Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.ipad > #10213 > unrolled thread

Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.ipad

Contents

  Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-19 07:26 -0700
    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 15:14 -0400
      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 15:31 -0400
      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 15:51 -0400
        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 15:53 -0400
        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-03-20 12:19 +1200
          Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-19 20:50 -0400
            Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-03-20 16:14 +1200
              Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 23:28 -0400
              Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-20 17:16 -0400
        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-20 19:33 -0500
          Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-20 17:50 -0700
            Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-21 07:46 -0500
              Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 09:42 -0400
                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 09:23 -0500
                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 12:25 -0400
              Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 09:13 -0500
                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 12:23 -0400
                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-21 16:04 -0500
                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 19:30 -0500
                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 20:53 -0400
                      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 22:28 -0500
                        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 08:01 -0400
                          Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 08:13 -0400
              Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-21 08:44 -0700
                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 12:29 -0400
                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-21 15:26 -0500
                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 16:45 -0400
                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-21 14:34 -0700
                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 19:05 -0500
              Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-22 14:16 -0400
                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 14:34 -0400
                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-22 14:25 -0500
                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-23 09:02 -0500
                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-23 10:44 -0700
                      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-23 14:05 -0500
                        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback News <News@Group.Name> - 2012-03-23 15:20 -0400
                          Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-23 19:19 -0500
                            Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-23 20:05 -0700
                              Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 10:54 -0500
                                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-24 09:48 -0700
                                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback News <News@Group.Post> - 2012-03-24 12:53 -0400
                                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 20:15 -0500
                                      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback News <News@Group.Post> - 2012-03-25 12:01 -0400
                                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "Douglas C. Neidermeyer" <sgt@arms.omega.faber.edu> - 2012-03-24 18:45 -0400
                                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-24 19:30 -0700
                                      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "Douglas C. Neidermeyer" <sgt@arms.omega.faber.edu> - 2012-03-25 18:11 -0400
                                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback russotto@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) - 2012-03-26 00:10 +0000
                                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-25 17:39 -0700
                                      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback russotto@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) - 2012-03-26 02:50 +0000
                                        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-25 21:10 -0700
                                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-24 15:02 -0400
                                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-24 19:09 -0400
                                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-25 09:39 -0500
                                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-25 14:02 -0400
                            Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback News <News@Group.Post> - 2012-03-24 12:42 -0400
                        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> - 2012-03-23 15:52 -0600
                          Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-23 19:24 -0500
                            Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-23 20:04 -0700
                              Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 10:43 -0500
                                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> - 2012-03-24 11:22 -0600
                                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-24 15:16 -0400
                                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback News <News@Group.Post> - 2012-03-24 16:10 -0400
                                      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-25 12:19 -0400
                                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-24 19:31 -0700
                                      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-25 12:40 -0400
                                        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-25 13:46 -0700
                                          Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-25 18:14 -0400
                                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback russotto@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) - 2012-03-26 00:13 +0000
                                      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-26 17:44 -0400
                                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 20:20 -0500
                                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-25 09:33 -0500
                                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-25 07:45 -0700
                                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> - 2012-03-25 13:07 -0600
                                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-24 19:02 -0400
                                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 20:26 -0500
                                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-24 21:59 -0400
                            Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback News <News@Group.Post> - 2012-03-24 12:42 -0400
                            Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> - 2012-03-24 11:09 -0600
                        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-23 22:45 -0400
                        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-23 20:00 -0700
                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-23 22:43 -0400
                      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 10:40 -0500
                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-23 22:42 -0400
                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-24 08:21 -0400
                      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-24 18:29 -0400
                        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-25 09:36 -0500
                          Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-25 13:56 -0400
            Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "Thomas R. Kettler" <tkettler@blownfuse.net> - 2012-03-21 11:08 -0400
          Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-20 20:34 -0500
            Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-21 07:49 -0500
              Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 09:25 -0500
                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-21 11:02 -0500
                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-21 09:20 -0700
                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-21 16:02 -0500
                      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-21 14:24 -0700
                      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> - 2012-03-21 16:38 -0600
                        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-21 16:59 -0700
                          Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-22 16:32 -0400
                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 19:11 -0500
                      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-21 18:49 -0700
                        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-22 00:45 -0400
                          Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Steve Hix <sehix@NOSPAMmac.comINVALID> - 2012-03-21 23:09 -0700
                        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 07:51 -0400
                          Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-22 08:28 -0500
                            Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-22 16:28 -0400
                          Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-22 10:10 -0700
                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 19:09 -0500
              Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-21 08:23 -0700
                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-22 16:34 -0400
                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-22 13:45 -0700
      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-03-20 08:12 +1200
        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 16:49 -0400
        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-19 19:37 -0400
    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-19 16:56 -0400
      Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 17:08 -0400
        Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-19 17:22 -0400
          Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 17:46 -0400
            Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-19 14:54 -0700
            Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-19 18:17 -0400
              Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 19:00 -0400
                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-19 19:23 -0400
                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-19 19:26 -0400
                Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-19 17:55 -0700
                  Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 22:14 -0400
                    Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-19 20:58 -0700

Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7  Next page →

#10324

In article <timmcn-3D7272.19304821032012@news.iphouse.com>,
 Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:

 
> 
> Every person earning a wage in the US pays taxes on their income.  Do 
> you not look at your own pay stubs?  We all pay the Social Security tax 
> and we all pay the Medicare tax.  But its truthier to say "half the 
> population doesn't pay income tax" 'cuz then we make those poor little 
> rich people look so much more heroic for being greedy.
    Which they get back. SS and MCare are not income taxes, they are 
payroll taxes and have been a whole other kettle of fish since 
instituted. But it is also truthier to note that the bottom 40% get 
enough back in credits that it pays for most of the SS and MCare tax, 
thus the negative rates of taxes even when these are included. 

> 
> > > What's not fair is that roughly 500 people earn as much as that 48% 
> > > combined- which is about 150,000,000 Americans.  Greed comes with a 
> > > price, George.  One of those prices is taxes.  The other is your soul.
> >
> > Although at the same time, the total income tax shares of the top 
> > 1% went from 24.81% of federal income taxes paid in '87 to 36.73% in 
> > 2009 while the bottom half went from 6.07% to 2.25%. At the same time 
> > the top 1% INCOME shares when from 12.32% to 16.93% over the same 
> > timeframe. There was a 36% in income at the same time there was a 48% 
> > increase in taxes paid.
> 
> The top 20% of Americans get 93% of the wealth, George.  But they pay 
> less than 93% of the taxes, effectively getting a massive transfer of 
> wealth from everyone else.

    Of course we have no taxes on wealth and never have had, with the 
possible exception of inheritance taxes. But hey, let's bring in side 
issues shall we? 

> 
> Hell, $800,000,000,000 of the Bush tax cuts is sitting in the national 
> debt, having failed to stimulate the economy enough to pay for 
> themselves (which Uncle George promised us they would do).  Another 
> transfer of wealth from the poor and the middle class to the rich.
     DId not happen either. If you look at the actual revenues, they 
went up after the first year. If you look at the scoring from the Joint 
Committee on Taxation (which was the model used by the Congress when 
they voted on the decreases) the revenue increase was even higher than 
what the foresaw BEFORE the cut. Go to the website for Joint Committee 
on Taxation and get their final report and then go to the Stat Abstract 
and compare that with what actually happened. 


>
> And how are we going to make that right and balance the budget and 
> reduce our debt?  We're going to fuck over the 99% by killing Social 
> Security and Medicare (which would mean most Americans would literally 
> never be able to retire until they are simply to decrepit to work any 
> longer).  
   Which is going to happen any way since both sides have LONG known 
that they were increasing benefits much quicker than they were the taxes 
used to pay for it. When (not if) SS collapses it will be one of the 
most stirring bipartisan achievements in decades. 

