MICHAEL DAVIS WORLD

You can't make this stuff up, so we don't!

Don’t Tea Bag on Me, by Arthur Tebbel & Chris Toia – Pop Art… and Chris #19

April 14, 2009 Arthur Tebbel & Chris Toia 0 Comments

TeabagDear Art & Chris,

A few months ago I gave a rant on CNBC that jumpstarted a populist movement that I’m very proud of.  I denounced President Obama’s plan to help people whose mortgages had gone into foreclosure.  I even suggested that there be a “Chicago Tea Party” to protest this.  In the weeks since this idea has seemed to catch fire.  This week there will be protests in every state in which people will dump tea to show their outrage over Obama’s policies.  Will you please inform your readers about these events and perhaps even join us this week?  We’ve got a lot of cool speakers.

-Rick Santelli CNBC

Rick,
Yeah, we won’t be doing that.  We’d even like to encourage our readers to learn less about your protests.  If you’re out there and know anything about this topic, go pour yourself a stiff drink.  Bonus: it’ll make us funnier.  We will, however, devote this column to pointing out how you and your brood are insane hypocrites.  Strap yourself in.

First of all, this is nothing like the Boston Tea Party.  The Boston Tea party was about taxation without representation.  The Republicns have 178 representatives in the house and 41 senators.  This is a stark contrast to the zero representatives the colonists had in British Parliament.  Furthermore, tea was dumped in the Boston harbor to protest a new tax on tea.  There is no new tax on tea.  The big new tax in the Obama administration is an increase in the top tax bracket from 36% to 39%.  It’s obvious to us that the thing people should be dumping in the water is three percent of rich people’s money.  Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck should go first.

This also does not, in any way, resemble a grassroots movement.  When you made your proclamation on television the URL for the tea party website had already been purchased by a right wing organization.  That is not grassroots, we call that astroturfing you insufferable hack shill.  This is just another top down movement.  Fox News is even sponsoring four of these events themselves and are devoting a day to covering it as news.  The sound you hear is Edward R. Murrow’s ghost punching himself in the balls.

The basis of this asinine protest is that people will go out, purchase tea, purchase stamps, then mail the teabags to liberal dems.  Here’s the thing, the two taxes that every middle schooler knows incited the revolutionary war, the Stamp Tax and the Tea Tax.  News flash, colonists didn’t oppose the British taxes by going out and buying all the stamps and tea they could stuff into their oversized pockets.  In essence you guys are Britons in Colonists clothing; purporting to stand up on the side of righteousness but only really supporting the old and untenable ways of the crown.  Your followers are the people too cynical to care, or too poor and downtrodden to notice the difference.

Finally, don’t think we haven’t noticed that your movement has swaddled itself in the juvenile term “teabagging”.  Teabagging is when a man dips his testicles into another person’s mouth.  Why use this term?  Is it because the liberal movement proverbially teabagged the holy shit out of conservative candidates in voting booths across the country this year?  Or is it because the conservative movement knows it can’t win in a battle of wits and must therefore attempt to goad their opponents into a race to the bottom… or at least the taint.  While we hope that our leaders continue to exist above the fray we have an idea for a counter protest that makes use of a much more appropriate metaphor.  We encourage all of our readers to send douche bags to Rick Santelli, as well as the entire team at Fox News, but especially Glenn Beck and Sean “Douche Bag” Hannity.  The douche bags are symbolic of the hypocrisy of the nation’s economic and conservative elite usurping revolutionary symbols to encourage the nation’s underprivileged to act against their better economic interest.  Also, it’s symbolic of these guys are huge douche bags.

Previous Post

Next Post

Comments

  1. pennie
    April 14, 2009 - 5:10 am

    Douche Bags…love it!
    But in the interest of saving money (douche bags cost $ and would make hefty packages), why not used tampons? Human waste–which is what these misguided souls embody.
    Fairly inexpensive, biodegradable and they bloody well convey the point. If these miserly miscreants wish to put them to use and mimic the colonials, they can always use the red tampons as daubers to paint their faces. A win-win for all.

  2. Martha Thomases
    April 14, 2009 - 5:47 am

    Or send them scum-bags! Preferably used.

  3. Russ Rogers
    April 14, 2009 - 5:57 am

    Could we start a “grassroots” campaign to send Disposable Douche to Fox News, just to show what we think of them?

  4. pennie
    April 14, 2009 - 6:28 am

    @Russ,
    “Could we start a “grassroots” campaign to send Disposable Douche to Fox News, just to show what we think of them? ”
    Combine that with Mike Gold’s subject from yesterday. Stuff the douche bags with stems, seeds, and shit to really make it grassroots! Tell ’em to go plant it!

  5. Mike Gold
    April 14, 2009 - 12:23 pm

    Pennie: The idiots at Fox would probably smoke it anyway.

  6. Vinnie Bartilucci
    April 14, 2009 - 1:22 pm

    “The big new tax in the Obama administration is an increase in the top tax bracket from 36% to 39%. ”

    The vast majority of people define “tax” as what they pay on April 15th. If they took a moment to think about every “Fee”, “surcharge”, or any other term they can come up with that mean “money that goes to the government”, people would be far angrier. Something like 20-30 percent of a cell phone bill is taxes and genernment fees. Sales tax, the nebulous fees and charges on a traffic ticket that often come up to several times the actual fine, it all adds up.

    Back when the gas prices were outrageously high (as opposed to just crazy high as they are now) some politicians floated the idea of taking away the gas taxes temporarily, to help people out. It never happened, mainly because it would shine a light on exactly HOW much of the price of gas was tax. The government makes more on a gallon of gas than the oil companies do.

    As a rule, people are not upset about taxes as much as they are angry that the taxes are not being used on things that they agree with. So you get articles about pork, the famous bridge to nowhere, and pieces about how they want to save money by cancelling the National Endowment for the Arts (which at the time, accounted for 64 cents of everyone’s yearly tax bill) So when taxes are used to, say, build a road in their area that will employ a umber of people, that’s good planning, but when it’s used to pay off a bunch of lazy slobs who should just get off their asses and get jobs, that’s bad planning. In a perfect world (according to these folks), their taxes would be used solely to help them.

    That ain’t how it works, alas. Even if you don’t have kids, your property taxes will be used to pay for schools. And your employment will be a source of funds to help those who are not.

    The trick is not to tax the people who have money MORE, but to come up with a way to make it so MORE people HAVE money, tax MORE people LESS money, and end up with the same amount, maybe even more. Create more jobs, educate people so they can get BETTER jobs, and improve things across the board.

    Let’s see who can pull that off.

    Clean cup, move down…

  7. MOTU
    April 14, 2009 - 3:35 pm

    ALL Fox News are idiots and if you need any more proof check out the below clip from the Glenn Beck show the other day:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20090414/ts_ynews/ynews_ts298

    The guest started to sway back and forth and Beck asked “Are you OK.” the guy answered a FEW TIMES “I’m passing out.” What did Beck do? He shook his hand. No one from the show moved until the guy DROPPED to the floor. This after a FEW “I’m passing out.’ from the guy who…passed out.

    Like I said IDIOTS. Hey don’t take my word for it watch the clip.

  8. pennie
    April 14, 2009 - 3:55 pm

    @MOTU,
    “ALL Fox News are idiots”
    Yeah, they just pimp their ride like the ho’s they are.
    Then again, the working girls I grew up with would retch if they were bunched with these slimeballs.

