Representation At The Polls

Conservatives love to talk about taxes and how they are oppressed. I'm wondering how long it's going to take this idea to gain traction within the modern conservative movement.



For the past several years, it's been popular amongst the more wealthy within the conservative realm that most people in America don't pay taxes - at all. Unfortunately for them, this simply isn't true. While there are many in American that don't pay as much in taxes as others, anyone that has a job has a verifiable tax liability. From Social Security, Medicare, on down to state and local taxes, everyone pays in.

Yes, there are tax breaks and credits that many in America can take advantage of, but does that mean that they lack the right to have their vote count or have their voting rights diminished?

This is a perfect example of the class warfare and pure elitism that is perpetrated by modern conservatives. And while these are the same people that claim liberals/progressives are perpetrating class warfare, one has to marvel at the unblushing way that this argument is presented as a legitimate way to change this country.

What's Fair Isn't

A little class warfare to start you morning?



Who precisely is Kilmeade talking about? The poor? The elderly? Does he even know what he's talking about or is he just reading from the script handed out in the pre-show meeting? Do you honestly care?

The broader point that is likely to be made throughout the day, as Fox & Friends is generally a trial-balloon for the talking-points that are to be used during the following programs. So for anyone to claim that it's a valid argument that certain people aren't paying their fair share doesn't seem to understand who is asking the question and why.

You always hear conservatives talk about a "fair tax" that would somehow miraculously level the playing field in America. I'm no economist, but that simply sounds like an idea that would make the upper-earners in America have to pay in less than they should while the lower income brackets will get the shaft. Not much of a level field but more of a hill with most of us at the bottom.

The Thankless Party

This clip is really getting under some people's skin. But he has a valid point.



Conservatives are want, on a daily basis, to claim that Obama is "think skinned" and that he can't take what's being dished out to him. The reality Obama's statements is completely lost on even the most educated of Tea Bagger. While the truth regarding taxation since Obama took office will not sway any Tea Bagger, it should be pointed out that their Contract For America isn't exactly the picture of fiscal responsibility that they claim to champion.

If you bothered to click the links above, you'll be taken to posts by Malkin and Allahpundit. The former is all pursed-lipped rage while Allah does a great deal of reaching and speculation in an attempt to make some type of semi-cogent point. Both seem to lack the ability to exercise even a fraction of intellectual honesty, but are you really surprised?

Taxation Education

It really enrages conservatives that a comedy program like The Daily Show, and Jon Stewart in particular, can provide far more accurate information on taxation than Fox"News", CNN, or the bulk of MSNBC could even dream of doing.



Crooks And Liars has a great piece up now entitled Ten Inconvenient Truths For Tax Day that is a great source of ammunition against Tea Baggers, should you encounter any today.

*click image to play clip*



Here's another inconvenient truth.

I got my first job in 1992 when I was 17 and have had Federal Income Tax taken out of all my checks ever since. When I get my return after April 15th, I have never once received the entire amount back. I'm 34 now and make less than 50,000 a year and still have Federal Income Tax taken out of my checks every week. I've also payed into Medicare, Social Security, local and state taxes, and I pay taxes on items I purchase - except food. I grew up on a farm and when my uncle died ( who was primary owner of the farm ) there was no Estate or "Death Tax" paid. I could go on......

The point is that there is so much unblushing ignorance within the conservative movement regarding taxes that I'm surprised at all hearing people peddling tired talking-points as fact. Far too often, these words come from the mouths of people that should know better. The tools are out there for everyone to fact check. It's just a shame that people don't know how to utilize them.

Contractual Tea Bagging

One can't but read through the list of 20 Bullet Points and wonder exactly how conservatives are going to live up to all these.

Tea Party Patriots, the group organizing the effort, will hold a press conference on Thursday in Washington, D.C., at the CPAC conference to announce the launch of thecontract.org, where activists can help “draft” the finalized contract by voting for their top 10 of those issues. After releasing a final “Contract from America” on April 15, activists will ask members of Congress to sign the final document.

Interesting that the anti-government Tea Baggers are asking the Federal Government to help them pass something. Is this even real or is this just another ploy to grind everything to a screeching halt? Take a look at some of these proposals.

Amending the constitution to require a balanced budget and a two-thirds majority for any tax hike.

Straight away, this is something that conservatives have not been able to accomplish. And taking such a cavalier attitude to what should be and shouldn't be in The Constitution tends to invalidate their ear piercing machinations that The Constitution should be followed the way it already is.

Requiring each bill to identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does.

This is where the Tea Baggers think they know more about The Constitution than people that are actual Constitutional scholars. Who is going to have the final say as to what The Constitution does or doesn't allow? From my perspective, it's a living document that must be applied to a situation based on the context.