> 
> Cheers, dude.  Gotta love GOP.  More than happy to look you in the eye 
> while they stab you in the back.

-- 
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative, 
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10328

In article <4sidnTs6gs275ffSnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
 Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote:

> In article <timmcn-3D7272.19304821032012@news.iphouse.com>,
>  Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
> 
>  
> > 
> > Every person earning a wage in the US pays taxes on their income.  Do 
> > you not look at your own pay stubs?  We all pay the Social Security tax 
> > and we all pay the Medicare tax.  But its truthier to say "half the 
> > population doesn't pay income tax" 'cuz then we make those poor little 
> > rich people look so much more heroic for being greedy.
>
>     Which they get back. SS and MCare are not income taxes, they are 
> payroll taxes and have been a whole other kettle of fish since 
> instituted. But it is also truthier to note that the bottom 40% get 
> enough back in credits that it pays for most of the SS and MCare tax, 
> thus the negative rates of taxes even when these are included. 

Taxes on my income are not income taxes.  Frog's hair duly split.

> > > > What's not fair is that roughly 500 people earn as much as that 48% 
> > > > combined- which is about 150,000,000 Americans.  Greed comes with a 
> > > > price, George.  One of those prices is taxes.  The other is your soul.
> > >
> > > Although at the same time, the total income tax shares of the top 
> > > 1% went from 24.81% of federal income taxes paid in '87 to 36.73% in 
> > > 2009 while the bottom half went from 6.07% to 2.25%. At the same time 
> > > the top 1% INCOME shares when from 12.32% to 16.93% over the same 
> > > timeframe. There was a 36% in income at the same time there was a 48% 
> > > increase in taxes paid.
> > 
> > The top 20% of Americans get 93% of the wealth, George.  But they pay 
> > less than 93% of the taxes, effectively getting a massive transfer of 
> > wealth from everyone else.
> 
>     Of course we have no taxes on wealth and never have had, with the 
> possible exception of inheritance taxes. But hey, let's bring in side 
> issues shall we? 

Property taxes?  Luxury taxes? Excise taxes?

> > Hell, $800,000,000,000 of the Bush tax cuts is sitting in the national 
> > debt, having failed to stimulate the economy enough to pay for 
> > themselves (which Uncle George promised us they would do).  Another 
> > transfer of wealth from the poor and the middle class to the rich.
>
>      DId not happen either. If you look at the actual revenues, they 
> went up after the first year. If you look at the scoring from the Joint 
> Committee on Taxation (which was the model used by the Congress when 
> they voted on the decreases) the revenue increase was even higher than 
> what the foresaw BEFORE the cut. Go to the website for Joint Committee 
> on Taxation and get their final report and then go to the Stat Abstract 
> and compare that with what actually happened. 

Total recapture of the tax cut was about $200 billion.  But hey, I got 
my taxes lowered by $50!  That makes it all worthwhile.

> > And how are we going to make that right and balance the budget and 
> > reduce our debt?  We're going to fuck over the 99% by killing Social 
> > Security and Medicare (which would mean most Americans would literally 
> > never be able to retire until they are simply to decrepit to work any 
> > longer).  
>
>    Which is going to happen any way since both sides have LONG known 
> that they were increasing benefits much quicker than they were the taxes 
> used to pay for it. When (not if) SS collapses it will be one of the 
> most stirring bipartisan achievements in decades. 

Social Security is easily fixable.  Except the Republicans just plain 
refuse to do it.

Remedial reading:

<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/paul-ryans-budget-to-nowhere/2012
/03/21/gIQAe8qYRS_story.html?tid=pm_opinions_pop>

<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/paul-ryans-budget-hurts-the-poor/
2012/03/20/gIQAX73LQS_story.html?tid=pm_pop>

> > Cheers, dude.  Gotta love GOP.  More than happy to look you in the eye 
> > while they stab you in the back.

