I'm sure Olbermann and main-stream media will investigate this as throughly as they did a plumber who had the audacity to ask the chosen one a valid question.

well obviously he's a racist.

Nemo's Brother: I'm sure Olbermann and main-stream media will investigate this as throughly as they did a plumber who had the audacity to ask the chosen one a valid question.

There's no polite way to tell a man that if he thinks he'll be taxed on an income of $250,000 in a year as a plumber, that he's not aware of the difference between revenue and profit.

Asa Phelps: Nemo's Brother: I'm sure Olbermann and main-stream media will investigate this as throughly as they did a plumber who had the audacity to ask the chosen one a valid question.

There's no polite way to tell a man that if he thinks he'll be taxed on an income of $250,000 in a year as a plumber, that he's not aware of the difference between revenue and profit.

I was commenting about how we learned more about Joe in a few days than we did about Obama for over a half a year. The media tried to tear him apart. All for asking a candidate a fair question.

Oh boy, once Obama's Children of the Corn get word of this Kenneth J. Connor is going to wish he was never a loan officer, but a simple plumber. Errr...maybe not.

Nemo's Brother: Asa Phelps: Nemo's Brother: I'm sure Olbermann and main-stream media will investigate this as throughly as they did a plumber who had the audacity to ask the chosen one a valid question.

There's no polite way to tell a man that if he thinks he'll be taxed on an income of $250,000 in a year as a plumber, that he's not aware of the difference between revenue and profit.

I was commenting about how we learned more about Joe in a few days than we did about Obama for over a half a year. The media tried to tear him apart. All for asking a candidate a fair question.

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know Joe wrote an autobiography.

Nemo's Brother: I was commenting about how we learned more about Joe in a few days than we did about Obama for over a half a year. The media tried to tear him apart. All for asking a candidate a fair question.

Hey that reminds me, stupid should be painful.

Cue the crying Republican baby. We're being repressed!

Ooh, a Moonie Times story. I'm real convinced.

I'm sure THIS will be the thing that flips some of those Obama voters who were concerned about the economy and junk.

Crown_of_Shoes: Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know Joe wrote an autobiography.

He didn't. But Barry wrote two. And I still know more about Joe.

Nemo's Brother: All for asking a candidate a fair question.

actually, a question based on false premises is pretty much by definition not a "fair" question. it assumed a scenario that did not exist. he was not buying a business, he was not going to be making that amount of money, and the whole point was how common it is that a small business owner is making over 250k in taxable income, which is actually quite the rarity.

as a developer i work with likes to say, you can break any system if you force in inputs that can't exist in real life.

however, obama actually answered the question, answered it well, making your faux outrage even more absurd.

burndtdan: however, obama actually answered the question, answered it well, making your faux outrage even more absurd.

"I'm a commie" is a good answer? I weep for our future.

I love how Republicans and Fark Independents^TM' hearts grew three sizes and learned how to care about a lying deadbeat.

ChubbyTiger: Crown_of_Shoes: Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know Joe wrote an autobiography.

He didn't. But Barry wrote two. And I still know more about Joe.

Bull. If you don't know about Obama at this point, then you've been hiding under a rock with one thumb up your butt and one in your mouth

Are the announcers saying that Ohio State is an easy team to beat?

wow, wrong thread.

Gwendolyn: Are the announcers saying that Ohio State is an easy team to beat?

Not in this thread, but they're implying it.

Atillathepun: Bull. If you don't know about Obama at this point, then you've been hiding under a rock with one thumb up your butt and one in your mouth

The policies he currently espouses are so far removed from those he's been advocating for years that, no, I don't know what he really wants. And we're not talking about changes over a long period of time, we're talking about last year to this year total changes. And before you ask: healthcare, budget, foreign policy, etc.

Nemo's Brother: I'm sure Olbermann and main-stream media will investigate this as throughly as they did a plumber who had the audacity to ask the chosen one a valid question.

a. You are an idiot who continues to post in his own submitted threads. That is pathetic.

b. This is the Washington Times, which is as reliable on politics as was Pravda in 1975.

c. You are still an idiot.

bronyaur1: b. This is the Washington Times, which is as reliable on politics as was Pravda in 1975.

Are you telling me that Pravda wasn't true?

ChubbyTiger: Crown_of_Shoes: Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know Joe wrote an autobiography.

He didn't. But Barry wrote two. And I still know more about Joe.

Thats because your an idiot who didnt read either autobiography, and only wants to parrot what Rush "sex-tourist" limbaugh and Hannity tell you...

drew46n2: Thats because your an idiot who didnt read either autobiography, and only wants to parrot what Rush "sex-tourist" limbaugh and Hannity tell you...

lol Of course I'm not going to read his autobiography. First, he hadn't nearly enough in his life to warrant one, let alone two. Second, I don't much like the genre. Third, there is absolutely nothing that he could say and nothing that he could do which would tempt me to vote for someone as far left as he is. Finally, I'm not going to read a ghost written book under any circumstances. Either write it yourself or don't put your name on it.

