing about comments made by state Sen. Nancy Schaefer (R-Turnerville) at a recent eggs-and-issues breakfast in Hart County. We quote from the Hartwell Sun newspaper: Commenting on illegal immigration, Schaefer said 50 million abortions have been performed in this country, causing a shortage of cheap American labor. 'We could have used those people,' she said.
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/insider/stories/030606.html
You're welcome. sm
I wholeheartedly agree that Lurker's post went straight to the heart of how I feel on so many levels and it took time to put it together.
You're welcome. nm
You're welcome.
You're welcome!
You're welcome. :-) (NM)
/
You're right...sm
War was used for lack of a better term - genocide. One day is a long time when you fear for your life and are watching other's die. Nothing made me more upset with Clinton than watching Hotel Rwanda. Quite frankly though, that is an ugly part of history. Darfur is here and now. What do we do, give the UN and Bush a pass?
I know you're not...sm
I said those interested.
But you're not sorry at all..
Call me condescending, call the majority of liberals on this board shallow, immoral, without firm foundations and that's just part of your comments. What is the purpose of this name-calling? Does it make you feel better about yourself? What do you hope to accomplish? This is the liberal board and I don't believe this board was provided as a venue for you to vent your condemnation of liberal folks. Why do you and others do it? Where is there one iota of value in your posting other than a rant against liberals and their many many failings.
you're right
There is free speech and tolerance of extreme behavior in our nation, but here there is also a missing element of having enough social training to not persist in bothering people who do not wish to be associated with you. In real life, this would be embarassing, but with the anonimity of the internet, people let their real selves emerge without fear of consequences. Shunning has alway worked in the past.
You're right I don't.
I do not appreciate your views. I believe them to be jaded.
I think you're right.
Lieberman doesn't have the clout that he used to. It's a small feather in McCain's hat at best.
However, to play devil's advocate when it comes to looking objectively at the republican candidates, I believe McCain to be the lessor of all evils :o). If I have to settle for a republican winning the next presidential election, I could more easily swallow it if it were John McCain; regardless of his stance on the war. Even though he was supportive of overthrowing Hussain, he was pretty vocal about Bush's bungles afterwards.
you're right, I don't
They can bash all they want, they can sling all the mud --- I will remain unphased. My decision is made, unwavering. It really comes down to black and white (not literally, cuz who cares?). The question is this: Do we want business as usual or do we want a change? Well, sign me up for the Change Train and let's get this moving forward. McCain is doing some serious bashing. All the nay-sayers are filled with fear. Well how about we go with some Hope for our Future? How bout we just go on blind faith that things can only get better and support this Positive thinking individual? My mind is made up and will not be changed no matter what y'all sling in Obama's direction. We need a Democrat in charge, STAT.
|