-- 
And wackiness ensues...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10337

In article <timmcn-81CC31.22284321032012@news.iphouse.com>,
 Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:

> >     Which they get back. SS and MCare are not income taxes, they are 
> > payroll taxes and have been a whole other kettle of fish since 
> > instituted. But it is also truthier to note that the bottom 40% get 
> > enough back in credits that it pays for most of the SS and MCare tax, 
> > thus the negative rates of taxes even when these are included. 
> 
> Taxes on my income are not income taxes.  Frog's hair duly split.
        Not really. The enabling legislation for SS makes the 
distinction. Besides when was the last time the SS taxes went down? 


> >     Of course we have no taxes on wealth and never have had, with the 
> > possible exception of inheritance taxes. But hey, let's bring in side 
> > issues shall we? 
> 
> Property taxes?  Luxury taxes? Excise taxes?
   Property taxes aren't wealth taxes. What are luxury taxes? Excise 
taxes hardly qualify either since they include things like the taxes on 
phone lines and other necessities. 

>
> >
> Total recapture of the tax cut was about $200 billion.  But hey, I got 
> my taxes lowered by $50!  That makes it all worthwhile.
   Sorry, I don't understand the point. 

>
> Social Security is easily fixable.  Except the Republicans just plain 
> refuse to do it.
> 
> Remedial reading:
> 
> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/paul-ryans-budget-to-nowhere/2012
> /03/21/gIQAe8qYRS_story.html?tid=pm_opinions_pop>
> 
   Not sure why this is remedial reading on the subject since it 
excoriates the plan w/o one mention of why it is wrong and no mention of 
how to fix SS or MCare. 

> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/paul-ryans-budget-hurts-the-poor/
> 2012/03/20/gIQAX73LQS_story.html?tid=pm_pop>

Have to register for this one so I can't read it.

-- 
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative, 
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10338

In article <W9CdnQ-gJ70zifbSnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@earthlink.com>,
 Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote:

> In article <timmcn-81CC31.22284321032012@news.iphouse.com>,
>  Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
> 
> > >     Which they get back. SS and MCare are not income taxes, they are 
> > > payroll taxes and have been a whole other kettle of fish since 
> > > instituted. But it is also truthier to note that the bottom 40% get 
> > > enough back in credits that it pays for most of the SS and MCare tax, 
> > > thus the negative rates of taxes even when these are included. 
> > 
> > Taxes on my income are not income taxes.  Frog's hair duly split.
>         Not really. The enabling legislation for SS makes the 
> distinction. Besides when was the last time the SS taxes went down? 
> 
> 
    BTW: As I mentioned, the tax credits for the lower 40% (expanded 
greatly under the Bush tax cuts, something ignored by those who call it 
only for the rich) balance out the SS/Mcare taxes for nearly half of the 
taxpaying population.

-- 
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative, 
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10294

In article <CB8F37F3.83C08%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> >> The same one that will tax the dividends that we are talking about at 
> >> the same rate as ordinary income
> > 
> > Which is what it should be.  Why should it be that the more money you 
> > make, the lower your tax rate should be?
> 
> I'm not saying that.

But that's what lowering the tax rate on dividends and other capital gains 
will do.  What it has done.

> But what about the 48% who pay NO taxes. Is THAT fair?

You mean like the thirty companies that paid no income tax in 2008, 2009, 
and 2010?  Or the seventy-eight companies (which includes those thirty) 
that paid no income tax in at least one of those three years?  Some of them 
even had negative tax rates, thanks to tax rebates.

<http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers/CorporateTaxDodgersReport.pdf>

> >> even though you already paid taxes on you income once to *buy* the 
> >> stock that pays the dividends.
> > 
> > You pay taxes on income that you use to buy goods that you pay sales 
> > tax on.
> 
> So investors, who are trying to provide for themselves in their old age 
> and not be a burden to the public or children, should be taxed twice on 
> their wages and earnings?