ChubbyTiger: burndtdan: however, obama actually answered the question, answered it well, making your faux outrage even more absurd.

"I'm a commie" is a good answer? I weep for our future.

he answered about how the very concept of marginal tax rates makes the question a little overdramatic, and he also goes on to explain the other ways in which his tax plan would still benefit such a business.

i know you're probably talking about the "spread the wealth around" comment, but that's actually firmly grounded in the opinion of most economists about what exactly we need in this nation to truly prosper again.

ChubbyTiger: And we're not talking about changes over a long period of time, we're talking about last year to this year total changes.

mccain changed his outlook on the economy as a whole in the course of 2 hours.

Nemo's Brother: I'm sure Olbermann and main-stream media will investigate this as throughly as they did a plumber republican plant who lied about every facet of his question to obama with the intention of tripping him up.

FTFY

burndtdan: mccain changed his outlook on the economy as a whole in the course of 2 hours.

I'm not a McCain fan, either. You know what they say about people who assume.

i know you're probably talking about the "spread the wealth around" comment, but that's actually firmly grounded in the opinion of most economists about what exactly we need in this nation to truly prosper again.

I'm afraid that the, admittedly few, economists I know do not really subscribe to a socialist mindset. Spreading the wealth is not the job of the federal government. Period. And aside from the fact that they shouldn't be doing it, they do it badly.

Why do I get the feeling that he was somehow rewarded by the McCain campaign for his work in filing this complaint.

ChubbyTiger: I'm afraid that the, admittedly few, economists I know do not really subscribe to a socialist mindset.

there's absolutely nothing "socialist" about understanding that a plutocratic society is not economically sound and will stagnate. the spread of wealth and education to the masses has been the driving force behind all of the lasting success of humanity. it is the very thing that makes democracy possible.

but what am i doing arguing with someone who doesn't even know the definition of either socialism or communism. here's a hint though: they have nothing to do with what either candidate for president has proposed, whatsoever.

JohnnyC: Why do I get the feeling that he was somehow rewarded by the McCain campaign for his work in filing this complaint.

because it is damaging to the chosen one would be my guess on your feeling.

ChubbyTiger: I'm afraid that the, admittedly few, economists I know do not really subscribe to a socialist mindset. Spreading the wealth is not the job of the federal government. Period. And aside from the fact that they shouldn't be doing it, they do it badly.

That's because they haven't been spreading the wealth around... They've been consolidating it... among the rich. If you're making millions and living a very comfortable life here in America, you should pay in a fair share in tax.

My personal preference is a flat tax for everyone above the poverty level and no tax for those below it.

inebriated brain: because it is damaging to the chosen one would be my guess on your feeling.

Actually it's because the guy decided to wait until right now to complain. If he had a real complaint, I imagine he would have complained when it happened and not years later.

JohnnyC: That's because they haven't been spreading the wealth around... They've been consolidating it... among the rich. If you're making millions and living a very comfortable life here in America, you should pay in a fair share in tax.

how is a progressive tax structure that sends out EIC checks not wealth distribution already?

JohnnyC: Actually it's because the guy decided to wait until right now to complain.

fair enough, but I thought this had something to do with Rezko and the grad jury underway.

Meet the new Paula Jones.

inebriated brain: how is a progressive tax structure that sends out EIC checks not wealth distribution already?

I'm not an economist, but as near as I can tell, wealth distribution is when you literally take from one person to give to another. Taxing people who have more than they need at a rate which does not greatly impact their lives but contributes more to the very society that makes it possible for them to have more than they need makes sense. In other words... if you can barely pay your housing, food, and utilities, you should be taxed less because you have less to contribute than those who have more.

You can call that wealth redistribution if you want... I call it common sense. It's my opinion that the trickle down theory is bullshiat and does't work.

ChubbyTiger: lol Of course I'm not going to read his autobiography. First, he hadn't nearly enough in his life to warrant one, let alone two. Second, I don't much like the genre. Third, there is absolutely nothing that he could say and nothing that he could do which would tempt me to vote for someone as far left as he is. Finally, I'm not going to read a ghost written book under any circumstances. Either write it yourself or don't put your name on it because I don't want to run the risk of accidentally thinking.

Fixed for brevity.

JohnnyC: It's my opinion that the trickle down theory is bullshiat and does't work.

well why would taking money away from the wealthy and giving it to the not so wealthy so they can then spend it to send it back to wealthy not be considered bullshiat too? I mean the rich just get it back, and then taken away, and get it back.. seems rather stagnant at face value.

