April 16, 2010
Obamas give away 1/6th of income to charity. As Biden would say, BFD!
I woke up this morning to one of The Today Show “reporters” (I don’t remember their names. Can we go with Ann? Is there an Ann on that show?) fawning overreporting on the Obama’s tax return, which was released yesterday after the Tea Partiers descended upon DC, but before Obama started mocking them.
Anyway, Ann was overly impressed with the Obama’s generosity. They gave away one-sixth of their income to over 40 charities! And, as our boy Biden would so eloquently put it, I thought to myself, big effing deal! I wonder how much of my money Obama has donated to charity (AKA welfare)! So, I quickly did the math. Between what the federal government took out in federal taxes, Medicare taxes, and Social Security taxes, not including my DC “state” taxes, the government robbed me of 18% of my income last year.
For Medicare and Social Security alone, I was robbed of 7.7% of my income. Now, one could argue that it’s not Obama’s fault that I have to pay that much for these welfare programs. He didn’t create them, after all. But, he has done nothing to end them, either, and in fact has created a brand new entitlement program with Obamacare, which will eat up even more of my income, and my childrens’ income (if I ever have any), and their childrens’ income, etc.
It’s probably so shocking to the liberal elite in the MSM that the Obama’s donated so much because it is a well-proven fact that conservatives donate more to charity than liberals do. THe only money liberals want to donate to charity is other people’s money and that’s in the form of various welfare programs. Like last night when they voted, and Obama signed, an extension of unemployment benefits into law. I guess they’re just ignoring all of the evidence that extending benefits prolongs unemployment as people who would have otherwise looked for work decide to lounge on the couch a little longer catching up on Jerry Springer.
I don’t have a problem with giving to chairty or helping the poor. I have a problem with politicians taking my money and giving it away to people who I don’t think deserve it or spending on programs that don’t necessarily work. Maybe I would give one-sixth of my income to charity if I wasn’t already being raped for 18% before I even get my paycheck, never mind the additional taxes I pay to live in DC (Taxation without representation!), and the various taxes I pay to fly, eat, drink, smoke, breathe! Everything is taxed, so that 18% is just the beginning. I’m not gonna lie, though, I’m really getting excited about the VAT! Can’t wait to see how much more of my income I’ll be giving away to “charity.”
Comments (11)April 7, 2010
Obamacare and the “Power of No,” as in, “No treatment for you!”
From the “I told you so!” files:
How can we learn to say no?
The federal government is now starting to build the institutions that will try to reduce the soaring growth of health care costs. There will be a group to compare the effectiveness of different treatments, a so-called Medicare innovation center and a Medicare oversight board that can set payment rates.
But all these groups will face the same basic problem. Deep down, Americans tend to believe that more care is better care. We recoil from efforts to restrict care.
Managed care became loathed in the 1990s. The recent recommendation to reduce breast cancer screening set off a firestorm. On a personal level, anyone who has made a decision about his or her own care knows the nagging worry that comes from not choosing the most aggressive treatment.
The article goes on to talk about how the government intends to decide what medical treatments are best and then, the dreaded ‘r’ word they denied so much while shoving health care down our throats–RATIONING! No, don’t worry. They’re just going to decide what treatments work and which treatments don’t and when and who should get this treatment or that, which means that when you need any treatment they can decide you’ll get none.
I have paid for insurance for the past three years and barely used it. If they think something is wrong with me and want to run every test in the book, that should be between me, my doctor(s), and my insurance company. In fact, I recently had an appointment that led to some specialized testing that has led to more specialized testing. The chances of their being something wrong with me, at my age, are very low, but my doctors thought this would be a good idea and so I will do whatever they say.