They are not taxed twice on wages and earnings.  Let's look at a 
hypothetical.  A person earns $1,000,000 a year, a portion of that goes to 
pay income tax.  He uses $60,000 of the after-tax money to buy 100 shares 
of Apple Stock at $600 a share.  Over the next year, he receives $1,060 in 
dividends.  ($2.65 quarterly dividends per share, as recently announced.)  
He then pays income tax on that $1,060, but doesn't pay an additional cent 
of tax on the $60,000 investment.  So exactly where does is anything taxed 
twice?

Apparently, you believe that gambling winnings shouldn't be taxed either.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10299

In article <michelle-6F96D7.08443121032012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In
> 
> But that's what lowering the tax rate on dividends and other capital gains 
> will do.  What it has done.
> 

So, I can assume that you were as vehmently opposed to the cap gains 
reductions that took place under Clinton? 
    (Interesting side light that I have no idea what it means, but the 
cap gains tax reductions resulted in increased revenue from the first 
year. Other tax cuts tend to dip the first year while the results kick 
in and then restart their trajectory the next year. Find that 
fascinating for some reason...) 
>

-- 
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative, 
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10308

On 3/21/12 10:44 AM, in article
michelle-6F96D7.08443121032012@news.eternal-september.org, "Michelle
Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <CB8F37F3.83C08%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>>> The same one that will tax the dividends that we are talking about at
>>>> the same rate as ordinary income
>>> 
>>> Which is what it should be.  Why should it be that the more money you
>>> make, the lower your tax rate should be?
>> 
>> I'm not saying that.
> 
> But that's what lowering the tax rate on dividends and other capital gains
> will do.  What it has done.

Wrong. If there is non money for R&D, plant and facility expansion and new
hiring because of increased taxes, there will be none left for any of the
above. Why cannot liberals see that, I just don't know?!?

> 
>> But what about the 48% who pay NO taxes. Is THAT fair?
> 
> You mean like the thirty companies that paid no income tax in 2008, 2009,
> and 2010?  Or the seventy-eight companies (which includes those thirty)
> that paid no income tax in at least one of those three years?  Some of them
> even had negative tax rates, thanks to tax rebates.
> 

Exactly, like GE Chairman Immelt, whose company paid absolutely no US taxes
in the last few years, being hand picked by your Resident to run the
President¹s Council on Jobs.

What a hoot that is! Talk about 'Strange Bedfellows'...

> <http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers/CorporateTaxDodgersReport.pdf>
> 
>>>> even though you already paid taxes on you income once to *buy* the
>>>> stock that pays the dividends.
>>> 
>>> You pay taxes on income that you use to buy goods that you pay sales
>>> tax on.
>> 
>> So investors, who are trying to provide for themselves in their old age
>> and not be a burden to the public or children, should be taxed twice on
>> their wages and earnings?
> 
> They are not taxed twice on wages and earnings.  Let's look at a
> hypothetical.  A person earns $1,000,000 a year, a portion of that goes to
> pay income tax.  He uses $60,000 of the after-tax money to buy 100 shares
> of Apple Stock at $600 a share.  Over the next year, he receives $1,060 in
> dividends.  ($2.65 quarterly dividends per share, as recently announced.)
> He then pays income tax on that $1,060, but doesn't pay an additional cent
> of tax on the $60,000 investment.  So exactly where does is anything taxed
> twice?
> 

When he sell the stock at $700 next month (just had to throw that in)
Seriously, If he holds it for a year, under present rules, that Your
Resident will not continue, the tax is 15% of the gain, not 39% - the tax
bracket that a guy making a Mil a year is in. You and me are most likely up
to ~22% (below $100K/yr. income) that Obama will settle for, but wants it
higher. 

THAT is a double tax, my friend. I also find it that if our investor had
bought any major banking stock in the past few years, that 60K would have
sold for an approximate 80% LOSS. What does the Federal Government do? Well,
they tell our investor "Sorry, but we know you got bit to the tune of
$48,000, but we will benevolently allow you 16 years to take that loss -
only if you don't have any cap Gains anywhere else".

