“To the Venter who thinks Rod Livdhal writes outstanding letters, could this no doubt, be Rod Livdhal in person? Maybe a relative was used in switching his hogwash from Letters to the Editor to the Vent! You liberals are so easy to figure out!”
“Headline said: ‘Faith leaders to petition Jan Brewer to retract order barring benefits for illegal immigrants.’ They’d just as well save themselves the trouble. People like Jan Brewer, Russell Pearce, et al, only trot their religion out when it serves as a useful political tool.”
“Driver’s licenses are issued by the states under their own rules and regulations. The federal government has absolutely no jurisdiction. It is disingenuous for these immigration attorneys to make the claim it is illegal for Arizona to withhold issuing these documents to illegal aliens.”
“To anyone, including my own mother, who says she is uncomfortable voting for a Mormon: They said the same thing when JFK was campaigning to be president. They did not want to vote for that man in that “Catholic Cult” either. Shame on you, Mom, and shame on anyone who thinks that way. It is unconstitutional and disgraceful.”
“On Tuesday, conservative talk show hosts are calling for Akin to step down. On Wednesday, they deny they said that. Tells you everything you need to know about conservatives.”
“For Rep. Todd Akin and other idiots like him: If women aren’t likely to get pregnant when raped, ‘legitimate rape’ or not, why can’t we ‘summon’ that power any time we don’t want to get pregnant (which is most of the time)? Why would anyone need to take the pill?”
“If Obama cared about saving Medicare and protecting seniors he wouldn’t take $716 billion out of the Medicare trust fund. He would leave it there to extend the life of the program and protect current seniors. His cuts to providers (according to Medicare), will result in providers going bankrupt in 15 years. Restore the money to Medicare trust. Keep doctors that accept Medicare insurance.”
“Amazing how the Bush tax cuts supposedly only benefit the wealthy until the Democrats want to keep them for the middle class. Then they all of the sudden benefit everyone!”
Brittanicus posted at 11:00 am on Sun, Aug 26, 2012.
Everybody now should know the financial consequences of illegal immigration? Just remember that any amnesty this Presidents executive orders is just another giant magnet to draw my foreigners here, looking for a better quality of life or here to scam the American taxpayer. Whether it’s Obama’s Dream Act, Sanctuary cities, , voter fraud, Chain Migration or just plain old illegal immigrants dodging agents at the border or just arriving in America, as an intentional overstay supposed visitor by plane or ferry. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano states it would be too costly to deport the underestimated 11 million illegal immigrant invaders? Nevertheless her agency stays tight-lipped about the rising hundred billion dollar figure, which is a forcibly extracted tax annually. There are very few issues that are not unrelated with these people who should never be here. However, it all goes back to the inattention of Democrats and Republicans who abused their oath of office, after the 1986 Immigration Control and Reform law. The policies composing of the passage of this bill was dismissed, which was to do with stricter control of business hiring, and building a much sturdier fence.
The Democrats refused to appropriate the money, so nothing was done? Now we have over 20 million aliens settled here illegally. But why even bother with any tough laws, when there is no real punishment? I am absolutely sure there was no intention from either party to stop cheap labor for Republicans, or illegal vote collections for the Democrats. If Obama wins a second term there is sure to be a comprehensive amnesty, with American taxpayers having even a larger chunk taken from the payroll check. And to be honest I am not even sure of the Republicans agenda? But what I am sure about is the plan of the TEA PARTY if they can eject many Democrats and Republican incumbents and replace them. It’s already happening and by infiltrating the Republican Party can politically persist that the “LEGAL WORKFORCE ACT (E-VERIFY) and the BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP LAW” are enacted.
THE MORE TEA PARTY LEADERSHIP IN CONGRESS, THE MORE INFLUENCE?
Both bills if passed can insure the removal of illegal aliens from the workplace and stop the smuggling of children into America, to gain citizenship, which has an astronomic financial payout by states. Every American voter has a chance to alter the direction of Americans future. Under Obama resurgence as President in November heads us towards Socialist Republic, that all of our nation will depend on government empowerment. The US counterpart of “freeloaders” who have no integrity would rather live of the rest of us. Judge for yourself by contacting the thousands of local TEA PARTY chapters, or read the conservative manifesto of fighting for our liberties as consigned to us by the founding fathers. The TEA PARTY DOT ORG has all the information you need to decide your vote in less than three months.
chatmandu002 posted at 11:13 am on Sun, Aug 26, 2012.