Permitting all health insurance plans to be sold anywhere in the United States through the purchase of insurance across state lines. Allow small businesses and associations to pool together across state lines to buy insurance

This is the conservative movements prime reform suggestion that shows they lack the ability to see how insurance providers manipulate the system. All companies have to do is find the state with the most relaxed regulations and then it's all a big race to the bottom, with the consumer taking the brunt of the impact.

And speaking of massive deregulation....

Making all regulations “sunset” after 10 years unless renewed by congressional vote.

You kind of see where this is going, don't you?

But there is one suggestion in the list of 20 that has me quite puzzled.

Preventing any regulation or tax on the Internet.

I can understand and even appreciate the "tax" as it applies to the internet, but when they say "no regulation" of the internet are they speaking out for or against Net Neutrality?

In all, these suggestions would be beyond disastrous for this country and should any of them become implemented and a conservative politician would be the first one to break the "new rules". The consistent idiocy of the conservative movement and their inability to see what their policies have wrought is mindboggling.

If Fox"News" Isn't Promoting The Tea-Parties....

....then why are they replaying ( yes, REPLAYING ) Glenn Beck's Tea-Bagging festivities right now?

Yes, they are replaying his right-wing stage show - complete with Ted "I'm so fucking hardcore Republican that I will suck Sean Hannity's balls for more fame" Nugent - and they are claiming that it's not about party but lambasting the "far-right extremist" memo from the DHS. They are talking about how it is non-partisan while there are flags in the background that are directly related to Barack Obama and the Democratic party.

Yeah, no promotion what-so-ever.

And the fact that it was broadcast from The Alamo is so hilarious:

The Battle of the Alamo (February 23 – March 6, 1836) is the most famous battle of the Texas Revolution. After a revolutionary army of Texian settlers and adventurers from the United States drove all Mexican troops out of Mexican Texas, Mexican President Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna led an invasion to regain control of the area. Mexican forces arrived in San Antonio de Bexar on February 23 and initiated a siege of the Texian forces garrisoned at the Alamo Mission.

In the early morning hours of March 6 the Mexican army launched an assault on the Alamo. The outnumbered Texians repulsed two attacks, but were unable to fend off a third. As Mexican soldiers scaled the walls, most of the Texian soldiers retreated into the long barracks or the chapel. Several small groups who were unable to reach these points attempted to escape and were killed outside the walls by the waiting Mexican cavalry. The Mexican soldiers fought room-to-room and soon had control over the Alamo. Between five and seven Texians may have surrendered; if so, they were quickly executed on Santa Anna's orders. Most eyewitness accounts reported between 182 and 257 Texian dead, while most Alamo historians agree that 400–600 Mexicans were killed or wounded. Of the Texians who fought during the battle, only two survived: Joe, spared because he was a slave, and Brigido Guerrero, a Mexican Army deserter who convinced Mexican soldiers he had been imprisoned. Women and children, primarily family members of the Texian soldiers, were questioned by Santa Anna and then released.

Like Beck had told his audience. He was bringing his show from the only place in America where it makes sense.

The Plurality Of Ignorance Pt. III: Tea Parties And Presidential Conspiracy Theory

From Blogger Interrupted, a video showing the connection between the tea-bagger crowd and right-wing conspiracy theory.



While it is easily understnadable that every protest will have its fringe participants, the "tea-parties" that are so en vogue now do have a common thread that seems to run through them - willful ignorance.

The one that seems to be a common undercurrent with the "tea-baggers" is there belief that Barack Obama was not born in the U.S.

While each of the protesters interviewed seemed to express their own level of suspicion, none of them seemed prepared with any information to refute the question that was put toward them.

And speaking of "questions", it is people like BloggerInterupted that are being pointed out as those that are attempting to sabatoge the "tea-bag" festivities.

For the next 9 days, the left-wing blogosphere and left-wing clueless pundits will hammer away with their unreality-based Tea Party smears.

And on the ground, the tax-subsidized and Soros-subsidized troops are going to try and wreak havoc every way they can. Many readers and fellow bloggers have seen signs that ACORN may send in ringers and saboteurs to usurp the anti-tax, anti-reckless spending, anti-bailout message.

It’s already happened once before — at the Denver anti-porkulus rally last month, when the Media Matters/Daily Kos crowd shifted media attention away from the policy message by manufacturing fake outrage about some stunt-puller who showed up with a sign comparing Obama to Hitler that I didn’t see and asked for a picture. The local newspaper, the Rocky Mountain News, took the bait.