Concerning Dividends: Most folks cannot make a dime on CD rates and bonds as
in the past, so they are putting their money in dividend stocks to preserve
their value against inflation, due to this Administration's spiraling debt.
Instead of leaving the investors' hard-earned money's dividends at 15%, a
rate set by Bush tax cuts, they are going up to whatever the investors'
earnings rate might be.

> Apparently, you believe that gambling winnings shouldn't be taxed either.

Hell NO! The trouble with that is that there is no paper trail. OTO hand,
any money made by a hobby is also taxable. It says so in the Code.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10311

In article <CB8FA3B6.83C84%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> Concerning Dividends: Most folks cannot make a dime on CD rates and bonds as
> in the past, so they are putting their money in dividend stocks to preserve
> their value against inflation, due to this Administration's spiraling debt.
> Instead of leaving the investors' hard-earned money's dividends at 15%, a
> rate set by Bush tax cuts, they are going up to whatever the investors'
> earnings rate might be.
> 
> 
    Especially given the last few years, I never have understood why 
they haven't gone out of their way to tax advantage dividends. One major 
reason is that you can't restate a dividend. Also, like CDs only at 
higher rates, you can reinvest and take advantage over the years of 
compounding. Dividends add handsomely to the total rate of return 
(interesting stat during the last decade or where the stock market has 
traded more or less flat, the S&P 500 has had a 2% annual return if you 
add back in the dividends.

-- 
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative, 
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10315

In article <CB8FA3B6.83C84%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> >>>> The same one that will tax the dividends that we are talking about 
> >>>> at the same rate as ordinary income
> >>> 
> >>> Which is what it should be.  Why should it be that the more money 
> >>> you make, the lower your tax rate should be?
> >> 
> >> I'm not saying that.
> > 
> > But that's what lowering the tax rate on dividends and other capital 
> > gains will do.  What it has done.
> 
> Wrong. If there is non money for R&D, plant and facility expansion and 
> new hiring because of increased taxes, there will be none left for any 
> of the above. Why cannot liberals see that, I just don't know?!?

When people pay lower taxes on investment income, all they do with it is 
invest it in more stocks to make more investment income.  They don't spend 
it on R&D, plant and facility expansion, etc.  They merely buy more stocks 
and bonds.

> > They are not taxed twice on wages and earnings.  Let's look at a 
> > hypothetical.  A person earns $1,000,000 a year, a portion of that 
> > goes to pay income tax.  He uses $60,000 of the after-tax money to buy 
> > 100 shares of Apple Stock at $600 a share.  Over the next year, he 
> > receives $1,060 in dividends.  ($2.65 quarterly dividends per share, 
> > as recently announced.) He then pays income tax on that $1,060, but 
> > doesn't pay an additional cent of tax on the $60,000 investment.  So 
> > exactly where does is anything taxed twice?
> > 
> 
> When he sell the stock at $700 next month (just had to throw that in) 

Unless he needed the money then, he'd be a fool to do so; if he holds onto 
it for another year, he could get $800 or more a share.  ;)

> Seriously, If he holds it for a year, under present rules, that Your 
> Resident will not continue, the tax is 15% of the gain, not 39% - the 
> tax bracket that a guy making a Mil a year is in. You and me are most 
> likely up to ~22% (below $100K/yr. income) that Obama will settle for, 
> but wants it higher. 
> 
> THAT is a double tax, my friend. 

How is that double taxing?  He's being taxed solely on the gain, not the 
sale price.

> > Apparently, you believe that gambling winnings shouldn't be taxed either.
> 
> Hell NO! The trouble with that is that there is no paper trail. OTO hand,
> any money made by a hobby is also taxable. It says so in the Code.

No, you don't believe it should be taxed, or no, you disagree with me?

