See it all here

Tax Year 2005

Read Full Article

Despite his storied investing prowess, Buffett is a liberal who sees eye-to-eye with Obama on economic policy. That's why he's contributed $4,600 to Obama's campaign — along with $28,500 to the DNC — and not a dime to John McCain or Republicans during this election cycle.

During the Nashville debate, Obama put forth an ideological litmus for the Treasury job, a post that has taken on even more importance amid the financial meltdown. He said he would want to make sure the next secretary shares his views on improving tax fairness and income redistribution.

The world's richest man thinks other rich should pay more so the government can make the right investments with their money. Those investments include most everything Obama's proposing, from universal college and health care to urban redevelopment.

"The market isn't so good at making sure that the wealth that's produced is being distributed fairly or wisely," Buffett told Obama. "Those of us who've benefited most from the market should pay a bigger share." News flash: You already do. According to IRS data, the top 1% of taxpayers paid about the same amount of federal individual income taxes as the bottom 95%.

And nothing is stopping Buffett, if he wants to pay more, from cutting checks directly to the poor as he squirms uncomfortably and apparently guiltily atop his mounds of billions. This would be far more efficient than having government tax and spend his money. But no, he prefers that Obama redistribute your income, too.

Buffett, a registered Democrat who opposed the Bush tax cuts, is also mad the president repealed the death tax. "When you get rid of the estate tax," he told Obama, "you're basically handing over command of the country's resources to people who didn't earn it."

House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank has suggested that linking the banking crisis to the high-risk bank lending mandates of the Community Reinvestment Act and the 'affordable' housing goals set by Congress for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac constitutes a Republican effort to scapegoat poor, minority households that took out such mortgages.

Read Full Article

So, what do "the rich" pay in federal income taxes? Nothing, right? That, at least, is what most people think. And Democratic...

Read Full Article

A recent poll by Investor's Business Daily asked, in effect, "What share do you think the rich pay?" Its findings? Most people are completely clueless about the amount the rich actually do pay.

First, the data. The top 5% (those making more than $153,542 — the group whose taxes Obama seeks to raise) pay 60% of all federal income taxes. The rich (aka the top 1% of income earners, those making more than $388,806 a year), according to the IRS, pay 40% of all federal income taxes.

The top 1%'s taxes make up 17% of the federal government's revenue from all sources, including corporate taxes, excise taxes, social insurance and retirement receipts.

Thirty percent of American voters pay nothing — zero, zip, nada — in federal income taxes. And, not too surprisingly, compared with taxpaying voters they are more likely to support spending that benefits them.

The majority of the 30% who don't pay federal income taxes agree with Obama's $65 billion plan to institute taxpayer-funded universal health coverage. But the majority of the 70% who pay federal income taxes are opposed to Obama's health care plan.

Nontaxpayers support Obama's plans for increased tax deductions for lower-income Americans, along with higher overall tax rates levied against middle- and upper-income households. The majority of nontaxpayers (57%) also favor raising the individual income-tax rate for those in the highest bracket to 54% from 35%. And the majority (59%) favor raising Social Security taxes by 4% for any individual or business that makes at least $250,000.

Obama calls increasing taxes and giving them to the needy a matter of "neighborliness." His running mate, Joe Biden, calls it a matter of "patriotism."

The rich pay more in income taxes than people think. Voters, clueless about the facts, want the rich to pay still more.

CNN demonstrates that they don’t understand what subprime means

"But here’s what McCain didn’t talk about. Obama went on to say that greed changed all of that. Certain lenders and brokers, quote, began to lower their standards, Obama said, and borrowers — well, they ended up in places they could never afford. So Obama definitely spoke out against the practice."

Well, that’s exactly what subprime lending was. The entire subprime lending structure intended to get loans to people who didn’t qualify for them by lowering lending standards. In fact, thanks to the CRA and groups like ACORN, lenders got accused of racism if they didn’t lower their standards — and so long-established prerequisites for mortgages like income standards and down payments disappeared.

And where did the greed arise? It came from Congressional mandates to have Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buy up subprime loans to provide short-term profits to the lenders lowering those standards. Who pushed those mandates? Obama’s own party. Who accused regulators like Armando Falcon of racism for blowing the whistle on the bad financial decisions at Fannie and Freddie resulting from the massive underwriting of these loans? Obama’s own party.

Cho needs a fact checker of her own. McCain’s point was perfectly valid. The financial crisis came from government deliberately distorting the lending market to push people into subprime loans who could not afford the houses they were buying — and the advocates of that policy counted on “greed” to make it work. In fact, they built it into the program.