  9. Reg
    April 14, 2009 - 4:01 pm

    Great article man…

    There was one of these idiotic bagging parties in my neck of the woods last week and they’re planning another one. The gullibility of the red heads never cease to amaze me.

    Oh yeah… apparently they’re still saying that our President is not really an American.

  10. Better Dead Than Red
    April 15, 2009 - 2:28 pm

    Perhaps you are not aware of the actual breakdowns Art & Chris. I will list them below for you to actually read and study up on. By the way, this is for the tax increases over the next 10 years, which I like to call the Marathon Taxes…

    1) On people making more than $250,000 (apparently the American Dream has a cap).

    $338 billion – Bush tax cuts expire
    $179 billion – eliminate itemized deduction
    $118 billion – capital gains tax hike

    Total: $636 billion/10 years

    2) Businesses:

    $17 billion – Reinstate Superfund taxes
    $24 billion – tax carried-interest as income
    $5 billion – codify “economic substance doctrine”
    $61 billion – repeal LIFO
    $210 billion – international enforcement, reform deferral, other tax reform
    $4 billion – information reporting for rental payments
    $5.3 billion – excise tax on Gulf of Mexico oil and gas
    $3.4 billion – repeal expensing of tangible drilling costs
    $62 million – repeal deduction for tertiary injectants
    $49 million – repeal passive loss exception for working interests in oil and natural gas properties
    $13 billion – repeal manufacturing tax deduction for oil and natural gas companies
    $1 billion – increase to 7 years geological and geophysical amortization period for independent producers
    $882 million – eliminate advanced earned income tax credit

    That is a total of $353 billion NEW TAXES over the next 10 years, and that is without the new “Smoking Tax” or “Carbon Tax” or “Charitable Tax” aww forget it.. You hopefully see what I mean.

    As for the Tea Parties…It’s about way more than taxes. The name is simply there for kitsch, in order to call it something, and what better way, than naming it after the first big F.U. to our former overlords in England.

    We the people are fed up with ALL POLITICIANS who refuse to listen to the very people that put them in their office. The MAJORITY of Americans were against ALL of the stupid damn “Stimulus Packages” but they didn’t listen.

    We the people are fed up with OUR GOVERNMENT (you know, the people that are supposed to WORK FOR US) deciding to get into the Bank business, the Auto industry, the Insurance industry, the Housing industry, the Healthcare industry and on and on and on.

    Remember…and this is important…Life, Liberty, and the PURSUIT of Happiness. Not handouts to trophy kids who USE the government and live lazily ever after. There are not supposed to be ANY Free Rides in THIS country! You are supposed to EARN your own way.

    We are a Free Republic not a Democracy/Socialist bordering on Communist country. If you want that please LEAVE and go north to Canada or overseas to Europe. We are different than the rest of the world, and yes, I will state it…WE ARE BETTER THAN THE REST OF THE WORLD!!!!

    At least, we’re supposed to be. We are the ideal! There is a reason why people keep flocking here, and it’s because they want a chance to EARN their own way, and KEEP what they have earned. They want to better their life, and lead it in a way that they deem fit.

    Sadly, the American Dream will continue to erode if we stay this course.

    Right and Left are BOTH wrong because we in the MIDDLE refuse to be trampled on and forced into submission.

    2010 will bring in a brand new ballgame, where the Independent thinking Americans re-state their independence and get rid of the people currently residing in our nation’s capitol, who are BEYOND out of touch with the REAL world and REAL people.

    Lifetime Politician was never, ever, supposed to be an actual occupation. Much less one that uses the 27th Amendment to continue giving themselves raises via COLA.

    This will happen by power of the VOTE! No violence, no TV stations, no newspapers, no radio. Just us, a booth, and a vote.

    Tis a pity that most of the people who have commented here, have already given up on this country and what it used to be. I thought and hoped you would all be better than that. I haven’t, I won’t, and I never will.

    This isn’t about party, this is about us an our way of life

  11. Arthur Tebbel
    April 15, 2009 - 6:29 pm

    @BDTR
    I have an economics degree so you can stuff any noise about educating me on tax policy.

    Furthermore absolute numbers in a discussion about taxes are pretty much completely meaningless but I’ll play your game. $353 billion in new taxes over the next ten years? Oh No! Assuming a 0% growth in GDP (impossible) that’s an astounding 0.246% of GDP. I assure you this is a remarkably insignificant change.

    I’ll let Chris handle the political philosophy part of this debate (you are completely fucked dude) but I will give you an idea of how naive you are if you think you represent the majority. Gallup’s daily poll for today shows the President with a 63% approval rating. Another recent poll showed 51% trust the democratic leaders in congress to handle the economy compared to just 38% who trust the republicans. You have the kind of majority that can neither win an election or show up on polling data. If the dems represent socialism then it would seem that’s what people want.

    Dasvedanya comrade.

  12. Alan Coil
    April 15, 2009 - 7:42 pm

    And most of what BDTR is calling “new” taxes is actually a reinstatement of previous tax cuts according to the law Bush signed several years ago. Bush is to blame.

    And for those that think this was a grassroots tea party movement, wrong. The chicagoteaparty (dot) com site was brought into being last August, lay fallow until after Rick Santelli’s “impromptu” rant. All this was planned and primarily funded by Right Wing extremists, the true terrorists in today’s society.

  13. Austin Walker
    April 15, 2009 - 8:21 pm

    I’ll be brief now, will have more later:

    “We are a Free Republic not a Democracy/Socialist bordering on Communist country. If you want that please LEAVE and go north to Canada or overseas to Europe.”
    +
    This will happen by power of the VOTE! No violence, no TV stations, no newspapers, no radio. Just us, a booth, and a vote.

    =
    Contradiction.

    You can’t be behind the power of the vote, then complain when elected officials change the “core” of the country. No structure in the history of humanity has been permanent in any nature.

    The fact that we’re not a “Democracy/Socialist bordering on Communist country” right now doesn’t mean we can never be. It also doesn’t mean we can’t end up being a laissez-faire Randian utopia. The reason our country is so great isn’t because of the thing it has been, it’s great because of what it could be. Or Constitution is the core of our nation, not some misguided nostalgia for an American Dream. And the Constitution’s greatest strength is its ability to be modified over time, as per the will of the people. This shit isn’t hard, man.

    You are reductionist, a reactionary. You are without original claim. You are literally using your conclusion as your argument. You fail to tell me why your proposed system is preferable, only that it is, so there. Worse? At some point in your schooling, I think someone told you that the number of exclamation points you use corresponds with how correct you are. Anecdotal evidence suggests the inverse.

    Try harder.

    More later.
    -Austin

  14. Better Dead Than Red
    April 15, 2009 - 9:06 pm

    Arthur wrote: “I have an economics degree so you can stuff any noise about educating me on tax policy” and then, “$353 billion in new taxes over the next ten years? Oh No! Assuming a 0% growth in GDP (impossible) that’s an astounding 0.246% of GDP.”

    LMAO!!!!! I wouldn’t presume to assume when it comes to the GDP if I were you. I don’t care what type of degree you have.

    I notice that you glossed over that it adds up to almost 1 Trillion Dollars, and discounted the sheer volume of currency they are printing up with NOTHING to back it up except I.O.U.s. Which is equivalent to writing a check over the amount of what you have, in order to cash it and then deposit back in the very same bank. Hoping it won’t bounce before payday to cover what you just wrote.