Vent #1: To many are giving Rod a lot of credit for his opinions. I'm just glad I still get to respond with my own opinions.
Vent #2: Let the religious do what their heart and or god tells them to do. But Jan is standing by the law.
Vent #3: I hope Gov Brewer stands by her decision. Drivers licenses and other state programs are a state's rights issue.
Vent #4: I would hope that no religion would automatically discount anyone from holding an elected position. Although there are some religions that do preach against a democracy.
Vent #5: When a democrat misspeaks you hear laughter, yawns and they get a free pass. When a republican misspeaks the liberal/progressives and the MSM go berserk. To the liberal/progressives there is no forgiveness for a misspoken word, no matter how much someone may acknowledge their wrong words and apologize.
Vent #6: All this talk about "legitimate" rape and condemnation of republicans. Yet the Democrats invite to their convention as a keynote speaker a confessed liar and accused rapist in Bill Clinton. Is this another of the liberal/progressive double standard.
Vent #7: I'm not in favor of Obamacare but something has to change with Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. We better get our heads around this necessary change or these programs and or our country won't be around in 20 years.
Vent #8: You are right, the Bush Tax Cuts did cut taxes for everyone. The only reason the rich got more is because of the lower rates on investment and capital gains income. The liberal/progressives believe that the rich should be punished for their success. For a country that demands everyone be treated equally when it comes to income taxes the liberal/progressives believe that "equally" then becomes so kind of undefined "fairness" issue.
Arizona Willie posted at 2:19 pm on Sun, Aug 26, 2012.
chatmandu002: where did you get the idea that " For a country that demands everyone be treated equally when it comes to income taxes the liberal/progressives believe that "equally" then becomes so kind of undefined "fairness" issue."
I'm not sure about the end of that == I think you meant ' some kind ' not so kind. However the United States has NEVER demanded everyone be treated equally.
We have ALWAYS had a progressive Income Tax -- based on the principle that those who receive much from Society owe much to Society. The wealthy get more from society so they have ALWAYS been expected to pick up a bigger percentage of the load. THEY CAN AFFORD IT.
Logical and fair minded people have always determined that it was FAIR that the wealthy paid a higher percentage.
It has been that way since the Income Tax was instituted.
Why should the wealthy pay more?
Let's say you and 9 high school friends decide to have a reunion dinner. One member of the crew has been very successful and owns a chain of car washes and a car dealership.
You go to a nice restaurant for this dinner and the wealthy guy orders the filet mignon & lobster combo with champagne and you and your friends order hamburger steaks and beer.
When the meal is over your wealthy friends bill is $75 and you and your buddies bills are in the $18 range and your wealthy friend says " Let's add up the bills and everybody pays 10% -- that's fair isn't it? Everybody pays the same percentage ".
Would that be right?
Similarly Income Taxes pay the bills for living in this country. The wealthy have received much more so they should owe more.
A flat tax shifts the tax the wealthy should pay to those less well off.
chatmandu002 posted at 11:36 am on Mon, Aug 27, 2012.
OK Willie,
What is a "fair share"? Give me a percentage. What is a fair percentage of my wages. "Fair" for who? Surely not for the rich guy. What about the people that don't pay any income tax? What is their "fair share"? Are we a country of equal people or not? Shouldn't all citizens be treated equally? Why then when it comes to income taxes do we treat our citizens according to a communist theory. From each according to their ability to each according to their need, with the big government determining who has the need and who has the ability. Where is the equality in our progressive tax structure? Where is the principle of equal treatment?
Arizona Willie posted at 12:29 pm on Mon, Aug 27, 2012.
chatmandu002-- I have no idea what your fair share is. That is far above my pay grade.
You ask " What about the people that don't pay any income tax? What is their "fair share"?"
As far as people paying no income tax, I recommend you check out this link:
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/11/americans-paying-no-taxes/
What is their fair share? Once again it isn't my place to determine that. But people who are on the bottom rungs of society, and are one paycheck away from being evicted should have a very low " fair share " if not zero.
The experts who calculate those things have decided it was not fair for them to pay anything, in some cases. But as the link I provided will inform you ... those people generally do pay some taxes. They may not owe any ADDITIONAL tax and may even get a refund.
