I have a tendency to retreat into the privacy of my own private den when things are not going perfectly in my life. This is not a good trait. It is not fair to me or my friends. I am sorry, and I am going to work on this trait, so please bear with me. Pun intended. With that said, I am slowly coming out of hibernation, so I will be trying to get back in touch with the rest of society very soon and will be blogging more regularly. As I wake from my hibernation, the bear is apparently pissed.

The fact though is that I have been in hibernation, so I may not have my facts straight. I thought I was waking up in the year 2008, not sometime in the 1940s and 1950s where McCarthy and other fear mongers thought that we can simply dismiss and, in some cases, destroy lives by screaming socialism. I thought that I was taught that a true and strong democracy was based on a battle of ideas. Again, my mind may be a little cloudy due to the hibernation, but surely we have not returned to these tactics of screaming socialism in the year 2008. I almost wish that I was wrong.

The fact is that we are in the year 2008. The fact is that Republicans are now screaming socialism on the campaign trail. This pisses me off. Whatever happened to expecting professionalism and maturity out of adults? I expected professionalism from my secretary, so why can I not expect and demand the same from my politician? Why would the scream of socialism not be professional and not be mature? Simply, it is wrong…the Republicans know that…the Republicans have made the choice to appeal to the worst in humanity by scaring the voting public with emotionally charged words. In full disclosure, I am not voting for Obama…or McCain for that matter, but I do hate it when I am put in a position to completely defend someone attacked unfairly.

This is why it is wrong…

All of this is coming from McCain’s continued use of Joe the Plumber’s question regarding Obama’s tax plan. McCain keeps describing Obama’s tax plan as a redistribution of wealth akin to socialism.

First, read Karl Marx before you call anyone a socialist. Tax plans do not make someone a socialist.

Second, we have a progressive tax system in this country. This is a fact. What does this mean? This means that the more money that you make, the more taxes as a percent of your overall income you will pay. To illustrate this, the tax brackets for a single (unmarried) person in 2008 are the following:

- 10%: from $0 to $8,025
- 15%: from $8,026 to $32,550
- 25%: from $32,551 to $78,850
- 28%: from $78,851 to $164,550
- 33%: from $164,551 to $357,700
- 35%: $357,701 and above

Why do we do this? Because it is fair. Why is it fair? Here is an illustration. Take Person X that is trying to live on $10,000 a year. Person X is poor. Person X is dirt poor. Person X has to worry about basic necessities of food and water, shelter, and clothing at this income level. Person X is in the 15% tax bracket. Now, take Person Y making $200,000 a year. Person Y’s worries are very different. Person Y is not worrying about survival. Person Y has all necessities covered by their large income. Person Y is in the 33% tax bracket. Yes, the percentages of taxes are different, and yes it is fair. But shouldn’t Person X and Person Y pay the same percentage in taxes for it to be fair? Well, we do not have a flat tax in this country. If we were to expect Person X and Person Y to both pay 25%, just to pick a percentage in the middle, more and more people like Person X will not be able to afford the basic necessities of life, eventually becoming dependent on the state for shear survival. In order to avoid this, we ask those of us that can afford to pay more to pay more. The fact is that those of us who have been given an opportunity to make more have the infrastructure, society, and culture that the government helped to create and maintain to thank for it…to some degree.

Obama did not invent the progressive tax system. It is a fact of our society. In the last 100 years, we have never had a flat tax system. The only thing that changes is the steepness of progression. In fact, during WWII, the highest tax bracket was 94%. 94 fucking percent… Surely, this was just because we were in war. Obviously, WWII was the main driving factor to taxes being that high in the highest tax bracket, but the reality is that we have a strong history of high taxation of the rich. To illustrate this, when I was born in 1978, the highest tax rate was 70%.

If McCain is going to complain about a progressive tax plan, you would expect his plan to be a flat tax…right? Nope…Not at all. He is taking his plan completely out of context in order to scare us all. The Tax Policy center compared Obama and McCain’s tax plans. It can be found here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html

McCain can claim that he will be reducing taxes, but this does not mean that he himself is not guilty of a redistribution of wealth. You see, just because you lower taxes on the wealthy, does not mean that you have created a flat tax where everyone is paying the same percentage of income in taxes. He still is proposing a progressive tax system. He knows this, and he is a hypocrite that is trying to scare voters by screaming socialism.

Another example of him being a hypocrite…McCain voted against Bush’s tax cuts “because of the disproportional amount that went to the wealthiest Americans.” I guess he was in favor redistribution of wealth at that time. Check out the transcript on Meet the Press this past Sunday.