    Did you see the economic collapse coming? Did ya? No…you didn’t or you would be on the talk show circuit crowing about how you “saw it all coming”. So, please excuse me if your degree means nothing more than paper to me.

    The you went and wrote: “Gallup’s daily poll for today shows the President with a 63% approval rating. Another recent poll showed 51% trust the democratic leaders in congress to handle the economy compared to just 38% who trust the republicans.”

    Did you not read a thing I wrote, or did you skim, like so many in the present government did on their taxes? His, or anyone else’s “approval rating” has no bearing on the point I was making. Which was in regard to the Bailouts, and Stimulus packages.

    This isn’t a Right vs. Left thing. It’s a POLITICIAN THING!!!! They come from all parties and are too comfortable in the cushy positions away from the real society in which people WORK for a living and can’t raise their own salaries due to “Cost Of Living”, or continue to receive kickbacks from lobbyists and their corporate puppet masters.

    Alan wrote: “new” taxes is actually a reinstatement of previous tax cuts according to the law Bush signed several years ago. Bush is to blame.”

    I will again refer to the taxes laid out above. By ending tax cuts, you are increasing tax amounts…get it?

    Perhaps you didn’t hear the quote from Larry Summers on March 31st when he said, “Let’s be very clear: There are no, no tax increases this year. There are no, no tax increases next year.”

    Larry Summers, for the record, is President Obama’s chief economic adviser.

    Then Alan wrote: “And for those that think this was a grassroots tea party movement, wrong. The chicagoteaparty (dot) com site was brought into being last August, lay fallow until after Rick Santelli’s “impromptu” rant. All this was planned and primarily funded by Right Wing extremists, the true terrorists in today’s society. “—- Not where I am! Though you are correct in the Right Wing extremists moving in and laying claim. They are desperate to cling to anything that would swing the pendulum back their favor. It is more POLITICIANS trying to be something they are not.

    I have been pushing these “Tea Parties” since our rights were being infringed upon due to the Patriot Act. Rick Santelli(nites) took off because he was on national television, and said what he did, and people are angry. He was the first to really be candid about it, on an NBC owned station no less. Plus, I am angry at him, since he ripped of my movement.

  15. Better Dead Than Red
    April 15, 2009 - 9:16 pm

    Hi Austin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    You wrote : “Worse? At some point in your schooling, I think someone told you that the number of exclamation points you use corresponds with how correct you are. Anecdotal evidence suggests the inverse.”

    Poetic license in punctuation, by way of written dialog/blog is subjective.

    This isn’t an English paper, it mutherfuckin’ MDW

    I will dismantle you later, I have a party to attend to.

  16. Better Dead Than Red
    April 15, 2009 - 9:18 pm

    There was no insult intended in my phrase “This isn’t an English paper, it mutherfuckin’ MDW”

    They like to keep it loose and let conversations free flow. Which is why I keep coming back.

  17. Arthur Tebbel
    April 15, 2009 - 10:13 pm

    I’ll do this out of order. I have a degree in economics; not fortune telling. I was certainly educated in bubble economies, and we discussed the real estate market. I also learned enough finance to know that the subprime mortgages were ticking bombs. I couldn’t have said “summer 2008 is when it’ll blow up” but nothing about the economy this decade has been on firm ground. Bubbles pop, ask the Japanese and the Internet.

    If you actually think that in 10 years our GDP will be lower than it is now you should seriously consider investing your money overseas. Convert your dollars into stable commodities.

    Didn’t I write a column freaking out about Geithner’s plan to print a trillion new dollars to buy bad debt? Not even a month ago. I don’t think I glossed over it as much as I did already talk about it. But none of our money is backed by anything real anymore. Currency doesn’t work like that anymore.

    Finally, in your original response you said you would bring change through the ballot box. This implies that you think you’re in the majority. My polling data was to demonstrate that you do not appear to be. It was entirely relevant.

  18. Austin Walker
    April 15, 2009 - 10:18 pm

    @BDTR:

    I’m gonna let someone with an education in economics take on your more dollar oriented claims. But I will say this: I can’t fucking believe how easy you guys jump at the boogeyman of big numbers. You don’t know how much money that is, do you? One trillion dollars. Over ten years? That seems like a gigantic number to you? Really?

    Moving on…

    “Did you not read a thing I wrote, or did you skim, like so many in the present government did on their taxes? His, or anyone else’s “approval rating” has no bearing on the point I was making. Which was in regard to the Bailouts, and Stimulus packages.”

    I think Arthur is referring to your claim that the majority disagree with the current state the country is in. That is a claim separate from its correctness. I don’t know if you’re correlating the two together, or what, but they’re different. If you were saying “It’s wrong” and Art said “No, people say it’s fine,” then you’d have a case. But you said “People hate this! ((!!!)!!)” and Art showed that numbers say they don’t.

    Ok, Ok. Technically you’re talking about the plan, and not Obama. But your fellow “moderates” aren’t. They’re raising signs of Obama dressed like Steve Urkel saying “Did I do that!?” and “Obamanomics: White Slavery.” I’m not trying to make this a race thing, but you guys are making it an Obama thing. To say that this is a protest against politicians and not against Obama would be – oh wait… You did.

    “This isn’t a Right vs. Left thing. It’s a POLITICIAN THING!!!!” !!! !!!!! !!!!!

    Those mother fucking elected official assholes. Doing what they want without asking us each individually first. Using their years of experience and education, loads of resources that we don’t have, and teams of support staff to help figure out problems for us.

    Look, I’m not saying all politicians are flawless. I think a lot of them are probably very corrupt. But the alternative that you seem to be suggesting, or at least the logical conclusion that your arguments lean towards, is a direct democracy. I’m not going to have time tonight to get into the arguments for and against that, but please, take me at my word, the system we have now ain’t so bad.

    But maybe I’m wrong, guy who’s name suggests that suicide is preferable to even a moment under opposition rule, and maybe you have some dream guys in mind that would make great politicians. Tell me about them. Are they dreamy? Do they open the door for you when you walk around to the other side of the car? Do they realize that the only market worth having is a free one?

    Ok, but for serious. Your claims are that politicians are detached from the blue collar, lower middle class that makes up the majority of the country. That because they’re paid well, they can’t possibly relate to or unravel the problems of the working man.

    Look, I’m unemployed right now. When I was employed earlier in the year I was bringing down a hefty salary of $34,000 / year with 60 hour work weeks. I live in New York, in a neighborhood I can’t really afford. I don’t have family money to live off of, or anything like that. I know what it’s like to be broke, and to work hard. If this revulsion really was endemic to that lower middle class status, I think I’d have it. I think my friends would have it.

    We don’t. We realize that being a politician is a job just like any other. There are good politicians and bad ones. If your real goal is to condemn the bad ones, this isn’t an efficient way to do it. Your group’s message is muddled. There’s a little bit of populism, a little bit of Objectivism, a dash of white power movement, and even some good old fashioned secessionism (’round Texas way, mostly.)

    Even taking you, who despite the grammatical flair seem to be pretty level headed, and your argument, the Yours isn’t a “clean up Washington” movement. It’s not a call for better politicians. The words you’ve used in these comments are a rejection of the system.

