Drudge Does it Again–Obama Celebrates More Bad Economic News

image

Drudge has a way of making a point without making any comments, just from juxtapositioning stories that feed off each other to tell a completely different story.

Here’s a snapshot of his page right now.

In case you are curious, here are links to the articles he is referencing:

O NO: UNEMPLOYMENT STUCK AT 8.2%...
'STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION'...
Just 80,000 jobs added in June...
85,000 WENT ON DISABILITY!
Unemployment rate for blacks jumps to 14.4%...
780,000 Fewer Women Employed Under Obama...
Romney: 'It Doesn't Have To Be This Way'...
Team Obama predicted 5.6% today w/ stimulus...

Thanks, Matt

Best Places to Blog from: Big Bear Lake, CA

image

Ahhhh….

Madison Rising with an Awesome Performance of the Star Spangled Banner

I hope you’re having a great day with the family and friends.  Here is a little something to get the day going right… Enjoy this great video from Madison Rising.

H/T Theo Spark

Happy Independence Day

image

You have won your freedom.  Now, you need to fight to keep it.

The DNC Endorses a New Tax on… Well, Frankly Anything They Don’t Like

Debbie Wasserman SchultzOk, the last few posts were somewhat facetious, illustrating absurdity by being absurd.

Then again… my point is much better documented and demonstrable than Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s

She is still the Chair of the Democratic National Committee, and she was speaking in defense of the Obama administration, it not unreasonable to assume her words are tantamount to an endorsement of policy direction by the DNC.

I can’t believe anyone votes for these clowns.

The utter lack of intellectual honesty she is exhibiting is astounding.  Wasserman Shultz and the entire Obama administration are still trying to claim Obamacare is not a tax, while the Supreme Court has already ruled this is a lie and the only way to consider Obamacare constitutional is to consider it a tax.

Not content at merely lying, Wasserman Shultz then embarks on a massive expansion of the government’s role into every part of our life.  As long as congress determines any activity is “irresponsible” then, in Wasserman Shultz’s view, congress should tax it.

There is not another way to interpret her remarks during her interview with Wolf Blitzer, when she said the following:

The way we usually think of taxation, Wolf, is that taxation as the IRS administers is collected on broad swaths and large categories of individuals. This is a penalty that will be assessed on the tax return if you choose to roll the dice and make us all pay for your being irresponsible and increase all of our health care costs.

We’re not going to tolerate that any more in America. You have to be responsible and you have to pay a penalty if you choose not to be.

What else can she mean when she threatens IRS enforcement on Americans who “have to be responsible and you have to pay a penalty if you choose not to be”? 

She was making this point in trying to justify the “tax” as a “penalty,” and the use of the IRS to collect the “penalty” is just an act of convenience, not of taxation.  Still, there is no way to interpret these comments as other than an endorsement of similar action against any activity she deems as irresponsible. 

This is not a slippery slope, it is deadly quicksand, and such thinking will drag this country into the worst sort of hellhole, a bankrupt nanny state.

Everything from condom use (or lack thereof) to fatty foods; from getting pregnant to having an abortion; from being an alcoholic to being unemployed.   All “irresponsible” behaviors are now in the interest of the federal government, and therefore within the power of the IRS to collect “penalties”. 

If Democrats get their way, there will be no aspect of life wherein congress, or any future administration, could not make the case that an activity was “irresponsible” and, hence, taxable. 

Shame.  They must be defeated in November.  Must. Be. Defeated.

The DNC Endorses a New Tax on Toys They Deem Unsafe

Debbie Wasserman Schultz today endorsed taxing parents on toys that Democrats have deemed as unsafe.

At least that is what I assume she meant. Check out her interview with Wolf Blitzer, when she said the following:

The way we usually think of taxation, Wolf, is that taxation as the IRS administers is collected on broad swaths and large categories of individuals. This is a penalty that will be assessed on the tax return if you choose to roll the dice and make us all pay for your being irresponsible and increase all of our health care costs.

We’re not going to tolerate that any more in America. You have to be responsible and you have to pay a penalty if you choose not to be.

For those of you who think I am quoting her out of context, let me point you to her own website, where she talks about the fact that support for new toy safety laws.