Thing is there's no difference between gambling winnings and investment 
income.  In both cases you risk your money, and if you play your cards 
right (pun intended), gain monetary rewards.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10320

In article <CB8FA3B6.83C84%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> If there is non money for R&D, plant and facility expansion and new 
> hiring because of increased taxes, there will be none left for any of 
> the above. Why cannot liberals see that, I just don't know?!?

Because it doesn't happen.

-- 
And wackiness ensues...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10354

In article <CB8F37F3.83C08%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> But what about the 48% who pay NO taxes. Is THAT fair?
> But that is another subject.

That's a fucking lie. When you consider FICA taxes, state and local 
income/wage taxes, gasoline taxes, liquor taxes, tobacco taxes, sales 
taxes, use taxes, real and personal property taxes, excise taxes (e.g., 
on airfares, tanning services), estate taxes, inheritance taxes, gift 
taxes, tariffs, hotel taxes, car rental taxes, occupational privilege 
taxes, etc., just about _everybody_ pays taxes.

-- 
D.F. Manno | dfmanno@mail.com
Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead
soldiers. (George Carlin)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10355

In article <dfmanno-21003A.14163922032012@news.albasani.net>,
 "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> wrote:

> In article <CB8F37F3.83C08%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > But what about the 48% who pay NO taxes. Is THAT fair?
> > But that is another subject.
> 
> That's a fucking lie. When you consider FICA taxes, state and local 
> income/wage taxes, gasoline taxes, liquor taxes, tobacco taxes, sales 
> taxes, use taxes, real and personal property taxes, excise taxes (e.g., 
> on airfares, tanning services), estate taxes, inheritance taxes, gift 
> taxes, tariffs, hotel taxes, car rental taxes, occupational privilege 
> taxes, etc., just about _everybody_ pays taxes.

I always love how the discussion of income taxes and specifically 
federal income taxes all of a sudden morphs into things like this.

-- 
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative, 
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10356

In article <lMmdneQicc447fbSnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
 Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote:

> In article <dfmanno-21003A.14163922032012@news.albasani.net>,
>  "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <CB8F37F3.83C08%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
> >  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > But what about the 48% who pay NO taxes. Is THAT fair? But that 
> > > is another subject.
> > 
> > That's a fucking lie. When you consider FICA taxes, state and local 
> > income/wage taxes, gasoline taxes, liquor taxes, tobacco taxes, 
> > sales taxes, use taxes, real and personal property taxes, excise 
> > taxes (e.g., on airfares, tanning services), estate taxes, 
> > inheritance taxes, gift taxes, tariffs, hotel taxes, car rental 
> > taxes, occupational privilege taxes, etc., just about _everybody_ 
> > pays taxes.
> 
> I always love how the discussion of income taxes and specifically 
> federal income taxes all of a sudden morphs into things like this.

It wasn't about federal income tax specifically but got morphed into 
that because that's more fun for the right wing claim that half the 
population "doesn't pay tax."

-- 
And wackiness ensues...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10391

On 3/22/12 1:34 PM, in article
lMmdneQicc447fbSnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@earthlink.com, "Kurt Ullman"
<kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote:

> In article <dfmanno-21003A.14163922032012@news.albasani.net>,
>  "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> wrote:
> 
>> In article <CB8F37F3.83C08%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> But what about the 48% who pay NO taxes. Is THAT fair?
>>> But that is another subject.
>> 
>> That's a fucking lie. When you consider FICA taxes, state and local
>> income/wage taxes, gasoline taxes, liquor taxes, tobacco taxes, sales
>> taxes, use taxes, real and personal property taxes, excise taxes (e.g.,
>> on airfares, tanning services), estate taxes, inheritance taxes, gift
>> taxes, tariffs, hotel taxes, car rental taxes, occupational privilege
>> taxes, etc., just about _everybody_ pays taxes.
> 
> I always love how the discussion of income taxes and specifically
> federal income taxes all of a sudden morphs into things like this.

It's in the Liberal Talking Points Handbook. First indoctrination class 101.