    It’s a system that takes well liked and (often) well educated members of society, pushes them through a structure of community service, volunteering, and low level internships and administrative positions. It allows them to come up through the ranks by being mentored by active politicians on a state or national level, or by contributing to their region on a local level in city councils, PTAs, and other public settings. At some point your hated politicians decide to run for office and are rewarded by the people for their time spent in service with (finally) a pay raise and increased duties. I can’t understand for the life of me how you can see that process as anything other than part in parcel with your American Dream. It’s just indistinguishable.

    Enjoy your (tea? (!!!)) party. Hope a non-statistically provable majority of people have a good time there.

    -Austin

  19. Russ Rogers
    April 16, 2009 - 1:17 am

    Better Dead,

    We have a Representative Democracy instead of voting on every issue, bill and agenda with a Poll or Referendum. Why? Because the Majority of People don’t have the time or energy to understand the details of Governance. And lawmakers need the help of staffers and, yes, even lobbyists to wade through the morass of technical, legal, scientific and moral issues paraded before Congress.

    Let’s talk Keynesian Economics. It’s not something I readily grasp entirely. I’m not an economist. But, roughly, in times of great recession (or depression) when Consumers and Businesses are retrenching financially, the theory is that Government may be the only entity with the strength and courage to “kick-start” the economy with massive spending and investment in infrastructure. Government needs to do this massive spending, even if it means deficit spending in the short term. Otherwise you run the risk of putting the economy in a death spiral of contraction.

    Why did our elected representatives vote for economic stimulus over fiscal conservation? Because they are smart and they listened to a lot of very smart economists who said, “This MIGHT be a way to lessen the impact of the economic downturn.”

    Why did those same Representatives ignore the “will of the people”? Because they DIDN’T! Those Representatives were elected to REPRESENT their constituents and vote on what they see represents the best interests of the public. They are are not there to be the public’s puppets.

    The American Dream doesn’t have a cap. Nobody is limiting salaries to $250,000 a year. But our Income Tax System is built on Progressive Taxation. Those with the ability to pay more, should pay more. Those without the ability to pay, don’t pay. In other words, you can’t get blood from a stone.

    If you want to argue that it’s unfair that the top 10% of wage earners pay more than 70% of the Income Taxes, I think you need to address the fact that the top 10% of wage earners also MAKE more than 40% of the wages.

    You go on and on about the MAJORITY and MORE TAXES! But the MAJORITY of people will be paying LESS in taxes. Those earning less than $250,000 a year (a vast majority of people) should see a tax break or no raise in their taxes. At least that’s the plan.

    And seeing the Bush Tax Cuts expire is NOT a raise in taxes. It’s an end to what is now seen as an unfair, and unaccounted for, CUT in taxes.

    Better Dead, where are you getting your figures? Who are you quoting? Is this Matt Drudge? Because this posting nearly verbatim (at least these figures) has been copied and reposted in comments on pages all over the Internet, but not by you (or not under this name). So who is the source? Is this a grass roots deal or a bit of Astroturf?

  20. Vinnie Bartilucci
    April 16, 2009 - 5:20 am

    “Those with the ability to pay more, should pay more. ”

    Why?

    It’s the question I eternally ask, and I never get a good answer.

    If I have a million dollars, and you have ten thousand, then yes, I should absolutely pay more taxes than you. But why should I pay a higher RATE than you? Ten percent of a million dollars is MORE than ten percent of ten thousand. goal achieved

    I simply don’t accept the idea that if I have more money than you, I should pay a greater fractional amount of it. I agree with the “my fair share” concept, I just don’t grasp why someone with more money should have to pay more OF it. Should the rich pay a higher sales tax as well? Or get charged more at the mall for the same goods, just cause they can afford to pay more?

    Consider my example, one person has a million dollars, one has ten thousand. Let’s say there are two proposed tax plans, one where person one pays a hundred thousand dollars in taxes, and the other pays one thousand, and another plan where both pay 10 percent. The gag of course is that they’re both the same plan, just presented differently. But if you asked the average person which of those plans was “more fair”, I think most would say they say the one with the rich guy paying the “larger amount” It has more “truthiness” to it.

    Now if you want to argue that there are more loopholes and dodges at higher tax rates, and it’s possible for a savvy rich person to get away with paying a lower percentage, I’m right there with you. But that just speaks to the fact that the tax system is overly complex and confusing, and designed to make you think you “won” by getting a rebate. All it means is you gave the government an interest-free loan for all those months. It’s like the soda companies making more money by people not cashing in the cans – if you don’t take advantages of the deductions and other factors on your taxes, the government gets to keep money you could concievably demand back. Rich people have better access to accountants and lawyers who know those rules back to front. But with the computer programs and other services, even normal people have access to the same knowledge base. Lower the rates across the board, get rid of most of the deductions and hoops you have to jump through, and that’s it. Of course, that puts all those accountants and lawyers out of work, so I don’t see it happening.

    The vast majority of the tax code (well named, as it requires deciphering) is designed to keep you in the dark. Your taxes are deducted from your check “to save you time” – no, it’s so you never actually grasp how much you’re paying. If you had to write a physical check for your taxes, all in one lump (like most rich people do) you’d grasp exactly how much you weere paying, and you’d be far angrier than you are. Most of the time you get a rebate and you’re happy about it.

    “If you want to argue that it’s unfair that the top 10% of wage earners pay more than 70% of the Income Taxes, I think you need to address the fact that the top 10% of wage earners also MAKE more than 40% of the wages.”

    I don’t think anyone is arguing that it’s unfair, it goes back to my point – the rich are ALREADY paying more of the tax bill than the middle and lower class, because they HAVE more of the money. that makes sense. It’s the idea that they should pay a higher percentage of their funds that doesn’t make sense. They’re going to spend that money, and pay sales tax. They’re going to put it in the bank or invest it, earn interest, and pay taxes on the interest. They WILL BE paying more taxes than we do, but it won’t “feel” like they are. It’s one of the reasons the numerous flat tax plans fail – people reject the idea that the wealthy should pay “the same” as we do.

    “And seeing the Bush Tax Cuts expire is NOT a raise in taxes. It’s an end to what is now seen as an unfair, and unaccounted for, CUT in taxes.”

    Scenario – Day one, with tax cuts in place, you pay 10 dollars in taxes. Day two, cuts expire, you pay twelve dollars in taxes. Did your taxes go up? Of course they did – claiming they simply “returned to where they shold be” is just doublespeak, similar to my large/small vs the same percent example I gave before.

    Any businessman will tell you, having a large customer base is better and safer than a small one. Hell, ask any comic shop. The goal is to get more people working, get more people earning their own money, which the government can then tax, allowing them to lower the tax rates across the board. Two million people paying eight dollars in tax is more money than one million paying ten dollars in tax. It’s same idea as how Wal-Mart can make money with their low proces – they make it up in volume. Expand the base, lower prices for all.

  21. pennie
    April 16, 2009 - 5:35 am

    BDTR,
    The guys above filled in most of my objections to your original post and responses. I’ll fill in the holes:

    “Tis a pity that most of the people who have commented here, have already given up on this country and what it used to be. I thought and hoped you would all be better than that

    NOT so much!

    Some of the comments (including mine) that were written prior to your original post were sarcastic. That we choose to comment is, in itself, a public display of our deep affection for this country. If you don’t care for the tone or intent, that’s one thing. To characterize us as having given up on America because we feel differently than you do is immature and a sad, old tactic of reactionaries everywhere.