It's amusing in a way. You denounce the progressive income tax as " a communist theory. " and then demand we treat everyone equally which is VERY COMMUNISTIC.
No, we are not a country of equal people.
THAT IS A MYTH.
Very much like religion it is used to pacify the masses.
Where is the equality in the progressive income tax?
There is no equality ... it is not designed or intended to be equal.
FAIR and EQUAL are two different concepts.
The progressive income tax is FAIR but not EQUAL.
If you want equality in the tax structure ... let's try this idea on for size.
We will make everyone equal.
We tax everyone so that everyone has the exact same amount of money left after they pay their tax.
Everyone has the same amount of money to live on.
THAT'S EQUAL.
chatmandu002 posted at 5:04 pm on Mon, Aug 27, 2012.
Really Willie,
Everyone ends up with the same amount of money after taxes??? Come on Willie is anyone going to take you seriously? Do you read your own words? Keep punishing success and you will end up with no one successful.
Arizona Willie posted at 7:42 am on Tue, Aug 28, 2012.
chatmandu002 --- it's known as reductio ad absurdam.
Making everyone equal AFTER taxes is a demonstration that there are various EQUALS.
We are NOT a nation of equals. Demanding equality is a risky business as my extreme example demonstrates.
We do not even have an EQUAL opportunity in life.
People like Mitt Romeny are born inheriting millions of dollars in trust funds and get sent to all the best schools. Other people are born in a ghetto and abandoned by their fathers ( and sometimes mothers too ) or born to a mother on drugs with their own drug addiction into a neighborhood society that does not value education.
No way do those two people have equal opportunities in life.
Requiring people who have gotten a good deal from life in our society to pay more income tax than people lower on the economic rungs IS NOT PUNISHMENT for being successful.
Just as in the example I gave you earlier where your classmate had a much better dinner and then wanted you to pay 10% of the total bill for everyone's dinner ( which - in case math isn't your strong suit - makes you and your buddies pay for most of his dinner ) .... those at the top of our society enjoy many benefits the average person doesn't. Asking them to pay more taxes is simply asking them to pay a FAIR share of the bill. IT IS NOT PUNISHMENT.
Or do you consider being asked to pay your bills punishment?
Remember, the people on top of society here owe that to society.
YES THEY DO.
Granted they worked hard ( some of them ).
But they would not have been able to do what they did if they had been born in the Soviet Union or China or India or almost any other country in the world.
Being in our society enabled them to build the business they built ( presuming they didn't inherit it ).
They receive more FROM society and thus they owe more TO society.
Arizona Willie has spoken [smile]
chatmandu002 posted at 11:19 am on Tue, Aug 28, 2012.
Willie,
I'll gladly pay my bills but I don't want to be forced to pay your bills, which is what's happening in this country. Just as you should not be forced to pay my bills. We should be treated equally.
chatmandu002 posted at 11:54 am on Tue, Aug 28, 2012.
Wait Willie, I got more....
You say the experts determine what is "fair share". Wonder what political motivation the experts have? Does redistribution of wealth sound familiar? What I see it not a progressive tax structure to run the government but a redistribution of wealth to support citizens and in some cases non-citizens. As this system of redistribution of wealth continues, the numbers of supported citizens, and others, will expand to a point where the wealth to redistribute is exhausted. When the country goes bankrupt the only option will be a flat tax or VAT tax because there will be no upper income brackets, the rich will have moved away or become like everyone else, poor. You can have your "fair share" income tax along with your attitude that if you are born poor you will always be poor. I want to see success rewarded and encouraged. When everyone is treated equally (taxed equally) then more success will be possible. Can it happen overnight? No, but we have to start sometime or we are lost to bankruptcy and a progressive socialism.
Arizona Willie posted at 1:10 pm on Tue, Aug 28, 2012.
chatmandu002--- as citizens of this country, we are ALL responsible for the expenses of this country.
The bills have to be paid. No one enjoys paying taxes -- but this redistribution of wealth is so much bull-pucky.
There has been a redistribution of wealth going on BUT it has been from the middle and lower classes to the upper classes. The wealthiest people have gotten MUCH wealthier over the last 30 years. Incomes for the middle class have been stagnant to falling.
The middle and lower classes have been the VICTIM of wealth redistribution -- not the RECIPIENTS.