Third, a nuanced fear that McCain is pushing is that Obama’s plan will result in refundable tax credits that would result in the government cutting a check to citizens that actually have no income tax liability resulting in Obama giving welfare to Americans…i.e. – OBAMA IS A BIG SOCIALIST…He is giving money to people that do not pay income taxes…Here is the problem. Our tax system already pays out refundable tax credits to people that have no income tax liability…How can this be? McCain is not pointing out an important factor…People who do not have income tax liability due to low income still pay taxes. How? They still pay payroll taxes…What are payroll taxes? Payroll taxes go to Social Security and Medicare.

McCain’s own tax plan has a refundable tax credit for health care expenses, so he knows that these exist and is even proposing some himself…

More color on this issue can be found at this link:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/813/

Finally, still on the tax issue, but less on the socialism issue, McCain wants us to worry that Obama’s tax plans will hurt corporations in this country because the statutory tax rate is not the lowest corporate tax rate amongst industrialized nations. Surely McCain cannot be wrong that corporations would be attracted to countries with lower taxes. He is actually quite right. The problem is that McCain is playing the fear card again because he knows that the American public does not understand the nuances of the tax code. Yep, he is purposely misleading the American voter, and scaring them into voting for him…Country First…I think not.

The nuance is in the concept of the effective tax rate. An effective tax rate refers to the actual rate of taxes paid, not the tax rate written in the statutes. Why would a corporation pay a different tax rate than the ones written in the tax codes? First, corporations have tax offsets that lower taxable income. Second, corporations…are you sitting down?…keep two separate tax books…and this is legal. One tax book is kept to report earnings for the stock market…i.e. – higher earning means that the stock will go up. The other tax book is used to determine how much in taxes the corporations have to pay. How are these tax books different? One way is that the two books use different ways of valuing inventory which drives up earnings or liabilities depending on the method you use. What is the end result? The Government Accountability Office found that 2/3 of all corporations did not pay any taxes between 1998 and 2005…Good times…

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/13/business/13tax.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

So where does this leave us? No candidate is perfect. No platform is perfect. However, there is no room for screaming socialism in the year 2008. A democracy is a battle of ideas, so show up and bring some ideas to the table. We need some fucking ideas. What we do not need is diversions of stating that I am putting the Country First while at the same time purposefully and knowingly appealing to the worst in all of us.

Here is the reality…

- A recession is coming.
- We have 2 fucking wars going on.
- We have a disappearing middle class as more and more middle class jobs leave the country leaving us with working class service jobs.
- 3 weeks ago I had friends wondering if they should pull money out of their checking accounts…Seriously, a potential run on the bank. 3 weeks ago I was reliving “It’s a Wonderful Life.”
- Whether you want to ignore all science and say the global warming may not be caused by humans (this is an issue for another time), the world is changing.
- People are losing their homes.

And you want me to tolerate a Red Scare now?

Both plans are progressive tax plans. The fact is that the rich will still be rich, will still be able to live a rich lifestyle, and just because you may pay more taxes if you get rich this does not in any way destroy the incentive system for people wanting to be rich…

McCain is a liar, and he is putting McCain and McCain alone First.

I mean, really.

Pay your respects here…

Again, Sadly, No! is smarter than everyone else.

It’s time for the Democrats to call the GOP’s bluff. They have to hammer the SOBs and tell them that they had a deal all set before John McCain and his big fucking ego decided to ride in on his white horse and fuck everything up. They cannot allow themselves to be used as pawns to get John McCain elected.

Democrats, give them the finger and walk away until they meet your demands. And then go on television every day and loudly blame for the coming stock market crash. Crush them and don’t stop crushing them until you’ve won.

I swear to god, I will lose all faith in this country if we get railroaded on this bailout, and let me not even speak of anyone who still thinks Sarah Palin should get within 1000 yards of executive office.

For fucks sake.

“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.”

–John Kenneth Galbraith

• A character in the movie “The Holiday” stated that “In the movies, we have leading ladies and the best friend. You’re supposed to be the leading lady of your own life, for God’s sake.” I am not sure what this means, but I am trying to incorporate it into my life. Hello world…I am a leading lady!?!

• Ballerinas cannot punch.

• It is 2008, and I can still dunk. This translates to I am not old…yet.

