Would it be all right if I sent the IRS actual happy meals?

xenophon10k: I can't remember the last time I had this much fun during an election season.

It's like an all-you-can-facepalm buffet.

I like how her husband taught her how to take a corn dog down about 8 inches.

hmmm, she probably should have gone with something about old country buffets

Hey Bachmann, wanna know why so many Americans don't have a federal tax liability? Because they don't make any farking money. You take away two happy meals and that's two meals their kid misses. But whatever, it's fair, right?

"President Obama's plan for job creation has absolutely nothing to do with the true people who know how to create jobs. He should really be going to job creators if he wants to know how to create jobs."

So he should be talking to the poor and indigent who don't have enough money to put a Happy Meal in their stomach?

Why is the press still covering her? I'm probably beating her in the polls for the GOP nom at this point.

CPennypacker: Why is the press still covering her? I'm probably beating her in the polls for the GOP nom at this point.

Depends. Can you deep-throat a corn dog?

Appropriate, since Bachmann is a few fries short of a Happy Meal herself. Oh, who am I kidding, she's the whole bag of fries, the chicken nuggets, the juice box, the toy, and the box short of a Happy Meal.

She or Perry will win the Iowa Caucus. Romney will win everything else.

Two Happy Meals^TM? How many potatoes is that?

Okay, let's use the GOP mindset with a touch of good ol' math. Ten bucks a year, no matter what. Let's apply that to the 'half of the country' that pays no income tax.

350 million people, give or take, so half gives us 175 million people. Including children, retirees, disabled, etc. etc.

Ten bucks a head, gives us.... 1.75 billion, and just for fun let's round up to 2 billion. We have a deficit of 1.3 TRILLION. With this, it brings us to, roughly... 1.298 TRILLION. At best.

You'll pardon me if I look at the GOP plans for solving the deficit issue with a little less than admiration and respect.

Here Comes Everybody: Appropriate, since Bachmann is a few fries short of a Happy Meal herself. Oh, who am I kidding, she's the whole bag of fries, the chicken nuggets, the juice box, the toy, and the box short of a Happy Meal.

You forgot that she's short the McDonalds as well.

Two things:

1. How can the TEA party support her and this plan to raise taxes?

2. If 47% of the country paid $10 each, that comes to $1.4 billion dollars. Ignore for a moment this is taxes on babies and the elderly. With an estimated 2012 deficit of 1.102 trillion dollars, her plan reduces that to 1.1006 trillion dollars. A 0.13% reduction.

I know, she's a pandering idiot.

Cinaed: Okay, let's use the GOP mindset with a touch of good ol' math. Ten bucks a year, no matter what. Let's apply that to the 'half of the country' that pays no income tax.

350 million people, give or take, so half gives us 175 million people. Including children, retirees, disabled, etc. etc.

Ten bucks a head, gives us.... 1.75 billion, and just for fun let's round up to 2 billion. We have a deficit of 1.3 TRILLION. With this, it brings us to, roughly... 1.298 TRILLION. At best.

You'll pardon me if I look at the GOP plans for solving the deficit issue with a little less than admiration and respect.

Rubes won't work that out, and the only math the GOP cares about is related to the electoral college. They're vile, despicable scum, but you have to admire their singleminded determination.

Cinaed: Okay, let's use the GOP mindset with a touch of good ol' math.

Get out of my head!!!!!

"ARE YOU LISTENING STAY AT HOME MOMS? I AM RELATING TO YOU."

PanicMan: Two things:

1. How can the TEA party support her and this plan to raise taxes?

2. If 47% of the country paid $10 each, that comes to $1.4 billion dollars. Ignore for a moment this is taxes on babies and the elderly. With an estimated 2012 deficit of 1.102 trillion dollars, her plan reduces that to 1.1006 trillion dollars. A 0.13% reduction.

I know, she's a pandering idiot.

And considering the number of Hoverounds and Rascals seen at Tea Party rallies that I'm sure had some form of government assistance in paying for them, how will those people feel when their Medicare gets replaced with vouchers?

I think she just stumbled upon an answer to all our problems. Screw the gold standard, lets switch to the happy meal standard.

Oh, FFS. Reduce their payroll deductions by $10, add $10 in "income tax" and call it a farking day. It will accomplish nothing, but at least it would be one more stupid talking point out of the way. There, now everybody pays taxes. Happy now, biatch?

I'm OK with this. If it'll stop the "don't pay taxes" hrrhrr.

Who exactly are these job creators? Is there some company that is producing new jobs by the thousands every year?

/oh wait, the prison industry...