The "cluelessness" seems to be falling squarely upon the shoulders of the protesters that Malkin is attempting to protect. Armed with half-truths and laughable conspiracy theories, these people seem to think that by simply gathering together that they are going to change something.

Make no mistake about it, protesting is part of being an activist, but you can't simply walk around with a sign for a couple of hours chanting "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore" and expect that to solve all of your woes. There has to be more.

If asked what they plan on doing, these people don't seem to have an answer.

And, isn't it just a little ironic that these are the same people crying that we having "socialism" pushed upon us while gathering in public-funded land or standing on the steps of building constructed with public funds?

Who Really Knows How Many Teabaggers There Were

Recently, another of the ridiculus "Tea Parties" - people that have their knickers in a twist over what they think the Obama administration is going to do to their taxes - was held in Fullerton Co. California.

The coverage that these "teabagging" gatherings are getting from right-wing/conservative sites is nothing short of glowing adoration.

The truth of the matter is, the parties amounted to what can only be described as irrelevant at best:

Let's see...The Pittsburgh party was canceled due to rain. A whopping 79 people showed up today in Jacksonville, FL. Looks like maybe over a dozen showed up in Asheville, NC. Almost 10 people made it to the Buffalo, NY, protest. About 100 people throughout all of Los Angeles came out to Santa Monica Pier. All of about 300 people made it out throughout the entirety of Atlanta. 250 made it out to Dallas for the tea party there. 150 in Lansing. Looks like about 100 went to watch the Joe the Plumber and Michelle Malkin teabag fest in D.C. (if you had to retch, it's not my fault, just your dirty, dirty mind...)

The very best numbers these jokers managed to pull was 1,500 people in St. Louis (UPDATE: St. Louis wasn't anywhere close to 1,500; it was more like 400 if that--delusional, pathetic FAIL), and somewhere between 500-1,000 in Chicago--if reports from the organizers are to be believed.

Perhaps most hilarious is the 250-person turnout in Houston which was said to be

pretty good turn-out considering the livestock show barbeque cook-off in Reliant Park was a competitor.

Because an all-or-nothing, bare-fisted fight against a Commie takeover of the United States just can't compete with the lure of livestock barbeque, not even for a few hours. That's patriotism for ya! The new Republican motto might be: "Give me liberty, or give me short ribs! Aw, hell, just gimme the ribs already."

Today, conservative blog Patterico's Pontifications ( aw, isn't that cute - alliteration ) gave an interesting crowd estimation.

Radio personalities John and Ken recently hosted a “taxpayer revolt” in Fullerton with a crowd of between 8,000 and 15,000....

That's a hell of a range - either 8K or near double that.

Seems that the conservative movement - in all it's various forms and faces - can't seem to come to grips with the fact that they have no real motivation left. The best they are able to do is create "fear" around what they are discussing.

The "Tea Party" nonsense is just another in a long line of examples of how conservative voters have this desire to be part of a"gimmick" in order to feel accepted. Even if that "gimmick" prevents them from not just seeing but accepting the fact that they are being duped by people that are meant to represent them.

Just think about how many people that participated in these events that won't see their taxes increased, that will have the option of tax deductions or credits not afforded to them these last eight years.

What Happens When A Conservative Tries To Be Clever: A Case Study In Reactionary Thought And The Consequences That Follow

---- cross-posted @ DailyKos ----

I have this bizarre ritual that I take part in.

Every morning, I read Michelle Malkin' latest blog-droppings. Then, it's over to HotAir - then Redstate, FreeRepublic, Townhall, Drudge, and maybe a few other conservative sites.

I do this to get a feel for what the lunatic-fringe has to offer-up as "serious discussion". Normally, the topics and comments fall along the lines of predictably tiresome drivel that doesn't so much further the national discussion as it makes anyone with two nerotransmitters to rub together and an ability to think for themselves say, "Are they serious?"

That was the situation that I found myself in when I read one of Michelle Malkin's postings today:

Tax hikes have consequences. Incentives matter. Only self-deluded wealth redistributors living in la-la-land believe otherwise.

Then she proceeds to link to a story about an attorney that is bound and determined to make less-than $250,000 in order to remove herself from the position of being taxed at the rate she was prior to the Bush Tax Cuts:

President Barack Obama’s tax proposal  which promises to increase taxes for those families with incomes of $250,000 or more — has some Americans brainstorming ways to decrease their pay, even if it’s just by a dollar.

A 63-year-old attorney based in Lafayette, La., who asked not to be named, told ABCNews.com that she plans to cut back on her business to get her annual income under the quarter million mark should the Obama tax plan be passed by Congress and become law.

So far, Obama’s tax plan is being looked at skeptically by both Democrats and Republicans and therefore may not pass at all.