What else can she mean when she threatens IRS enforcement on Americans who “have to be responsible and you have to pay a penalty if you choose not to be”?

The DNC Endorses a New Tax on Parents of Underage Drinkers

Debbie Wasserman Schultz today endorsed taxing parents just because their kids have engaged in underage drinking.

At least that is what I assume she meant. Check out her interview with Wolf Blitzer, when she said the following:

The way we usually think of taxation, Wolf, is that taxation as the IRS administers is collected on broad swaths and large categories of individuals. This is a penalty that will be assessed on the tax return if you choose to roll the dice and make us all pay for your being irresponsible and increase all of our health care costs.

We’re not going to tolerate that any more in America. You have to be responsible and you have to pay a penalty if you choose not to be.

For those of you who think I am quoting her out of context, let me point you to her own website, where she talks about the fact that underage drinking is unhealthy.

What else can she mean when she threatens IRS enforcement on Americans who “have to be responsible and you have to pay a penalty if you choose not to be”?

The DNC Endorses a New Tax on Parents with Unsafe Pools

Debbie Wasserman Schultz today endorsed taxing parents if their pool is not safe, according to new federal guidelines. 

At least that is what I assume she meant.  Check out her interview with Wolf Blitzer, when she said the following:

The way we usually think of taxation, Wolf, is that taxation as the IRS administers is collected on broad swaths and large categories of individuals. This is a penalty that will be assessed on the tax return if you choose to roll the dice and make us all pay for your being irresponsible and increase all of our health care costs.

We’re not going to tolerate that any more in America. You have to be responsible and you have to pay a penalty if you choose not to be.

For those of you who think I am quoting her out of context, let me point you to her own website, where she talks about pool safety.

What else can she mean when she threatens IRS enforcement on Americans who “have to be responsible and you have to pay a penalty if you choose not to be”?

Let’s All Go to The Fishin’ Hole

On of my personal quirks is that when I am in a particularly good mood, I whistle.  Usually the theme from the Andy Griffith Show, a song written for the show called The Fishin’ Hole.  I can’t help but smile when I hear that tune.  It is a part of my life, as it is for many Americans. 

Andy Griffith died today, and as sad as I am over his passing, I can’t help but whistle, and remember how much I enjoyed his work.  Thanks, Andy.

Rest in Peace, Andy

Does the Constitution Prohibit Obamacare Waivers?

As I was reading through all of the fallout discussions from Roberts’ decision on Obamacare, it suddenly occurred to me that most of the analysis to date has been done under the assumption that the Commerce Clause was the keystone of the legislation, not the power of Congress to tax.  What happens when you look at Obamacare from a perspective of Congress’ ability to tax?

Right off the bat, I thought of the Obamacare waivers being granted to all of his union buddies and assorted other Democratic allies. 

It is supposed to be unconstitutional for Congress to pass a tax law targeting an individual or organization.  See Bill of Attainder under Article 1, Section 9, Paragraph 3.  This was highlighted in recent weeks by the obnoxious political posturing against Eduardo Saverin of Facebook fame, wherein Chuckie Schumer attempted to pass a tax law targeted solely at capturing some of Saverin’s Facebook IPO gains.

So, it is unconstitutional to target a tax penalty against an individual or organization. 

Isn’t it thusly unconstitutional to target a tax benefit in favor of a specific individual or organization?  Can Congress pass a law allowing an unelected group of bureaucrats to eliminate the tax penalties of specific people for whatever reason they deem appropriate?

How about we have a tax lottery?  Some committee  in DHS can hold a suggestion contest, “Who Can Come Up with the Least Offensive Way for Us to Play with Your Private Parts”, and the winner is awarded the right to no longer pay federal income tax. Exempt

Currently, we have a committee in HHS determining who has to pay certain taxes.  Can’t some other government committee decide to allow waivers on other taxes?  For whatever reason they see fit?  Of course not.

The controversy over the Obamacare waivers is not new.  Milton Wolf had a great column on this at the Washington Times last year.  My question is whether the Supreme Court decision that Obamacare is a tax now means that instead of merely tyrannical, the waivers are, in fact, unconstitutional.

Minimize

Comments

BofA
Copyright 2012 by Chip Meyer Terms Of Use | Privacy Statement