    I would feel so much better if just one of these tea-party people along with the Fox news bobble-heads would come out and spit the hate that does not dare reveal it’s name: racial distrust. So many of these people ARE angry. They’re pissed off that a BLACK man, with a BLACK family got elected president and inhabits the WHITE House. They are pissed off at the visibility of BLACK culture. They want a return to the “good ole daze” down on the farm where white men ruled the world and life was good.
    Fact is, America is polarized with those who want a return to dinosaur days vs. those of us who have been patiently seeking change, equality, fairness and respect for all people and the earth we inhabit. Life is about change. Accept it. Roll with it. Or suffer and lament. Life is all about evolution–despite what some would have us believe. We are evolving as a race, and in this country, politically as well. That’s one of the things that makes this great: the grand possibilities.

    Then there’s this:”Remember…and this is important…Life, Liberty, and the PURSUIT of Happiness. Not handouts to trophy kids who USE the government and live lazily ever after. There are not supposed to be ANY Free Rides in THIS country! You are supposed to EARN your own way.”

    EXCUUUUUUSE ME!
    Like some others on this site, I was laid off last October. I’ve supported myself since I was a young teen. No handouts from anyone. Right now, without that unemployment check coming in, I would be on the street with all those others. Is that a good thing–for me or this country? I’ve applied for hundreds of jobs but I’m no spring chickie and there are not jobs I’m qualified to do right now. Should I–and all the other 20 million Americans out of work, underemployed or who’ve given up–should we be punished more? Is it our fault the economy is rotten and there are few jobs? DId we cause the bubbles to burst? Or is this nothing but survival of the strongest for you? Let them eat cake or perish?

    Fortunately, our country still has a place in it’s heart–and voting booths and Congress–for reasonable mercy. I doubt anyone receiving unemployment is comfortable or getting rich. It is bare survival if that–NOT socialism, communism or any “ism.” I hope you never need it but if you do, you’ll be happy it’s there–or not.

    And this: “We are a Free Republic not a Democracy/Socialist bordering on Communist country. If you want that please LEAVE and go north to Canada or overseas to Europe. We are different than the rest of the world, and yes, I will state it…WE ARE BETTER THAN THE REST OF THE WORLD!!!!”

    Yeah, I’ve heard that rant for decades: why do reactionaries always resort to that same tired, “Love it (only it has to be my way of loving it) or LEAVE IT!”

    NOT so much!
    I love this country as much as anyone–for it’s past glories AND possibilities. I don’t love it for it’s racism, homophobia, class wars, and sexism. I love it for it’s spirit and growth.
    ** Many of this country’s founders owned slaves. Can’t dispute it. Was that a good thing?
    ** Women were subjugated and not allowed to vote–participate in this country’s future. Was that a good thing that at least 50% were prevented from voting?
    ** Queers Americans are still not equal. Is that a good thing, too?

    Why should I–or anyone else–be encouraged to leave YOUR America. It’s not our vision but that doesn’t render it less real, valuable, or possible.
    Why do I have to love it your way? I don’t demand that of you. I simply want to live in peace.

    Bottom line: as ever, we agree to disagree. But isn’t that what makes this country–and this site so marvelous. Why do we all need to agree and isn’t public debate healthy? Doesn’t open discussion and the exchange of ideas encourage and further growth?

    I disagree with nearly everything you wrote. But the part that I have the greatest problem with, as always, is your overall arrogant attitude: “I’m right, my vision is right, and if you disagree–you’re wrong and need to clear out of town.”
    Obama is working hard to clean up the messes left him. I hardly agree with all of his decisions. But the last guy, and the one before him, and their predecessors got us into this state. There’s a lot to do and I ain’t leaving anytime soon.
    As ever, I look forward, not back.

  22. John Tebbel
    April 16, 2009 - 6:44 am

    Attention BDTR: If your moldy sobriquet is anything more than bad gas you should consider how much more valuable you could be on the front lines against real Communists in Georgia, or Moldova, or Tibet than laboring anonymously in the Republican talking point upholstery department pointlessly clotting up otherwise readable sites with superdense anti-prose.

  23. Martha Thomases
    April 16, 2009 - 6:56 am

    Vinnie said: “If I have a million dollars, and you have ten thousand, then yes, I should absolutely pay more taxes than you. But why should I pay a higher RATE than you? Ten percent of a million dollars is MORE than ten percent of ten thousand. goal achieved”

    In fact, you will both be taxed at the SAME rates until you reach various thresholds – there are several, but let’s just talk about the $250,000 for now, because that’s the only one I can remember off the top of my head – until you reach that $250,000. And then, ONLY the money you make over $250,000 is taxed at the higher rate.

    I know it’s still no fun to pay more taxes, but you aren’t paying it on all of your income.

    Personally, having lived through several waves of fashion that glamorized spending ridiculous amounts of money for designer labels, I think we should make being in that 39% bracket a status symbol. Let’s have our $60,000 Hermes handbags printed with a pattern that says 39%. Let’s re-brand Ralph Lauren’s Purple label the 39% label.

    We should be bragging about how we’re doing so well we have to pay more. And when this happens, I should get paid for coming up with this idea.

  24. Vinnie Bartilucci
    April 16, 2009 - 7:09 am

    “They’re pissed off that a BLACK man, with a BLACK family got elected president and inhabits the WHITE House.”

    I’m sorry, but I just don’t believe there’s nearly as many of those as libacrats believe. If there were, he wouldn’t have gotten elected. Period. The very fact that all the things that had to happen did (and the many more that had to NOT happen, didn’t) means that whatever number of those types may yet exist, they are not the mahority, and are not in sufficient positions of power to have kept the election from happening. They’re not gone (and never will be, alas), but they’re not a factor anymore, and can’t be legitimately used as a scapegoat anymore. Their footprint is too small.

    Similarly, I’m sure there’s not as many black people who are sitting at home, rubbing their hands and waiting for the gravy to flow now that “their man” is in the White House, thinking “WE in charge now!”. They’re easy to go to archetypes which allow us to discount the opposition. And while I can’t and won’t say they don’t exist at all, they’re simply just not a large enough number to apply to the whole.

    People are upset with paying taxes. People are ALWAYS upset with paying taxes. They are upset that the taxes are used to fund things they don’t agrgee with. traditonally Republicans rail against wlefare, and democrats rail against defense. They are upset when their taxes go up. Repulcians were terribly upset with Bush the senior when he went against his famous “read my lips” quote and had to admit that based on the state of the country, he had to raise taxes. He became a one-termer, a position traditionally equated with failure as a president, and spawning the desire for Bush the Younger to undo the slur to the family name.

    Claiming that suddenly people are against taxes “because he’s black” is unfair, counterproductive and just plain not in phase with history. Not to mention for the VAST majority, untrue. There’s more than enough reasons for a conservative to be against him and his practices because he’s a Democrat to have to fall back on his skin color.

    Stop basing the entire definition of a group on what you see on television. Television, almost by definition, attracts extreme personalities, larger than life types who exaggerate things. What you see on television isn’t real – it’s one of the first lessons I learned as a child, and it’s come in handy many a time.

  25. Vinnie Bartilucci
    April 16, 2009 - 7:23 am

    “I know it’s still no fun to pay more taxes, but you aren’t paying it on all of your income.”

    I get that. But I still have to ask WHY? Why is that extra money more acceptable to tax at a higher rate? No one can give a good answer.

    The only explanation that makes ANY sense and isn’t based on emotion is the simplest one – “The government needs the money, and the rich are the ones who have it”. That makes perfect sense. It’s also the wrong way to do it. I’ve said it many times, you get MORE people paying taxes, and you can (theoretically) reduce the tax burden on everyone. Many hands make light work.