Isn't that pretty arbitrary? I'm actually okay with removing most credits that would reduce tax reliability below $0 resulting in a refund that is more than one paid in federal taxes (though I understand certain programs offer incentives and every situation is different). But the whole idea of 'they at least need to send us ten bucks!' has no basis in anything other than specifically targeting the poor.

This is why Republican politicians resonate with most voters: they advocate simple, black and white plans to fix things that fit on a bumper sticker. People don't like being bogged down with the minutiae of inflation-adjusted tax brackets and altering tax exemptions to better target the intended recipient. People want to hear you have a quick fix that the eggheads in Washington surely overlooked because they embrace the mire of bureaucracy. It doesn't even matter if the policy doesn't address the issue, the solution sounds nice.

Can anyone explain how exemption from personal income taxes has damaged the economy? In what way would raising taxes on anyone be a method of getting America back to work (note: Democrats do not suggest tax increases on the wealthy as a stimulative measure, it is always in the context of deficit reduction)?

Even as deficit reduction this doesn't make sense. There are about 143 million tax returns filed every year. 47% of that is 62 million. That's right: $620 million dollar a year she wants to add to $2.2 trillion we currently collect in revenue, so raising revenues by 0.03% (someone correct me if my math is off).

Can anyone explain how this will help the government or the economy to follow this policy?

logic523: Who exactly are these job creators? Is there some company that is producing new jobs by the thousands every year?

/oh wait, the prison industry...

Its seriously like reading a madlibs.

""President Obama's plan for job creation has absolutely nothing to do with the true people who know how to create jobs," she said. "He should really be going to job creators if he wants to know how to create jobs. Instead, he continues to go to General Axelrod in Chicago to look for his orders on how to deal with the economy.""


There is nothing of substance in that statement at all. Lets make it better!


""President Obama's plan for (need action) has absolutely nothing to do with the true people who know how to (verb)," she said. "He should really be going to (proper noun) if he wants to know how to (noun). Instead, he continues to go to (name) in (place) to look for his (thing) on how to deal with the (action).""

This woman is so incredibly stupid. She worked at the IRS for years and really should understand that is costs the IRS close to $10 to process a single tax return so this just becomes a feel-good breakeven exercise.

I like how she sys that everyone can afford $10.

Try living on social security- $705 per month, biatch. Even assuming your rent was subsidized, your heating was comped by a state or local program, you got food stamps and your utilities were included in your rent... try to live on that.

My clients do it all the time. Now please, tell me WHY youw ant to take another $10 from them, but refuse to raise taxes THE TINEST BIT on the richest 1%.

what_now: Ok, so now we've got tax plans based on happy meals and three pizzas for 9 buck each.

Is this a slap at Michelle Obama's push to get people eating healthy?

Americans don't WNAT to eat healthy.

Have you looked around lately?

I mean, someplace other than those commie health clubs and dangerously homo gymnasiums?

what_now: Ok, so now we've got tax plans based on happy meals and three pizzas for 9 buck each.

Is this a slap at Michelle Obama's push to get people eating healthy?

Just wait until I unveil my $5 foot-long foreign policy plan. It will blow your farking mind!!

She makes me throw up two happy meals every time she speaks. Maybe I should mail it to her campaign.

So she's against St. Reagan's EIC?

error 303: Isn't that pretty arbitrary? I'm actually okay with removing most credits that would reduce tax reliability below $0 resulting in a refund that is more than one paid in federal taxes (though I understand certain programs offer incentives and every situation is different). But the whole idea of 'they at least need to send us ten bucks!' has no basis in anything other than specifically targeting the poor.

Have you been following along? Arbitrary is a good word to describe the campaign platform for most of these jokers. None of these people have a Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Dan Crippen, Bill Bartlett, or any other conservative economist with familiarity with how the budget actually works.

The candidates that drive the base wild advocate policies that sound like they further conservative principles while paying absolutely no attention to the ramifications of said policy.

All you have to know if you're doubtful that the candidates are either unaware of what they are advocating or are being deceitful: they claim they will fight to stop any policy that could weaken our military might while calling for the destruction of the Department of Energy.

I don't understand everyone's hate on this. $1 a month I doubt will make anyone hurt that much. This plan is not about balancing the budget or anything. It's more of a psychological play.

Most poor people take a lot from the government, There are food stamps, subsidized housing, free school, and many other programs. This is a token amount saying: I get a lot from this country and I now have skin in the game.

I'm not saying that the rich shouldn't pay more. That's a separate argument. I think $10 is a nice amount to get people to think that they are part of the system and not a leech. They pay taxes, have a vote and should try to be more involved in the system. Don't let the system take care of you -- be part of the system and take care of yourself. Be more active. People would realize it's now *your* tax dollars fighting wars, not other people.

I think it's an interesting plan.