P.R.? I thought you guys were a news channel, not Hill & Knowlton, Inc.

Boy, that grassroots PR from a nationwide news organization sure does help the little guy!

Because protesting wasteful government is gay.

Why lump Barney Frank into the mix? At least he has the testicular fortitude to be out of the closet.

Dancin_In_Anson: Because protesting wasteful government is gay.

No, two men kissing is gay.

This is assinine.

Dancin_In_Anson: Because protesting wasteful government is gay.

Yup, and if you wore assless chaps to church we'd all say that going to church was the part that made you gay.

Dancin_In_Anson: Because protesting wasteful government is gay.

Way to completely miss the joke.

Dancin_In_Anson: Because protesting wasteful government is gay.

Where were you when the government was wasteful last year? The year before that? This was a "boo-hoo, we lost" fest, nothing more, nothing less.

Dancin_In_Anson: Because protesting wasteful government is gay.

No... but it is fabulous.

Solid State Vittles: Where were you when the government was wasteful last year

Catching shiat for complaining about the bloat in government in the name of "compassion".

The only organizations? There was a rally here yesterday with about 1,000 people, give or take (estimates ranged from 400-4500).

It was sponsored by the local news/talk station, was front page above-the-fold on the only paper in town and in the A-block of all three network newscasts at 5 p.m., 6 p.m., 11 p.m. and the morning news cut-ins.

Dancin_In_Anson: Catching shiat for complaining about the bloat in government in the name of "compassion".

Yeah, because all those protests about the creation of DHS and the rapid expansion of government for the past 8 years were really... Oh, wait. There weren't any. They only come out of the woodwork after the Democrat wins.

Gotcha.

This is like bragging about being one of the only organizations to promote Scientology and/or creationism.

Dancin_In_Anson: Because protesting wasteful government is gay.

Is that what happened? Because, seriously, I am facinated by this whole "movement" and have been reading whatever I can about it, and I haven't the slighteset idea WTF they stand for.

Dancin_In_Anson: Solid State Vittles: Where were you when the government was wasteful last year

Catching shiat for complaining about the bloat in government in the name of "compassion".

Fair enough, I admit you took your lumps. All I'm saying is that this tea party stunt is motivated solely by partisan politics. This outrage was strangely absent from the right for the last 8 years of government mismanagement.

Mr. Coffee Nerves: The only organizations? There was a rally here yesterday with about 1,000 people, give or take (estimates ranged from 400-4500).

It was sponsored by the local news/talk station, was front page above-the-fold on the only paper in town and in the A-block of all three network newscasts at 5 p.m., 6 p.m., 11 p.m. and the morning news cut-ins.

I think the complaint that many of us have is that Fox didn't just cross the line between reporting and advocacy, they're not even in the same country as the line anymore.

Damn dirty liberals, spreading terrible innuendo about this grassroots populist movement!

Also, I must have hallucinated the many, many signs that talked about "teabagging Washington/Obama/Congress" or the numerous conservatives who used that slang long before MSNBC laughed its ass off at it.

Lionel Mandrake: This is like bragging about being one of the only organizations to promote Scientology and/or creationism.

Dancin_In_Anson: Because protesting wasteful government is gay.

Is that what happened? Because, seriously, I am facinated by this whole "movement" and have been reading whatever I can about it, and I haven't the slighteset idea WTF they stand for.

My girlfriend drove past the rally in Salem, Oregon and almost all of them had signs biatching about having their taxes raised.

Considering the cars parked nearby were mostly 5 to 10 year old Detroit rolling iron, I highly doubt they're in the top tax brackets affected.

Lionel Mandrake: Is that what happened? Because, seriously, I am facinated by this whole "movement" and have been reading whatever I can about it, and I haven't the slighteset idea WTF they stand for.

As best as I can tell, they are pissed they lost, are mad that they are getting their taxes cut, and at least one of them wanted to repeal the 14th Amendment.

Dancin_In_Anson: Because futile PR dressed up as protesting wasteful government is gay.

Sgt Otter: Lionel Mandrake: This is like bragging about being one of the only organizations to promote Scientology and/or creationism.

Dancin_In_Anson: Because protesting wasteful government is gay.

Is that what happened? Because, seriously, I am facinated by this whole "movement" and have been reading whatever I can about it, and I haven't the slighteset idea WTF they stand for.

My girlfriend drove past the rally in Salem, Oregon and almost all of them had signs biatching about having their taxes raised.

Considering the cars parked nearby were mostly 5 to 10 year old Detroit rolling iron, I highly doubt they're in the top tax brackets affected.

Well, if unemployed factory workers don't stand up for the rich, who will?

Lionel Mandrake: Sgt Otter: Lionel Mandrake: This is like bragging about being one of the only organizations to promote Scientology and/or creationism.