    The argument that the top 10% pay 70% of the tax bill, or whatever the popular trope is, does not mean “let’s spread the wealth around”. Well, okay, it does, but not the way Democrats mean it. Get more people working, get more people into the middle class, get more people to become taxpayers.

    Can you imagine what the country would think of a president who could say “We have so much money coming in thanks to so many people working, we’re going to lower taxes”? They’d strike down the Twenty-Second Amendment. They’d consider coronation. Hell, they’d consider canonization. If Obama’s plan to create more jobs could do that, it’s be a true blue miracle. I just don’t know if it will.

    The stimulus plan is a hot-shot, not in the “show-off” sense, but in the “special additive to make the horse run faster” sense. It will wear off. The long-term changes have to come from the private sector. Business has to hire more people, and they won’t do that unless people will buy what they have to offer. And people won’t buy things if they don’t have jobs. lather, rinse, repeat.

    Mike had it right last week – get the jobs created. Teach people to fish.

  26. pennie
    April 16, 2009 - 10:35 am

    @Vinnie,
    “’m sorry, but I just don’t believe there’s nearly as many of those as libacrats believe. If there were, he wouldn’t have gotten elected. Period.”

    Thankfully, there were a majority of people who had no problem electing a Black man. Still, there was about 40% of the country who voted for the other guy and Her. That’s a whole lotta room for racism and retrograde politics, voting against all that Obama espouses and represents–change. It was his slogan.

    I agree with you that people will always be against tax increases. It’s a no-brainer. Sometimes, the increases are justified by costs and conditions. If there are increases, now would be a real good time as one example. When FDR introduced the New Deal, there was just as much hooting and hollering about socialism, communism, and anti-American-way-of-life-ism as there is now with Obama’s programs. What esle is new?

    “Claiming that suddenly people are against taxes “because he’s black” is unfair, counterproductive and just plain not in phase with history.”

    I never made that correlation. I believe that racism is not dead, did not vanish overnight and is still very much with us. But I never made that equation above. I stated that there was some overt but also covert racism in the tea-bagging confabs.People are upset, angry and like to vent. But, I don’t think anyone would deny that there were a variety of issues for different people at these events. It was not just all about taxes. Even the bobble-heads at Fox stated that.

    “Stop basing the entire definition of a group on what you see on television. Television, almost by definition, attracts extreme personalities, larger than life types who exaggerate things. What you see on television isn’t real – it’s one of the first lessons I learned as a child, and it’s come in handy many a time.”

    Nowhere in my long comment did I bring up the media or specifically TV other than Fixed News, er FOX. I spend my time looking for work and doing a whole lot of reading of different viewpoints on many different websites and in periodicals.
    As a Queer woman, I’m well aware of TV’s misuse of extreme and colorful characters and caricatures to misrepresent whole groups. But I never mentioned it.

  27. pennie
    April 16, 2009 - 10:42 am

    @Arthur and Chris:
    “Teabagging is when a man dips his testicles into another person’s mouth. Why use this term? ”

    In all the political debates you incited, I neglected this cherry. As a woman who is eager to learn the ways of men, I need to be educated and am excited by you two creating this opening and opportunity.
    Can you help out a sister and tell me: is there a female equivalent for teabagging? I would like to try it during our next sex festival with my wife and am in need of your experienced advice.
    Thanks in advance for your great help. I have a lot to learn.

  28. Alan Coil
    April 16, 2009 - 11:15 am

    Russ Rogers–excellent response about 9 posts above. My response would be shorter, and baser.
    =========================

    The ultra rich don’t create jobs. They create more personal wealth.
    =========================

    Vinnie, I think you live in a fantasy world where having 100% employment would automatically mean there would be a cut in taxes. There can never be 100% employment. It would destroy the system…or change it to Communism. I don’t think that is what you want.

  29. Reg
    April 16, 2009 - 11:49 am

    Ummmmm, Anderson… whereas this is an unfortunately accurate assessment, but still…it’s a little TMI here. 🙂

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I64Ed5iLu4M

  30. Vinnie Bartilucci
    April 16, 2009 - 12:34 pm

    ct Pennie – “there was about 40% of the country who voted for the other guy and Her. That’s a whole lotta room for racism and retrograde politics, voting against all that Obama espouses and represents–change. It was his slogan.”

    You throw that 40% number out there, and then afterwards you hastily clarify that you’re not actually trying to suggest that the *entire* 40% are all knee-jerk racists…but *some* are. It’s the same play the Liberals were using before the election, and I bristled at it then. The line was “there’s only one reason you wouldn’t want to vote for Obama, and we all know what THAT is…” Apparently a desire to keep spending down, not increase taxes, a general mistrust of the opposing party and all the other reasons Republicans have been against Democrats for decades all went away, traded in for the uni-minded “He’s BLACK!!!” Did the 60 percent of the people who voted FOR him do it solely BECAUSE he’s black, or because mcCain was white? (or at least a significant portion – there’s lots of room in 60 percent as well – more so actually.) The automatic assumption suggested by the Democrats and the media was that if you voted against him it was for the color of his skin, and if you voted for it it was for the quality of his character. And that’s downright insulting.

    “I’m well aware of TV’s misuse of extreme and colorful characters and caricatures to misrepresent whole groups. But I never mentioned it. ”

    Dear heart, your whole comment chain was about how you wished these people (or at least the talking heads on Fox) would come out and admit their racism. Like here: “I would feel so much better if just one of these tea-party people along with the Fox news bobble-heads would come out and spit the hate that does not dare reveal it’s name: racial distrust. So many of these people ARE angry. They’re pissed off that a BLACK man, with a BLACK family got elected president and inhabits the WHITE House. They are pissed off at the visibility of BLACK culture. They want a return to the “good ole daze” down on the farm where white men ruled the world and life was good.”

    No. They don’t. Or the ones who do are as close to zero as makes no odds, as Douglas Adams put it. They want to make sure they stay rich, yes. They may want to make sure their money isn’t taxed to a great degree to support a bunch of people they feel don’t deserve the help, perhaps. But the number of true and actual racists who are just trying to keep him down HAVE to be small in number, or at least not in powerful positions, or, as I said before, he never would have gotten elected.

    If it will clarify and defuse the potential tension here, while I did not vote for Obama (mainly for the “past performance of Democrats” reasons mentioned before), I always found him an inspiring figure, and when he won I chose to support him and his choices, as working against the President is just cutting off one’s proverbial nose. I’ve agreed with the VAST majority of the things he’s so far, fiscally, politically and militarily. I am overjoyed that he hasn’t followed the traditional Democrat line, and has actually gotten some Democrats to speak against him. In short, I think that’s he’s a good enough man that he doesn’t need to fall back on the race-baiting defense that too many of his followers (not he himself, I’m happy to say) have almost forced into the discussions. If people disagree with his actions, it’s more often than not because they disagree with his actions; perhaps solely because it’s the action of a Democrat, possibly, but I have to believe that there’s a small enough people doing it for solely racial lines that they can be discounted and functionally removed from the discussion. I want to see him succeed. I want it because it will help the country. I want it because it will secondarily (and hopefully) cause some people to re-think the presupposed opinions. But I want it for the country first. And hearing people falling back on oversimplified explanations as to why people could possibly disagree with him demeans him and the office he holds.