• The election system needs to be revamped…
- Today, I felt a little disenfranchised. The fact that I essentially had to vote for my third or fourth favorite candidate in the party that I reluctantly vote in shows that there is a problem. After primaries in around 5 states, we have a system where candidates drop out before the vast majority of America has a chance to have a say.
- Let us please have a discussion about voters in Iowa. They are not automatically better voters, more informed voters, better judges of character, etc.
- Let us at least acknowledge that although this year’s election has been noteworthy in the sense that for the first time we have a viable woman candidate and a viable African-American candidate, the next president will be rich. This has not changed. No matter what Obama’s background is or what his name is, he is still a graduate of Harvard Law. This is not your average American. This is not a paradigm shift.
- Let us please have a real discussion about what it means to vote. Should we vote for who we think will win? Should we vote for who is winning in the latest poll? Should we vote for who we would rather have a smoothie with? Should we vote for who is raising the most amount of money? Should we vote for who makes us feel the most inspired but have no idea what the person stands for? Should we vote for who has the same demographics? Should we vote for whom we think will handle issues the way we think they should be handled? This real discussion needs to happen. Without this discussion, we go from election to election without an educated and informed voting public. An election determined by the uninformed results in what? Imagine the changes we could create if we demanded education of issues, public stances of issues by the candidates, and people actually knowing what they are voting for.
- Let us at least acknowledge that election coverage is a joke. Let us take the Democrats for an example. Obama entered the race on February 10, 2007. This is almost a year ago. We have all of the advantages of year long political coverage, many forms of media to get stances out, and most still could not tell me what are the specific differences between Obama and Hillary. Part of this is the voting public’s apathy. Part of this is the election coverage that treats it as a “horse race” not an election. Part of it is that our candidates do not state their platforms. No matter what side you end up on. The reality is that Obama does not speak in specifics…hardly ever. He gives a great speech. He gives an inspiring speech. He creates hope in the public. However, hope does not pay heating bills. Hope does not pay mortgages. I am not picking on Obama. Every candidate is guilty of this, but many Americans, however, will be casting a ballot today for Obama and not be able to tell you what he wants to do. This is the problem…Not necessarily Obama.
- Let us have a real discussion about privatization. Is the free market really better? Is it really always more efficient?
- Let us have a real discussion about Blackwater. Do we want to have private militaries? Do we want to have a private intelligence company that they are in the process of building as we speak? Do we want to have a private army that is fully armed and running around our cities as Blackwater was doing in New Orleans during Katrina? Is this a good idea?
- Let us have a real discussion about economics. We have a voting public that still believes in some form of trickle down economics. What is wrong with the average American when they would support a system that gives more money to the rich in hope that a little bit of the vast benefit that we just gave to the rich will trickle down to the rest of us? I understand how language and framing an issue can determine how we think about the issue, but trickle down economics does not even sound good for us and we support it.
- Let us have a real discussion about Corporations and the stock market. We have a candidate in Romney that made a fortune off buying corporations, laying people off, and reselling the company for a profit. The average American does not think that there is anything wrong with this because he is acting in the best interest of the shareholder. What is wrong with us when the average American lives from pay check to pay check and depends on a job to make this work, but yet we are ok with someone placing the needs of a rich shareholder’s account balance over the job of the worker that actually pays for food?

• Finally, I am apparently in a ranting mood this week…

Let us hope that recent “events” between Iranian speedboats and American warships do not eventually lead us closer to war…

There is, unfortunately, a long history of fabricated or overexagerated international events used as excuses to mobilize armies…

I just hope that all of this remains in the correct perspective. After all, in the famous board game, you never heard anyone ever say “you just sank my…speedboat.”

On the way to school this morning, I pulled up next to a car that had a bumper sticker that read “No Liberals.” Of course, I had to find out what the driver looked like. I pulled up further, and the driver had a jacket that had…please sit down for this because it will surprise you…had an American flag on it…

It gets better though…
- It turns out that the jacket with the American flag on it was his uniform. He is a subway train driver…Yes, the conservative gets his income from a public transportation system.
- The driver drove a 1995ish Toyota Tercel
- The driver also had an IRA sticker on his car.

Literally fifteen feet later, a SUV cut me off on the road. The license plate of the SUV read “USA ROX.” This made a little more sense to me. Weirdly enough, the SUV had a sticker on his back window that was a shamrock in Ireland’s colors…

I did not realize that the Irish were so conservative…

A: a single president? never happen
R: why not? he’d be hitting everything in sight
A: cause if he isn’t married, he might be gay!
R: heh– fair point
A: and God would melt the polar ice caps and kill millions of Americans to spite us if we ever elected a gay president
R: could you imagine the reporting– “The President was in Brazil yesterday, discussing the future of the United States’ relationship with South America. While there, he hit some fine Brazillian ass.”

You and your wife are about to pull away from the whole foods parking lot when a tall mid-40’s man leaves the bags he’s loading into his car to flag you down. When you roll down the window, with a big smile he says to you “All of the happily married couples I know are with women from foreign countries!”
How do you respond?