Best of the web from the Wall Street Journal

During Tuesday's debate, John McCain repeated an assertion he had made before:

In Lebanon, I stood up to President Reagan, my hero, and said, if we send Marines in there, how can we possibly beneficially affect this situation? And said we shouldn't. Unfortunately, almost 300 brave young Marines were killed.

The finest minds in American journalism set out to check McCain's claim and discovered it to be true.

The finest minds in American journalism set out to check McCain's claim and discovered it to be false.

Seriously! Here is CNN explaining why McCain's statement was true:

The U.S. Multinational Force operated in Beirut, Lebanon, from August 24, 1982, to March 30, 1984, as part of an international peacekeeping operation in the war-torn country.

McCain was a freshman member of the House of Representatives in September 1983 when it approved legislation "that would invoke the War Powers Act in Lebanon and authorize the deployment of American Marines in the Beirut area for an additional 18 months," the New York Times reported.

The resolution had the backing of House leaders of both parties and President Reagan, and it passed by a vote of 270 to 161, the Times report said. But McCain "argued that his military training led him to oppose the continued deployment of troops in Lebanon," the Times reported.

But here is how ABC concluded it was false:

This is an issue that came up in the first presidential debate, as well. And in both cases, McCain exaggerates his position. Marines were already in Lebanon when McCain arrived on Capitol Hill in 1983, and his vote was to prevent invoking the War Powers Act to extend the Marines already deployed. McCain did vote against that, but as he did in the first debate, McCain is wrong to imply that he opposed sending the Marines to Lebanon.

Note that these two "fact checks," despite reaching opposite conclusions, agree on the underlying fact, namely that McCain voted against what CNN calls the "continued deployment" in Lebanon.

ABC has a niggle--that the vote was not on the initial deployment, which occurred before McCain took his seat in the House. ABC does not mention that when Reagan deployed the Marines in August 1982, he did so on his own authority. Congress's 1983 vote on "continued deployment" was the first time lawmakers weighed in on the subject.

It is fine, indeed quite useful, for reporters to present relevant facts that voters can use in evaluating candidates' campaign claims. In this "fact check" form, however, journalists play prosecutor, judge and jury, deciding what evidence to present, what evidence to admit, and what it all means (CNN actually calls the conclusion a "verdict"). Why not just report and let the reader decide?

Chris Matthews and a host of other MSM whine about fired-up Palin audiences speaking out against the media. Well, you're part of the other guy's campaign! Maybe we need UN Peacekeepers to guard you. 

If Obama is so far ahead, why do his buddies at ACORN have to fake voter registrations and try to steal the election for him?

Media Circus: Obama Sued Citibank Under CRA to Force it to Make Bad Loan

Harry Reid spews lies and hate and rage when anyone asks a question about Obama's record. Why so angry, if your guy has it in the bag?

Harry Reid: Linking Obama to Franklin Raines is racist

Boehner declares war on ACORN

What does Obama know about ACORN fraud?

IBD outlines the scope of their criminal behavior, and Michelle gives us the details:

• Missouri - Officials now have to sift through hundreds of bogus applications submitted last August.
• Connecticut - A criminal investigation has been opened into ACORN fraud.
• Wisconsin - Registering convicted felons.
• Ohio - ACORN tells Cuyahoga County’s election board that they can’t stop themselves from committing fraud.
• Indiana - Over a thousand new applications from ACORN appear to investigators to be fraudulent, and that should be no surprise, since Indianapolis now has 105% of its population registered to vote.

In Nevada, officials seemed surprised by the news that the Dallas Cowboys had moved en masse to the Silver State.  The entire starting lineup registered to vote in Nevada, including Tony Romo, their quarterback.  However, Secretary of State Ross Miller assured Nevadans that anyone posing as Terrell “TO” Owens would get a big NO if they tried to cast a vote.

Update: The New York Post notes the nationwide pattern of fraud as well:

Let every vote count, is the Democratic Party’s mantra these days. That slogan might better be: Let every vote count as often as we need to win.

Such, at any rate, are the tactics of ACORN, Barack Obama’s favorite “community organizers,” and its Project Vote - of which, the Democratic presidential candidate has boasted, “I started working as the director . . . here in Chicago.”

ACORN has been implicated in voter-fraud schemes in 15 states - including Ohio, from where The Post’s Jeane MacIntosh reports today that a Board of Elections investigation has unearthed evidence of widespread voter fraud.

Hey, you know who else funds these fraudsters?  You do.  Congress sends them money every year, usually for housing assistance.

Update…here’s the vid via Allah…

I am away from my office, so haven’t seen the video of this yet. But several readers are reporting on a frustrating exchange John McCain had with a passionate supporter in Waukesha, Wisconsin. McCain gets a softball — and bungles again.