    I’m just as upset with the people who leap on every mistake or percieved mistake and insist on showing him in the worst possible light. I was just as upset by it when the opposite side was doing it to Bush. If a mistake is made, yes, address it and learn from it. But by god, if he does something right say so and applaud it. But it’s NOT because he’s black!

    “is there a female equivalent for teabagging”

    Well, obviously there is, but I don’t think anyone has come up with a catchy term for it. But if there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s that if it’s raunchy, base and disgusting, The Internet will provide.

    —————
    Alan – “The ultra rich don’t create jobs. They create more personal wealth.”

    Bill Gates is ultra-rich, one of the wealthiest men in America. How many people does Microsoft employ? And the myriad PC-based companies that were spawned by the creation of MS-DOS and Windows in the first place?
    MANY ultra-rich people are born into wealth and do little else (other than pay taxes), true, but your wide-brush statement smacks of the class-envy that colors so much of traditional Democrat/liberal rhetoric. It’s one of the way they successfully convince people that the ultra-rich should pay a greater percent of their income, or that the evil oil companies should pay a higher tax because they made too much money. It feels right, but that dosn’t mean it IS right.

    “Vinnie, I think you live in a fantasy world”

    My comments are as a rule dispassionate, deal with facts or at least clearly explained opinions, witty (one hopes), and avoid personal attack. You start off with a non-sarcastic questioning of my sanity. This too, alas, mirrors too many arguments between conservatives and liberals.

    “There can never be 100% employment. It would destroy the system”

    Ironically, I must mirror many of Pennie’s comments to me. I never suggested 100% employment – I’m well aware of how the system works. About 5% unemployment is traditionally considered “full employment”, allowing for people who are moving from job to job, and those who are injured or otherwise temporarily out of work but not actually removed from the workforce. Ironically, that’s about where we were at for a fair amount of Bush the Younger’s administration – it only started (visibly) falling apart near the end of his run.

    My point was simply that by getting MORE people employed (preferably in good jobs, better than the proverbial “burger flipper” positions) would expand the tax base, and allow at least the potential for taxes to drop. Yes, in a real world case, if the government has the opportunity to collect more taxes, it will, but the point remains, more employed people paying into the system is better than less people doing so, and a smaller tax base being responsible for footing the bill, and assisting the people who cannot pay. That’s not greed, that’s not indifference, that’s simple math. A wider base makes for stronger structures. It is one of the things Obama promises to do, and for this I applud him and support him. I hope that the private sector recovers to the point that they can pick up the baton when the stimulus plans end.

    How can you disagree with that as a plan? I’m not sure how getting more people employed and supporting themselves can be viewed as a bad strategy, or one that needs to be challeneged. Unless the plan is to keep people beholden to a government that promises to care for it and cure its ills, in which case it’s about the worst thing that can happen.

  31. pennie
    April 16, 2009 - 12:39 pm

    @Reg,
    “Ummmmm, Anderson… whereas this is an unfortunately accurate assessment, but still…it’s a little TMI here. :-)”
    Maybe you can enlighten me, is that as true for a woman teabagger as well? Do I have it right–teabagger and teabagee? I’m very confused about this important issue.

  32. Reg
    April 16, 2009 - 12:48 pm

    Ahhhh Pennie, Pennie… Where to begin…..but I’m afraid that I will have to defer to others with experience in this area.

    mOTu? Martha? Tatiana? Anyone?

    🙂 🙂

  33. pennie
    April 16, 2009 - 1:07 pm

    @Vinne,
    While I may be guilty of overestimating the amount of racism in those who oppose Obama and his polices, I believe you are guilty of vastly underestimating it when you write that it is near zero. This country was founded by those practicing racist policies–towards Native Americans, African-Americans, Asians, etc.

    Sure, it has changed over the years but it is hardly zero. I see it all too often in everyday life to believe it has vanished and can’t buy that it has no tie-in with those who don’t support Obama.

    Before I was laid off last October, I worked at a very large corporation and facility–one with more than 10,000 people in the same location. While working for Obama’s election there, I can’t tell you how many of those people stated they would rather dismember themselves before they would vote for or accept Obama–strictly on his race.
    I await the day racism is gone and work toward that end as much as I can–but know that while much is better, there’s not close to zero racism in America–or anywhere else.

    The bobbleheads at Fixed News were the only TV reference I made. I would never mistake their babbling grotesqueries as a useful referenced visual resource. They spew visual and verbal cliches and nauseating rhetoric. Hide the children.

    Finally, my query: “is there a female equivalent for teabagging”
    And your response:
    Well, obviously there is, but I don’t think anyone has come up with a catchy term for it. But if there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s that if it’s raunchy, base and disgusting, The Internet will provide.

    Can’t think of better attributes. Human sexual practices and activities are a wonderful thing. Nothing to fear and lots to enjoy. Least I try my best to soak it all in. Makes being alive all that more worthwhile.

    PS–You hit a homerun with that women and shaving thing! Right on the fucking money! But women with hairy armpits are supposed to be disgusting by today’s fashionistas. One person’s disgust is another;s wet panties.Let it rain!

  34. Vinnie Bartilucci
    April 16, 2009 - 1:37 pm

    True enough, it’s not near zero that was more a mirrored reaction to your statement that it was far closer to the entirety of the 100% of the people who voted against him.

    But alas, (I use that word a lot when discussing politics, don’t I?) it’s the tack that usually gets taken. Issues are either completely solved, or nothing’s been done. When you hear a “black leader” on TV, they will talk about racial issues as if slavery was repealed 18 minutes ago, and absolutely nothing has happened. The fear is that if you )the general you, not “you” you)address or applaud ANY progress made in an issue you support, people will think things are “fixed” and not worry about it any more. So you must “Keep the pressure on” and never stop hammering at the failures and flaws seen. But that cause many people to shut down, resign themselves to the idea that these people will never be pleased, and give up anyway.

    Yes, there is racism, I am resigned to that never fully vanishing. But it not anywhere near the endemic, institutionally invested prevalence that so many would have you believe. There has been progress, great progress; not the amount that some feel we should have, but prgress nonetheless. The same is true of trying to help the homeless, pollution and any number of things that people shrilly carp on, as opposed to calmly assess. You will almost never hear about the good side, and if you do, it will be attacked as an attempt to “make the issue go away by claiming it’s solved”. The knob isn’t marked “on” and “off”, it has number that to from 1 to 10 (and on occasion, 11).

    So if you can agree that not everybody is a racist, I can agree that not everyone isn’t. Fair?

    “Human sexual practices and activities are a wonderful thing. Nothing to fear and lots to enjoy. ”

    I fear I may have needed to throw up (sarcasm) (/sarcasm) tags around that comment. That was a compliment to the internet. I’ve learned about more fetishes (and spread the word on one or two of my own – Google “ASFR” and “Robotdoll”) via the internet than I’d have ever known about on my own. If it weren’t for the web, I’d go to my grave not knowing what a “blumpkin” or a “Nasty Sanchez” is.

    Hmm…maybe it wasn’t a compliment after all…

  35. pennie
    April 16, 2009 - 2:10 pm

    @Vinnie,
    “I fear I may have needed to throw up (sarcasm) (/sarcasm) tags around that comment. That was a compliment to the internet. I’ve learned about more fetishes (and spread the word on one or two of my own – Google “ASFR” and “Robotdoll”) via the internet than I’d have ever known about on my own. If it weren’t for the web, I’d go to my grave not knowing what a “blumpkin” or a “Nasty Sanchez” is.”