Dancin_In_Anson: Because protesting wasteful government is gay.

Is that what happened? Because, seriously, I am facinated by this whole "movement" and have been reading whatever I can about it, and I haven't the slighteset idea WTF they stand for.

My girlfriend drove past the rally in Salem, Oregon and almost all of them had signs biatching about having their taxes raised.

Considering the cars parked nearby were mostly 5 to 10 year old Detroit rolling iron, I highly doubt they're in the top tax brackets affected.

Well, if unemployed factory workers don't stand up for the rich, who will?

Ah yes, the American dream: fight for the rich because one day, you might be among them.

GAT_00: Lionel Mandrake: Is that what happened? Because, seriously, I am facinated by this whole "movement" and have been reading whatever I can about it, and I haven't the slighteset idea WTF they stand for.

As best as I can tell, they are pissed they lost, are mad that they are getting their taxes cut, and at least one of them wanted to repeal the 14th Amendment.



And one was upset that we weren't abiding by "Section 110" of "Artical III" of the U.S. Constitution.

/hot, like his tin foil hat.

if people were REALLY upset about the sad state of our economy and the undue influence of corporate organizations on tax policies in this country....we'd see people raiding local Apple music stores and smashing iPods with large rubber mallets.

these 'protests' strike me as more of a clumsy PR move and shallow affectation rather than any real sense of outrage over how we pay our taxes.

But don't worry folks. If we keep going on like this, sooner or later we'll see real outrage soon enough.

Sgt Otter
My girlfriend drove past the rally in Salem, Oregon and almost all of them had signs biatching about having their taxes raised.

The stupid... it burns.

Hender: Ah yes, the American dream: fight for the rich because one day, you might be among them.

Either that or hold on to the notion that raising taxes on the rich will somehow improve your lot in life.

I don't have so much of a problem with the protests per se. I think their anger is a bit misdirected in this case, and their facts are pretty shaky. It's FOX that I have a real problem with.

Dancin_In_Anson: Either that or hold on to the notion that raising taxes on the rich will somehow improve your lot in life.

When it leads to a lowering of my taxes, my lot actually improves.

Dancin_In_Anson: Hender: Ah yes, the American dream: fight for the rich because one day, you might be among them.

Either that or hold on to the notion that raising taxes on the rich will somehow improve your lot in life.

I still fail to see how you can even get away with 'taxing the rich'. I thought taxes were supposed to be 'fair'...? If we start using the tax code to pick out one particular group (be it social, political, religious or whatnot) then sooner or later we'll see the tax code being used to punished OTHER groups as well. Nobody will be safe.

Dancin_In_Anson: Either that or hold on to the notion that raising taxes on the rich will somehow improve your lot in life.

It's not that black and white. And in this case, if anything, I think it's equalizing/normalizing the tax burden in a way that's beneficial for us and the economy in general. A rising tide lifts all boats.

Weaver95: Dancin_In_Anson: Hender: Ah yes, the American dream: fight for the rich because one day, you might be among them.

Either that or hold on to the notion that raising taxes on the rich will somehow improve your lot in life.

I still fail to see how you can even get away with 'taxing the rich'. I thought taxes were supposed to be 'fair'...? If we start using the tax code to pick out one particular group (be it social, political, religious or whatnot) then sooner or later we'll see the tax code being used to punished OTHER groups as well. Nobody will be safe.

I don't really see it as "taxing the rich," either. I mean yes, their taxes go up, but it's not unprecedented--they're going back up to where they were before Bush took office. There is no expectation that once your taxes go down, they can never go back up again.

Diogenes: Dancin_In_Anson: Either that or hold on to the notion that raising taxes on the rich will somehow improve your lot in life.

It's not that black and white. And in this case, if anything, I think it's equalizing/normalizing the tax burden in a way that's beneficial for us and the economy in general. A rising tide lifts all boats.

so why not tax the jews next? They have lots of money, right?

I still say we should eliminate taxes at a certain income level to give people real incentive to get rich. It'll be your reward for success. Until middle class people get to that income level they can simply foot the bill for all federal spending.

Weaver95:

I still fail to see how you can even get away with 'taxing the rich'. I thought taxes were supposed to be 'fair'...? If we start using the tax code to pick out one particular group (be it social, political, religious or whatnot) then sooner or later we'll see the tax code being used to punished OTHER groups as well. Nobody will be safe.

"The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

-Adam Smith from The Wealth of Nations, 1776

With all this talk about taxing the rich, why doesn't anyone ever mention that the Bush tax cuts for the rich were supposed to be temporary in the first place?

Librul media strike again?

