Thursday, May 18, 2006

Here is a short piece on Economics for you Red State YOYOs that still haven't figured out that SUPPLY SIDE/TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS is what Bush 1 said it was "VOODOO ECONOMICS" .

The $70 Billion Tax Cut: Irresponsible and Obscene
by Robert B. Reich

Here we are six months before a mid-term election, with polls showing only about 20 percent of the American public approving the job Congress is doing. Small wonder. The federal budget deficit is still out of control. We’ve got a war going on that’s not going well, and the military is spending over a half a trillion dollars a year. Meanwhile, public services are being slashed. So what’s Congress about to give us? A $70 billion tax cut.

The tax cut would be politically irresponsible, but not obscene, if it were going to middle-income workers now facing sky-high fuel prices and soaring health-insurance costs, and variable-rate mortgage payments heading through the roof.

But this tax cut is not going to the middle class. Like the Bush Administration’s previous tax cuts, most of this one is going to people who are already very comfortable. Hence, it’s both irresponsible and obscene.

The non-partisan Urban Institute - Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center examined its provisions, including a two-year extension of capital gains and dividend tax cuts, and a one-year extension of relief from the Alternative Minimum Tax. It turns out a whopping 87 percent of the benefits of this tax cut will go to the 14 percent of American households earning above $100,000 a year. Twenty-two percent of the benefits will go to the richest two-tenths of one percent of American households earning more than a million dollars a year.

Perhaps I am slow to catch on to something the Bush administration and the Republican Congress understand intuitively. But I’d appreciate it if someone could explain to me why we need another tax cut for high-income Americans. At a time when the gap between the rich and poor, and between every rung on the income ladder, is wider than it’s been in almost a century, it would seem imprudent to add to these disparities unless there was a compelling public need.
What is the public need? Some administration apologists, including the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal, claim repeatedly that the rich are paying a larger-than-ever share of income taxes, so it’s entirely fitting that they get the lion’s share of any tax cut. This logic conveniently leaves out two facts. First, the rich are now paying a smaller percentage of their income in taxes than at any time in the last seventy-five years. That they pay a lot of taxes nonetheless is a by-product of the mind-boggling increase in their income and wealth relative to most other Americans.

Second, if you consider not just income and capital-gains taxes but all the taxes people pay – including payroll taxes and sales taxes – you find that middle-income workers are now paying a larger share of their incomes than people at or near the top. We have turned the principle of a graduated, progressive tax on its head.

A second justification given by the White House and the Journal for continuing to cut taxes on the wealthy is that the wealthy invest their extra money in the economy, and that extra investment trickles down to everyone else. The inconvenient missing fact here is the recent real-world impact of such supply-side economic theory. To date, the Administration’s capital gains and dividend tax cuts have not reaped what their proponents promised. The rate of new investment during this recovery has trailed the rate of investment during the three previous recoveries.

Meanwhile, almost nothing has trickled down. Productivity is up, but the current annual median wage of around $35,000 is what it was five years ago, adjusted for inflation. While top executives are raking in seven and eight-digit compensation packages, their middle-class workers are stuck in the mud.

Don’t expect much of a fight over this tax bill, however. The so-called "reconciliation" procedure, on which it’s riding, requires only a simple majority in the Senate and does not allow a filibuster. Members of the American public who believe this bill is irresponsible and obscene will get a chance to express their view in the voting booths, next November.

Monday, May 15, 2006

The Texan Nero and his GOP stooges are mounting a come back

Look out folks, the politics of hate is upon us again. The coalition of the Bible Bangers, the Zionists, the greedy higher incomers, the Red state fools that put Nero in office 2000 and 2004 is crumbling. Nero’s poll numbers dipping below 30 percent means only one thing, bringing back the only GOP strategy that has been successful since the 1960s. The Politics of fear and hate. The Politics of fear and hate, elected Nixon (the 60s radicals will take over the country), Reagan (the Russians are coming), Bush 1 (Dukakis riding a tank) and Bush 2 (Saddam).

While 9/11 was a gift for the Republicans, because it re-opened the GOP playbook of using fear and hate to get votes, now the public seemed to figured out that all the lies this administration has fed us, are just that lies! Or have we? The debate about illegal immigration and domestic spying leads me to believe that the ill-informed American public will always be sawed by the politics of fear. We forgot what a great American ones told us; “The only thing to fear is fear itself”

If the polls are correct that 2/3 of the American public says it is all right for the government to spy on its citizen (Jefferson is rolling in his grave!) means the fear of 9/11 is not over. Look for the sinking GOP to justify spying on all us by claming to protect us. I suppose we are all guilty until proven innocent! We should trust this ethical administration not use any conversation heard of those who disagree with them, against us!