“We are going to try to figure out how to make our income $249,999.00,” she said.

“We have to find a way out where we can make just what we need to just under the line so we can benefit from Obama’s tax plan,” she added. “Why kill yourself working if you’re going to give it all away to people who aren’t working as hard?”

Something about that theory, that you are going to drop just below $250,000 and all will be better, didn't seem to make sense. So, I did some searching and found this article from Eric Martin at NewsHoggers:

The attorney featured in this article - who claims that she will refuse to see some of her clients in order to keep her earnings down to avoid being hit by Obama's increase of the marginal tax rate on earnings above the $250,000 threshold - is most likely doing those clients a favor. At least if her ability to grasp the concept of marginal tax rates is any indication of her reasoning skills generally speaking....

Allow me to explain the concept of marginal tax rates to our would-be Jane Galt.....The marginal tax rate structure means that you pay a certain rate for money earned within certain dollar amount brackets. So, to simplify with hypothetical rates: you pay zero income taxes on dollars 0-20,000, then you pay 15% on dollars 20,001-50,000, you pay 25% on dollars 50,000-100,000 and so on. You don't pay a higher rate on all of your dollars just because some of your dollars make it into a higher tax bracket. Only those dollars above the given threshold are subject to that rate.

The tax rate on earnings above $250,000 is presently 35% (lowered from 39.6% by Bush). Obama is proposing to restore that rate to the Clinton-era level of 39.6%. What this means is that for a married couple earning $300,000 (after above the line deductions), the dollars that they make above the $250,000 threshold would be taxed at 39.6% rather than 35%. But all earnings below the $250,000 would still be taxed at the same tiered rates as before! You don't pay 39.6% on all of your earnings simply because you surpassed that level!

So the the Obama plan would mean that our hypothetical couple pays $19,800 rather than $17,500 on that $50,000 that falls into the $250,000 and above tax bracket. A difference of...$2,300. But the person still takes home $30,200 of that $50,000, as opposed to $32,500 out of $50.000. Slightly less, but generally speaking, making more money is viewed as a good thing by most individuals, even if there is a slightly higher rate applied to those extra earnings.

Now let's go back to the reasoning of our Louisiana attorney....This woman is going to turn away clients, and turn away income, so that she ensures that her income does not surpass $249,999, rather than subject any additional dollars to a slightly higher rate of taxes. Presumably, she would rather have $0 tax free than $50,000 taxed at 39.6%. But, mind you, she was quite willing to work for the extra $50,000 when it was taxed at 35%. The net effect: she will have $30,200 less dollars in her pocket just so she can avoid giving the federal government an additional $2,300, and she will have alienated clients and caused them to look elsewhere for legal services - damaging her business long term.

As I said: those clients she turns away as part of her grand tax-gaming scheme should feel lucky.

You see, this is what happens when the inane ramblings of the lunatic-fringe Right are taken to heart.

Also, if you have no grasp of how taxes are taken, you are far better of listening to a CPA rather than Malkin, Limbaugh, Hannity, or any of the host of ill-informed prattle-heads that continually try to convince the American voting public that they know what they are talking about.

Taxation And Right-Wing Misrepresentation

Perhaps it's a bizarre form of punishment - reading over right-wing blogs early in the morning before going to work.

Part of my daily routine is glancing over the latest bit of self-preening nonsense from people like Michelle Malkin, the dueling doofuses at Powerline, or the swirling Marsh Of Doom that is Free Republic.

Often I find predictabilities that don't really warrant a response.

Today was different. Today, Michelle Malkin decided to let her readers know that she knows ALL about taxes, tax preperation, and Tim Geithner:

They were just honest mistakes, really.

And I’m sure the Obama IRS would be as charitable with you or me as Team Obama is being with Timothy Geithner if we used the same explanation for failing to pay self-employment taxes

Yep, jumping in headlong right from the starting gun with the "if" meme. What was that book Ann Coulter just wrote about "victimhood"? I'm starting to think that Malkin is perpetually in that realm.

Then there's the harp about Geithner's hired help:

Oh, wait. There’s more. Geithner somehow overlooked the fact that his immigrant housekeeper’s work authorization papers had expired. Ghost of Zoe Baird:

Oh, she mentions Baird, but leaves off any trace of names like Linda Chavez, or even Mitt Romney.

As far as Geithner's Tax "problem", it became ( and still is ) such a frequent mistake, that the IRS has a solution.

While tax experts will expound on this - at great length - it matters not to people like Malkin. She simply sees the irony - and I suppose it is - in Tim Geithner owing taxes. But, least we forget, another, more well known, politician recently had "tax problems" of their own.