    Hell with solving the world’s problems. I’m still trying to figure out what the female equivalent to teabagging is. Now you’re trying to confuse me even more with these other new terms and practices. Ah, the world of men…it’s so busy…

  36. Reg
    April 17, 2009 - 2:39 pm

    Vinnie said ..”I’m sorry, but I just don’t believe there’s nearly as many of those as libacrats believe. If there were, he wouldn’t have gotten elected. Period. The very fact that all the things that had to happen did (and the many more that had to NOT happen, didn’t) means that whatever number of those types may yet exist, they are not the mahority, and are not in sufficient positions of power to have kept the election from happening. They’re not gone (and never will be, alas), but they’re not a factor anymore, and can’t be legitimately used as a scapegoat anymore. Their footprint is too small.”

    Unfortunately, I’ve got to strongly disagree with you here. All one has to do is understand the power that Boosh Limbaugh and his ilk has over the ‘Red folks’. How in the world could they wield such influence and pocket untold millions if they didn’t speak with the voice and closeted nuance of the MAJORITY of their target audience and political base? All one has to do is check out the sheer volume of vitriol and hate that’s disseminated on blogs, entertainment sites, and news media commentary to get a feel of how pervasive these attitudes really are.

    One of the realest pieces of commentary on what certain folks REALLY feel about Black folks was the scene in Trading Places, where the Duke brothers expressed their ‘deeper than their bottom gut’ feelings about the sheer impossibility of a Black male (the notion of a black woman being of a course an even more remote impossibility) running their little fiefdom. No matter that Billy Ray was shrewd, insightful, and making them money….no matter that their client base would hang unto his every word….Mortimer: Do you really think that I would allow a N****** to manage our company???!! Randolph: Of course not! Neither would I.

    That my friend was real. And the real heartbeat of far too many of ‘my fellow Americans.’ You can bet on that.

  37. Vinnie Bartilucci
    April 17, 2009 - 7:15 pm

    Can you name a single time Rush has made a racist statement about Obama? Heck, a racist slur, period? His comments about McNabb are the closest thing I can think of, and they weren’t racist, they were about how happy the NFL was to have a star quarterback they could hype to a new, ahem, “demographic”.

    I’m sorry too, but while I must admit racism still exists, you’re just looking too hard. Rush and the other talk show folks were just as viciously against every other democrat candidate as they bubbled to the top of the polls. They microanalyzed and attacked each and every thing they said, and treated everything they did as if it was step one of the plot to destroy America. It’s what they DO. It’s the SAME thing the liberal talk shows did about the republican candidates. Hell, CLINTON was doing to to Obama. Is she racist too?

    “That my friend was real.”

    No, that, my friend was a movie. It’s easy to tell because of the music playing in the background of all the scenes, and the fact that you got to see Jamie Lee Curtis’ awesome magnificences. Unless your name is Christopher Guest, that don’t happen every day.

    If you want to cling to the idea that that’s how (too many, some, a few, pick your adjective of choice) white people think, I really feel for you. Because you’re giving up. You’re going down the “nothing’s been done” road that I railed about earlier.

    A black man is President of the United States. All arguments that reference the idea that “a black man can’t get ahead in America” or “The Man is keeping us down” automatically and forever FAIL. The white racist stranglehold of the country no longer exists. It is in the minority, and dwindles daily. It will never be gone – I am no Pollyanna. But for pity’s sake, man, enjoy the fact that the obsidian ceiling has been shattered, and grasp the concept that the old order changeth.

    You’re still going to have to be smart, or talented, or damn lucky to succeed, but that’s true of everyone. Road still to travel, no one’s saying otherwise, but by all that’s holy, admit that the fuggin’ scenery’s changed a little. More trees and less burning crosses, more clouds and less Klan, more “Enter here” and less “white only”.

  38. M.O.T.U
    April 17, 2009 - 8:13 pm

    Russ Limbaugh is a big fat idiot.

    I do so Love me some Al Franken.

    I was too pissed about the hackers to get involved in this wonderful ( and I do mean wonderful debate. I’m not kidding about that) but whenever someone mentions that ass wipe I just want to scream. How does he maintain a following when he’s a goddamn hypocrite? Is he still railing against drug users or does the fact that he’s a KNOWN drug user and broke the law curved his rants.

    This “Law and Order’ right wing little dick ( I assume) bastard is a DRUG USER and since HE makes no distinction between ANY illegal drug user be they over the counter, subscription, or CRACK from the street drugs why should anyone else make that distinction?

    Well he USED to make no distinction maybe that’s changed since he GOT CAUGHT buying and using fucking drugs. Look- if I was a voice that stood for among other things the rule of LAW and I got caught breaking the law would that not make what I stood for bullshit and me a lair? Sooo who’s the morons who keep following Rash Limpdick?

    Or can you say ANYTHING and simply say “I’m sorry’ regardless if you are lying about one of the things you were famous for in the first place.

    If you ask me that stupid MOFO is the right wing Milli Vinnili except they could at least dance.

  39. M.O.T.U
    April 17, 2009 - 8:20 pm

    One last thing-it always amazes me the people with a lot of money don’t like social programs. What the fuck are they worried about, a day care center opening up near the country club?

  40. M.O.T.U
    April 17, 2009 - 8:30 pm

    One last thing…again. Here for your MDW reading pleasure is a FEW statements that Mr. Limbaugh has said on his radio show regarding race:

    1. I mean, let’s face it, we didn’t have slavery in this country for over 100 years because it was a bad thing. Quite the opposite: slavery built the South. I’m not saying we should bring it back; I’m just saying it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark.

    2. You know who deserves a posthumous Medal of Honor? James Earl Ray [the confessed assassin of Martin Luther King]. We miss you, James. Godspeed.

    3. Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?

    4. Right. So you go into Darfur and you go into South Africa, you get rid of the white government there. You put sanctions on them. You stand behind Nelson Mandela – who was bankrolled by communists for a time, had the support of certain communist leaders. You go to Ethiopia. You do the same thing.

    5. Look, let me put it to you this way: the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it.

    Nah-he’s not a racist. He’s JUST a drug user. Hope he never breaks down in South Central.

  41. Alan Coil
    April 17, 2009 - 9:27 pm

    Meanwhile, in Texas today, George W. Bush was celebrating his 9th year of not being president.

  42. Keu, The Talent
    April 18, 2009 - 11:51 am

    @MOTU

    I agree. Rush is a racist bastard. But I had to chuckle at #3. “all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson”.

    …but have you noticed how all composite pictures of child molesters, hooker-addicted preachers and Viagra-taking men resemble Rush Limbaugh?

  43. Mike Gold
    April 18, 2009 - 3:07 pm

    Keu: Close. The hooker-addicted preachers dress better.

  44. MOTU
    April 18, 2009 - 4:12 pm

    Keu said:

    ‘…but have you noticed how all composite pictures of child molesters, hooker-addicted preachers and Viagra-taking men resemble Rush Limbaugh?”

    Somewhat, but I have notice a striking resemblance to the serial killer John Wayne Gacy & Rush and that is no joke. Makes me think of the GOP convention where all those people who share the same politics looked, dressed and in my humble opinion sounded the same.

    OH NO!!! COULD IT BE!!!!???? POD PEOPLE!!!???

Comments are closed.