Then there is illegal immigration. Nero and his GOP stooges want to send the already stressed out National Guard who is fighting in Iraq to protect our glorious freedom, to stop illegals coming across our boarders. I suppose a few thousand National Guards can monitor the many millions of people coming across our borders. Never mind penalizing the big GOP contributors who actual hire them for cheap labor. I predict our ill-informed Public will buy this idiotic strategy!

Look for the GOP’s strategy in the coming midterm elections, to once again try to scare the hell out of us so that their Red-State fools will come back to their fold (THE stupid truck driving, confederate flag waving BUBAS are easily aroused). The GOP talking heads will try to scare us on Iran’s nukes (to protect Israel), illegal aliens taking our jobs (never mind that illegal represent less than 3% of our work force), the liberals will tax us to death (so lets give millionaires thousands of dollars and stiff the middle class with the bill) and off course that BOOGIE MAN Osama is talking to all of us, so let us surrender our civil liberties and have the NSA spy on all of us. Will it work? It works all the time as long as the public is ill-informed, and yes we are ill-informed!

The Beachboy

Friday, May 12, 2006

This just hit the Web, if this is true then it is a great day for the country, now that this Agent OF the ANTICHRIST and consumate Machiavellian will be taken out of the Bush Equation of EVIL.

Rove Informs White House He Will Be Indicted
By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t Report
Friday 12 May 2006

Within the last week, Karl Rove told President Bush and Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten, as well as a few other high level administration officials, that he will be indicted in the CIA leak case and will immediately resign his White House job when the special counsel publicly announces the charges against him, according to sources.

Details of Rove's discussions with the president and Bolten have spread through the corridors of the White House where low-level staffers and senior officials were trying to determine how the indictment would impact an administration that has been mired in a number of high-profile political scandals for nearly a year, said a half-dozen White House aides and two senior officials who work at the Republican National Committee.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, sources confirmed Rove's indictment is imminent. These individuals requested anonymity saying they were not authorized to speak publicly about Rove's situation. A spokesman in the White House press office said they would not comment on "wildly speculative rumors."

Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, did not return a call for comment Friday.

Rove's announcement to President Bush and Bolten comes more than a month after he alerted the new chief of staff to a meeting his attorney had with Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald in which Fitzgerald told Luskin that his case against Rove would soon be coming to a close and that he was leaning toward charging Rove with perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to investigators, according to sources close to the investigation.

A few weeks after he spoke with Fitzgerald, Luskin arranged for Rove to return to the grand jury for a fifth time to testify in hopes of fending off an indictment related to Rove's role in the CIA leak, sources said.

That meeting was followed almost immediately by an announcement by newly-appointed White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten of changes in the responsibilities of some White House officials, including Rove, who was stripped of his policy duties and would no longer hold the title of deputy White House chief of staff.

The White House said Rove would focus on the November elections and his change in status in no way reflected his fifth appearance before the grand jury or the possibility of an indictment.

But since Rove testified two weeks ago, the White House has been coordinating a response to what is sure to be the biggest political scandal it has faced thus far: the loss of a key political operative who has been instrumental in shaping White House policy on a wide range of domestic issues.

Late Thursday afternoon and early Friday morning, several White House officials were bracing for the possibility that Fitzgerald would call a news conference and announce a Rove indictment today following the prosecutor's meeting with the grand jury this morning. However, sources close to the probe said that is unlikely to happen, despite the fact that Fitzgerald has already presented the grand jury with a list of charges against Rove. If an indictment is returned by the grand jury, it will be filed under seal.

Rove is said to have told Bolten that he will be charged with perjury regarding when he was asked how and when he discovered that covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson worked for the agency, and whether he discussed her job with reporters.

Rove testified that he first found out about Plame Wilson from reading a newspaper report in July 2003 and only after the story was published did he share damaging information about her CIA status with other reporters.

However, evidence has surfaced during the course of the two-year-old investigation that shows Rove spoke with at least two reporters about Plame Wilson prior to the publication of the column.

The explanation Rove provided to the grand jury - that he was dealing with more urgent White House matters and therefore forgot - has not convinced Fitzgerald that Rove has been entirely truthful in his testimony.

Sources close to the case said there is a strong chance Rove will also face an additional charge of obstruction of justice, adding that Fitzgerald has been working meticulously over the past few months to build an obstruction case against Rove because it "carries more weight" in a jury trial and is considered a more serious crime.

Some White House staffers said it's the uncertainty of Rove's status in the leak case that has made it difficult for the administration's domestic policy agenda and the announcement of an indictment and Rove's subsequent resignation, while serious, would allow the administration to move forward on a wide range of issues.

"We need to start fresh and we can't do that with the uncertainty of Karl's case hanging over our heads," said one White House aide. "There's no doubt that it will be front page news if and when (an indictment) happens. But eventually it will become old news quickly. The key issue here is that the president or Mr. Bolten respond to the charges immediately, make a statement and then move on to other important policy issues and keep that as the main focus going forward."