Mordant: I still say we should eliminate taxes at a certain income level to give people real incentive to get rich. It'll be your reward for success. Until middle class people get to that income level they can simply foot the bill for all federal spending.

To do any less would be class warfare.

Weaver95: I still fail to see how you can even get away with 'taxing the rich'. I thought taxes were supposed to be 'fair'...? If we start using the tax code to pick out one particular group (be it social, political, religious or whatnot) then sooner or later we'll see the tax code being used to punished OTHER groups as well. Nobody will be safe.


That is pretty much the most ridiculous thing I have read all day. Good job.

Jaboobinator: Weaver95: I still fail to see how you can even get away with 'taxing the rich'. I thought taxes were supposed to be 'fair'...? If we start using the tax code to pick out one particular group (be it social, political, religious or whatnot) then sooner or later we'll see the tax code being used to punished OTHER groups as well. Nobody will be safe.


That is pretty much the most ridiculous thing I have read all day. Good job.

so...you're saying that our tax code was designed specifically to be unfair?

iiiiiinteresting.

cousin-merle: With all this talk about taxing the rich, why doesn't anyone ever mention that the Bush tax cuts for the rich were supposed to be temporary in the first place?

Librul media strike again?

Not to mention the fact that income inequality in the US is at its highest point since the 1920s.

Weaver95: so...you're saying that our tax code was designed specifically to be unfair?

iiiiiinteresting.

I wouldn't say "unfair," but obviously people with greater income are taxed at a higher rate than people with lesser income, as they should be.

My point, though, is that your jump from treating people differently in terms of taxation based on their income to treating people differently based on race or religion is patently absurd. Having a higher tax rate for wealthier people is not discrimination and you know it.

Mordant: I still say we should eliminate taxes at a certain income level to give people real incentive to get rich. It'll be your reward for success. Until middle class people get to that income level they can simply foot the bill for all federal spending.

I think that's the model that Citicorp used.

3Horn

Hender: Mr. Coffee Nerves: The only organizations? There was a rally here yesterday with about 1,000 people, give or take (estimates ranged from 400-4500).

It was sponsored by the local news/talk station, was front page above-the-fold on the only paper in town and in the A-block of all three network newscasts at 5 p.m., 6 p.m., 11 p.m. and the morning news cut-ins.

I think the complaint that many of us have is that Fox didn't just cross the line between reporting and advocacy, they're not even in the same country as the line anymore.

Ahh, I misunderstood. Some people here are doing the whole "Damn Mainstream MSM Media is using their Liberul Mind Tricks and not covering our grassroots uprising" line, when coverage of the event was friggin' everywhere.

The local N/T radio station (a FOXNews affiliate) sponsored it and gave it literally hours yesterday and in the days leading up.

Weaver95: so...you're saying that our tax code was designed specifically to be unfair?

iiiiiinteresting.

Dad-like typing detected.

To take it a step further, putting the entire tax burden only on the middle class should in theory be the best way to get government to lower spending. We need to piss off the largest block of voters we have to get them to take action, and I seriously doubt there are enough millionaires here to make that difference.

And if I'm wrong about that then Weaver and DIA will see their own taxes go up by 30% or so and we won't be hearing quite so much from them anymore.

Weaver95: so why not tax the jews next? They have lots of money, right?

Well, that's the obvious next step, isn't it? A jewtax.

cousin-merle: Dad-like typing detected.

This little bit of insight is brilliant.

Jaboobinator: I wouldn't say "unfair," but obviously people with greater income are taxed at a higher rate than people with lesser income, as they should be.

Well technically, rich people are taxed at the same rate as I am. They're just taxed at a higher rate than I am above a certain amount.

hillbillypharmacist: Well, that's the obvious next step, isn't it? A jewtax.

Let the Jews pay the Jew tax. I pay the Homer tax.

hillbillypharmacist: Weaver95: so why not tax the jews next? They have lots of money, right?

Well, that's the obvious next step, isn't it? A jewtax.

Won't work. They always get it wholesale.

Jaboobinator: I wouldn't say "unfair," but obviously people with greater income are taxed at a higher rate than people with lesser income, as they should be.

so the 'reward' for success is to lose more of your money to the federal government?

My point, though, is that your jump from treating people differently in terms of taxation based on their income to treating people differently based on race or religion is patently absurd. Having a higher tax rate for wealthier people is not discrimination and you know it.

'rich people' have more money, and you want to tax them at a higher rate. If jews have more money, why not tax THEM at a higher rate as well? it's all about the money, right? once you've started setting the tax code at arbitrary levels, you open the door to any abuse possible. Today, it's 'rich people'. tomorrow, it could be 'the jews'. Or maybe 'the catholics'. anyone who has 'too much' money is a potential target now. they just have to have a lot of money and be unpopular.