All B and I could do was laugh uneasily say “uhh thanks?” and drive off. I have no idea? Is this something like reverse racism? How did he know we were married? For that matter, how did he know she was from a foreign country?

For that matter, why did this guy feel so compelled as to quit loading his groceries, walk over to us and flag us down to say that?

From ACSblog:

Judge Robert Bork, one of the fathers of the modern judicial conservative movement whose nomination to the Supreme Court was rejected by the Senate, is seeking $1,000,000 in compensatory damages, plus punitive damages, after he slipped and fell at the Yale Club of New York City. Judge Bork was scheduled to give a speech at the club, but he fell when mounting the dais, and injured his head and left leg. He alleges that the Yale Club is liable for the $1m plus punitive damages because they “wantonly, willfully, and recklessly” failed to provide staging which he could climb safely.

thank you Judge Bork for providing me with the example I will forever use for “everyone wants tort reform until they are hurt.” jackass.

originally written for the 9/11 attacks, this short essay sums up a lot of the degenerate pricks on the television you are seeing right now in the wake of the VT shootings.

Many people will use this terrible tragedy as an excuse to put through a political agenda other than my own. This tawdry abuse of human suffering for political gain sickens me to the core of my being. Those people who have different political views from me ought to be ashamed of themselves for thinking of cheap partisan point-scoring at a time like this. In any case, what this tragedy really shows us is that, so far from putting into practice political views other than my own, it is precisely my political agenda which ought to be advanced.

Not only are my political views vindicated by this terrible tragedy, but also the status of my profession. Furthermore, it is only in the context of a national and international tragedy like this that we are reminded of the very special status of my hobby, and its particular claim to legislative protection. My religious and spiritual views also have much to teach us about the appropriate reaction to these truly terrible events.

(via BoingBoing)

Internet users in China should be thrilled to learn that thesupernicety.com is currently not blocked over there. Damn near everything else worth reading on the internet, however, is. Try out any site on the great firewall of china.org.

Courtesy of Japundit.

Update, 6pm March 7th: The supernicety.com has been blocked.

So I’m listening to an NPR “All Things Considered” segment about the Foley scandal that features an interview with a man named Paul Weyrich, the author of the Arlington Group’s letter that called for House Speaker Dennis Hastert’s resignation. The Arlington Group is a coalition of 70 socially conservative organizations. Their letter focuses only on Foley’s egregious error in judgement, but in the NPR interview, Weyrich veers off course and says that Foley should have been forced to resign years ago solely because he’s gay.

(Link here: Conservative Groups Call for Accountability on Foley)

Weyrich: It has been known, uh, for many years that congressman Foley was a homosexal. Uh, homosexuals tend to be preoccupied with sex. The idea that he should be continued, or should have been continued, as chairman for the Committee on Missing and Exploited Children, given their knowledge of that is just outrageous.

NPR: Now before we go on, I think I can say Mr. Weyrich, that there are a lot of people out there who will take exception to the statement that all homosexuals are preoccupied with sex.

Weyrich: Well, I don’t care if they take exception to it, it happens to be true. I mean, uh-

NPR: That is your opinon?

Weyrich: It’s not my opinion. It is the opinion of many psychologists and psychiatrists who have to deal with them.

Oh man, is that ever true. Everyone knows that heterosexual men never think about sex. I mean, remember when Bill Clinton wouldn’t do anything sexual with an intern? Or Arnold Schwarzenegger, who refused to touch a woman he didn’t know? And all those poor rap artists forced to put half-naked women in their videos? I remember that Barbara Walters interview with Nelly where he just cried and cried because he said he just wanted to take a walk in the park with a pretty girl, not flip her over and all fours and pour a $3,000 bottle of champagne all over her naked body. And what about those poor single men forced to go to strip clubs against their will? And Howard Stern, who made a fortune off of inviting elementary school teachers and elderly nuns on his program to read excerpts from The Grapes of Wrath to eunuchs? And the porn industry, man is that business struggling. And all those millions of men who don’t cheat on their girlfriends or wives on business trips? And what about women? Women never cheat on their husbands/boyfriends either. What about that TV show Platonic Hand Holding in the City that was so popular? And of course, we all love Brad Pitt and Johnny Depp because of their winning personalities. And remember when STDs went away because no one was doing it anymore? And there were no unwanted children conceived drunkenly in restaurant bathrooms? Everyone knows that God just added the commandment about not committing adultery in there as a freebie, since it’s something that no one has ever been tempted to do. I think he just put it in there to round out the commandments to 10. I know that I personally have never been hit on or propositioned or catcalled as I walked down the street. Sometimes I watch movies and television and I wonder if anyone in this country is getting laid anymore. We’re all just so…uninterested in the topic. Well, except for the gays.