JohnnyC: It's my opinion that the trickle down theory is bullshiat and does't work.

Tax cuts for the companies and tax cuts for the poor. Tax the wealthy. That's the way you go about stimulating the economy and creating jobs.

inebriated brain: well why would taking money away from the wealthy and giving it to the not so wealthy so they can then spend it to send it back to wealthy not be considered bullshiat too? I mean the rich just get it back, and then taken away, and get it back.. seems rather stagnant at face value.

See the problem is this theory is that:

1)The poor don't get all the money, they may get some of the money. The rest is spent on infrastructure and education that everyone benefits from.

2)The money spent by the poor doesn't all go back into big business. They may save or spend the money on small businesses.

3)The problem with all these ideas (trickle down economics or socialism) is assuming that people will behave in an ultimately fair and altruistic manner - i.e. contributing to the system in true socialism or hiring more people in trickle down - and this is not true. This is why neither will work.

honeymaid8: 1)The poor don't get all the money, they may get some of the money. The rest is spent on infrastructure and education that everyone benefits from.

2)The money spent by the poor doesn't all go back into big business. They may save or spend the money on small businesses.

3)The problem with all these ideas (trickle down economics or socialism) is assuming that people will behave in an ultimately fair and altruistic manner - i.e. contributing to the system in true socialism or hiring more people in trickle down - and this is not true. This is why neither will work.

There are alot more poor than there are rich, so proportionally they do get alot of the money.

Where they spend or save does not matter, because that money finds its way back to the top regardless, unless they are stuffing it under the matress.

I contend that growth and trickle down do work, and is how the standard of living increases for everyone in this country on a daily basis. I mean poor here isn't poor. Certainly there are exceptions so I don't need pictures of slums or whatever.

People say trickle down doesn't work because it's not 'fair'. Well boo farking hoo. there will be winners and there will losers no matter what economic system is in place. Individual responsibility determines where one falls on that spectrum, not handouts.

Even if this last-second conspiracy theory were true, it doesn't get you anywhere near implicating Obama in it. This is just AWing and/or desperation by the GOP.

If there were anything serious behind this, the "whistleblower" would have retained the counsel of a firm a bit more prestigious than Gaffney & Associates...

Jon Snow: Even if this last-second conspiracy theory were true, it doesn't get you anywhere near implicating Obama in it.

um yeah it does actually as the appraisal in question was for property that was sold to Obama after Rezko.

inebriated brain: um yeah it does actually as the appraisal in question was for property that was sold to Obama after Rezko.

And Obama has fark all to do with Mutual Bank Corp. how exactly? Even if Rezko engaged in a conspiracy with the bank to lower the estimate on the property, you still have to make the huge leap to proving that Obama was actually involved.

What part of this are you not understanding?

If this had any legs, the RNC would have retained one of the top law firms in the country, or at least the state on this "whistleblower's" behalf. Instead he's got some hungry regional-level guy who is getting free nation-wide if not international publicity out of repping him.

Jon Snow: Even if Rezko engaged in a conspiracy with the bank to lower the estimate on the property, you still have to make the huge leap to proving that Obama was actually involved.

Obama is involved as a beneficiary of getting a property that was improperly assessed. I'm not saying he asked for the deal to happen, but this is his home now is it not? Then there is the whole 10-ft strip selling back to Rezko, and this all just stinks. Not in a HUGE way, but it does raise ethical concerns.

inebriated brain: Well boo farking hoo. there will be winners and there will losers no matter what economic system is in place. Individual responsibility determines where one falls on that spectrum, not handouts.

Two words for you: French Revolution. The wealth of the rich depends upon the "poor" - they build your buildings, clean your houses, protect your streets, put out your fires and teach your children. If you don't take care of them, your money and your success doesn't matter. Society is benefited as a whole by keeping those who support it above the poverty line. You need to feed, clothe and educate the masses for your own best interest. At times, this requires a handout.

If you don't give the children of your housekeeper at least a fraction of the opportunities that you give your own children (by lieu of proper nutrition and access to education) then you are joking yourself if you think you live in a meritocracy. I'm not saying that merit shouldn't be rewarded (as a progressive tax would) but that if you don't care for the poor, they will tear the rich down.

ChubbyTiger: someone as far left as he is

How do you know if you didn't know anything about him?

That still means nothing unless Obama was involved or had knowledge of wrongdoing. And believe me, if there was even a *chance* that he did, the Republicans would be all over this like stink on Palin.

This is bad news... for yo momma!



_{/my deepest apologies}

Nemo's Brother: I'm sure Olbermann and main-stream media will investigate this as throughly as they did a plumber who had the audacity to ask the chosen one a valid question.

Did not read the thread but,

A) The question was not completely valid

B) Graeme Frost would like to have a word with you.