Banging. Head. Against. Wall.

Commenter nyc123me:

CNNlive online covering McCain/Palin event in Wisconsin. A guy just got up and begged McCain to take it to Obama in the next debate regarding all his shady associations. The crowd went for it big time. McCain said ‘yes I will’ and immediately started about something else. I don’t believe he will.

Reader Jeff e-mails:

He did it, but he had to be goaded into it. Called out Barney Frank and Chris Dodd when someone asked if he was going to name names and call for investigations. And people shouting ACORN, until he responded strongly about investigating them before the election

Also some guy was so riled up about McCain doing something to fight the socialists - Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid!

Stephen Hayes at the Weekly Standard reports more details — including something that made me grit my teeth last night when I heard him say it on FNC last night. Quit saying you “don’t care” about Ayers’ terrorist record. Stop that!

In response to a broad question about how Barack Obama “got here” — presumably got his lead — John McCain didn’t name Bill Ayers but spoke of him directly. McCain said “We don’t care about an old washed up terrorist and his wife” who said earlier this decade that he wished they were more successful. (Several in the crowd chanted: “Yes we do!”)

…The next question came from a black McCain supporter, who reminded McCain of the candidate’s plea at the convention for his supporters to do everything possible to ensure a victory. The supporter said: “I doubt that anyone has taken, pardon me, the [behind]-whoopin’ I have taken for doing that.” He then implored McCain to go after Barack Obama at the next debate and asked him to raise ACORN and Reverend Wright. “I am begging you, sir,” he said, as the crowd stood and applauded.

McCain, as my readers above noted, said “Yes, I will,” then hurriedly changed the topic.

We’re Screwed ‘08!

***

A commenter below thinks McCain did “fine.” But what does it tell you that the man has to be goaded and prodded and dragged into going on the offensive on ACORN/Ayers/Democrat Fannie-Freddie corruptocrats? It tells you what I’ve been saying out loud for quite some time — that McCain has always had much more of a stomach for taking own his own base than he has had for taking on the radical Left.

If there is a special medicine to cure him of this pathology, get him an IV drip of it, stat.

Question for discussion: Is it too little, too late?

Stop smirking, smirky.

Joe Biden called Sarah Palin’s much-needed attacks on Barack Obama’s ties to Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers “malarkey.”

Yeah, “malarkey.”

Tell it to John Murtagh, Greasy Joe:

Today, John M. Murtagh made the following statement on Barack Obama’s relationship with William Ayers:

“When I was 9 years-old the Weather Underground, the terrorist group founded by Barack Obama’s friend William Ayers, firebombed my house. Barack Obama has dismissed concerns about his relationship with Ayers by noting that he was only a child when Ayers was planting bombs at the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol. But Ayers has never apologized for his crimes, he has reveled in them, expressing regret only for the fact that he didn’t do more.

“While Barack Obama once downplayed his relationship with Ayers, today his campaign took that deceit one step further. Barack Obama now denies he was even aware of his friend’s violent past when, in 1995, Ayers hosted a party launching Obama’s political career. Given Ayers’ celebrity status among the left, it’s difficult to believe. The question remains: what did Obama know, and when did he know it? When did Obama learn the truth about his friend? Barack Obama helped Ayers promote his book in 1997, served on charitable boards with him through 2002, and regularly exchanged emails and phone calls with him through 2005. At what point did Barack Obama discover that his friend was an unrepentant terrorist? And if he is so repulsed by the acts of terror committed by William Ayers, why did the relationship continue? Any honest accounting by Barack Obama will necessarily cast further doubt on his judgment and his fitness to serve as commander in chief.

“Barack Obama may have been a child when William Ayers was plotting attacks against U.S. targets — but I was one of those targets. Barack Obama’s friend tried to kill my family.”

In February 1970 John Murtagh’s father was a New York State Supreme Court justice presiding over the trial of the so-called “Panther 21,” members of the Black Panther Party indicted in a plot to bomb New York landmarks and department stores. Early on the morning of February 21, three gasoline-filled firebombs exploded at their home on the northern tip of Manhattan, two at the front door and the third tucked neatly under the gas tank of the family car. The same night, bombs were thrown at a police car in Manhattan and two military recruiting stations in Brooklyn. A few weeks after the attack, the New York contingent of the Weathermen blew themselves up making more bombs in a Greenwich Village townhouse. In late November that year, a letter to the Associated Press signed by Bernardine Dohrn, Ayers’s wife, promised more bombings.

***

On a lighter note: Joe Biden introduced as…John McCain.

Some Blunt talk on Truth Squads, economic growth