You seem to be preoccupied with socialism yet you don't even realize that in the Constitution of the United States of America there is the phrase " provide for the common good "
That is socialism enshrined right in the Constitution.
The money that goes to the lower classes in welfare etc. etc. is a drop in the bucket compared to the wealth that has been given to the wealthiest people from the tax cuts they have been given since Reagan.
When they cut taxes for the wealthy -- someone has to make up the difference. Who do you think that is? IT'S YOU.
You're upset about a few pennies of your taxes that might wind up in the hands of someone you think doesn't want to work, and you are ignoring the hundreds of dollars you tax bill increases because you have to pay some of the taxes for the wealthy.
You think Republicans are going to fix it so your taxes are lower? Ha, think again.
The biggest tax increase in history on the middle class was in the Reagan administration when they took away the deduction for all interest except your mortgage.
Before that you could deduct ANY interest such as interest on your credit cards as well as your home. Interest on car loans / leases was also deductible.
That was a multi-trillion dollar tax increase on the middle and lower classes. It had little effect on the upper classes cause they can pay cash for their cars etc. etc.
THANK REPUBLICANS FOR THAT.[angry]
This country has always been a socialistic democratic republic.
The first 13 colonies would be called " communistic " today.
Since you are so against " socialism " you would undoubtedly be happier living in some other country, because this country was founded upon socialistic ideas and has socialism embedded in it's structure from the ground up.
chatmandu002 posted at 5:02 pm on Tue, Aug 28, 2012.
Willie,
Speaking of bull-plucky (whatever that is?) about redistribution of wealth!! It is the expressed policy of Obama to redistribute the wealth and it isn't going to the wealthy. When the top 20% pay 70% of the income taxes while 47% pay no federal income taxes, how is everyone paying their responsible share for the operation of our government.
The Constitution states that the government should provide for the common good not the common welfare. Obama and the democrats are combining the poor and middle class to form the "dependent" class. Dependent on the redistribution of wealth by a big government.
But I understand your beliefs Willie, you are a believer in socialism and big government. You also believe that capitalism is bad and that government should control all functions of the market place. But I still believe in a free market, the freedom of the individual and a constitutionally limited government.
To bad you can't see the consequences of socialism and it's eventual demise. Again I say that if you punish success you will end up with no one successful.
Engaged Voter posted at 5:53 pm on Tue, Aug 28, 2012.
"The Constitution states that the government should provide for the common good not the common welfare. "
At first I thought "hey, aren't common good and common welfare the same thing?" - then I looked them up:
[Common] Welfare (noun) - the good fortune, health, happiness, prosperity, etc., of a person, group, or organization; well-being
[Common] Good (noun) - profit or advantage; worth; benefit
One is concerned with the actual care of people, and one is concerned with profit.
Arizona Willie posted at 9:57 am on Wed, Aug 29, 2012.
Engaged Voter: it would be nice if you provided a link to the source for your " definitions ".
Arizona Willie posted at 10:03 am on Wed, Aug 29, 2012.
chatmandu002 -- I defy you to post a link to Obama's " expressed policy " of redistributing the wealth.
I also provided you a link to proof that your bunk'em about 47% the people not paying any Federal tax is horse puckey. And, of course, you ignore anything that doesn't fit your ideology.
I DO NOT think capitalism is bad. I think UNREGULATED capitalism is TERRIBLE.Big difference -- but you ignore that too.
Engaged Voter posted at 10:25 am on Wed, Aug 29, 2012.
Willie - I was not citing research, just word definitions.
I used the dictionary. ;)
Arizona Willie posted at 12:20 pm on Wed, Aug 29, 2012.
Engaged Voter: yes ... but < which > dictionary?
Arizona Willie posted at 12:38 pm on Wed, Aug 29, 2012.
Engaged Voter, I just googled the terms " common good " and " common welfare ". You need to put in both words in quotes and you will get much more extensive information.
Here is a link to a < great > article. Please read it and give me / us your opinion. I think it would make an excellent basis for discussion.
http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/commongood.html
Arizona Willie posted at 7:48 am on Thu, Aug 30, 2012.
chatmanduu002 --- I'm still waiting for you to provide us with a link to Obama's ' expressed policy to redistribute the wealth '.
Tick Tock Tick Tock