Right up there with when Liberals have no real factual answer to illegal
immigration or defense of Obama's socialist behavior they are trained to
bark and howl "RACIST!".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10408

In article <CB91ECAA.83DF1%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Right up there with when Liberals have no real factual answer to illegal 
> immigration or defense of Obama's socialist behavior they are trained to 
> bark and howl "RACIST!".

And when conservatives don't like something that liberals advocate or do, 
they bark "SOCALIST!", just as they're trained to do.

And they're still screaming that Obama is not a natural born citizen, and 
doesn't qualify to be president.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10411

On 3/23/12 12:44 PM, in article
michelle-0CAE59.10444723032012@news.eternal-september.org, "Michelle
Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <CB91ECAA.83DF1%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Right up there with when Liberals have no real factual answer to illegal
>> immigration or defense of Obama's socialist behavior they are trained to
>> bark and howl "RACIST!".
> 
> And when conservatives don't like something that liberals advocate or do,
> they bark "SOCALIST!", just as they're trained to do.
> 

More accurately:

If a Republican doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a Democrat doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

If a Republican is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.
If a Democrat is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for
everyone. 

If a Republican is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a Democrat is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.

If a Republican is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his
situation. 
A Democrat wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a Republican doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Democrat's demand that those they don't like be shut down.

If a Republican is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A Democrat non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.

If a Republican decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it,
or may choose a job that provides it.
A Democrat demands that the rest of us pay for his.

> And they're still screaming that Obama is not a natural born citizen, and
> doesn't qualify to be president.

Not necessarly all of us, but your local Maricopa County Sheriff may be onto
something...

<http://www.wnd.com/2012/03/sheriff-joe-tons-more-shocking-obama-info/>

Stay tuned!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10413

On 3/23/2012 3:05 PM, George Kerby wrote:

> If a Republican doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.

... and legislates to de-fund NPR.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10424

On 3/23/12 2:20 PM, in article
Mt2dnRCvg5hgUfHSnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@megapath.net, "News" <News@Group.Name>
wrote:

> On 3/23/2012 3:05 PM, George Kerby wrote:
> 
>> If a Republican doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
> 
> ... and legislates to de-fund NPR.
> 

Bullshit as usual, "News".

Retaliatory is sometimes a necessary reaction.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10438

In article <CB927D3D.83F41%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> >> If a Republican doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
> > 
> > ... and legislates to de-fund NPR.
> > 
> 
> Bullshit as usual, "News".
> 
> Retaliatory is sometimes a necessary reaction.

Retaliation against what?  Against not hewing to the GOP line and kissing 
GOP asses?

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10447

On 3/23/12 10:05 PM, in article
michelle-AB5CC5.20053723032012@news.eternal-september.org, "Michelle
Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <CB927D3D.83F41%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>>> If a Republican doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
>>> 
>>> ... and legislates to de-fund NPR.
>>> 
>> 
>> Bullshit as usual, "News".
>> 
>> Retaliatory is sometimes a necessary reaction.
> 
> Retaliation against what?  Against not hewing to the GOP line and kissing
> GOP asses?

Against lies. Against the people who ran the outfit for years as a leftist
organization. Against those who stated that they didn't need the money when
on hidden camera. Against those who forces one good liberal, Juan Williams
out of a job.

"Schiller, then-president of the NPR Foundation and senior vice president
for development, was caught on tape calling the Tea Party "xenophobic" and
"seriously racist people" who are "fanatically involved in people's personal
lives."

"He goes on to say that the Republican Party has been hijacked by the Tea
Party and laments the demise of intellectualism, particularly in the GOP."

"NPR's president and chief executive Vivian Schiller (no relation to Ron
Schiller) resigned in the wake of the scandal."

"House GOP leaders have for years attempted to cut funding for what many of
them see as a liberal-leaning broadcast operation."

<http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/npr-house-republicans-pass-npr-defunding-bil
l/story?id=13157489#.T23t-5hZ-0o>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.ipad

csiph-web