I don’t need some panel (death?) of bureaucrats in DC deciding I don’t qualify for these tests because my risks are low based on my age. I don’t want to hear about the “power of no.” I want to hear what the medical professionals I have personally chosen think and follow the course of treatment they recommend. I thought it was Democrats who wanted to keep the government out of the doctor’s office? I guess that’s just in the event of murder, er, I mean abortion (which, as it has been explained, isn’t murder because a fetus isn’t a baby unless the woman wants to have that fetus, then it’s a baby because, apparently, what determines if humanness is whether or not your mother wants you. Wait, I think I just even confused myself with that one, but that’s what they say).
The Constitution does not give the federal government the power to decide for me what health care treatments are available to me. By the way, since I brought it up, it also doesn’t give the federal government the right to decide that a woman has a right to privacy that includes declaring her unborn child not a child and slaughtering it while it’s still in her womb. Damn that pesky piece of paper! It just seems to keep getting in the Dems way.
Comments (1)April 5, 2010
Michael Steele Screams RAAAAACISM!
Oh brotha! I thought I would stop by Michelle’s blogto see what’s the news of the day. Over on her Buzzworthy, an article about Michael Steele calling his critics raaaaacist (remember, there are five A’s in RAAAAACIST). Yeah, that’s the reason people dislike you and Obama, because we’re all racist:
RNC chair Michael Steele defended his spending practices Monday morning, saying he has no plan to resign, and at one point suggesting that criticism of his tenure may be rooted in racism.
“I tend to come at it a little bit stronger, a little bit more streetwise if you will,” Steele explained to ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on Good Morning America, in his first interview since the Daily Caller broke the news last week that the RNC paid almost $2,000 at a risqué, bondage themed night club. “That’s rubbed some feathers the wrong way. At the end of the day, I’m judged by if I win elections and raise the money. That’s a standard I’m very comfortable with and meeting in November.”
Asked if “as an African-American” he has “a slimmer margin for error than another chairman would,” Steele replied: “The honest answer is yes.” Steele went on to explain that, like Barack Obama, he has had to contend with racism as someone who is “not ole boy network.”
I’m so sick of the racism accusation. It’s bad enough when it comes from Obama and the Left, but we expect them to stoop to that level. They can’t win an argument intelectually so they resort to calling names. I expect better from the Right. You know what’s racist? Affirmative action is racist, yet you and your boy Obama didn’t seem to be against that, especially when it helped you to land your current jobs.
Does it bother any Republicans that the leader of your party just labeled your party racist? Hello? Steele is like the rest of these idiots ruining running our country. He only has the power that he is given. It’s time we edge up those unemployment numbers by sending Mr. Steele to the unemployment line.
April 2, 2010
I am smarter than a census worker!
So, I apologize for not blogging in about two months. What can I say? I got busy? I was having one of those moments when you think, “What’s the point?” Some people have started encouraging me to get back into it. I’ve been thinking about it all week. So much to say, but so little motivation to keep saying it. The people making decisions in DC aren’t listening. Why bother? But, then I saw the quiz that a census worker must pass in order to get the job. Can we just call this what it is, another form of welfare that will artificially decrease or stabilize the unemployment rate in order to give The One and his cronies an approval rating boost?
Here is my score:
Are you smarter than a census taker?
The Constitution requires a headcount of the nation every 10 years, and the Census Bureau hires hundreds of thousands of citizens to help get the job done. Here are 5 actual questions they have to answer. See how you fare.
Done Final score: 5 of 5 points
Zing! This is a refrigerator-worthy score. And since being a census taker is a government job, the pay’s not too shabby. On average, census workers earn almost $15 an hour. And in Anchorage, Alaska, they earn about $25 per hour.
Take the quiz again
I could be rolling in the dough on this one! Too bad I haven’t even filled out my own census form. I was looking at it this morning. Well, I was looking at the second one I received because they sent me two. I’m not quite sure why they sent a second form before seeing if the first had been submitted, but it’s government so that kind of question is silly. It’s not their money that their wasting, so what do they care?
So, take the quiz! Looks like our government is putting geniuses back to work.
Comments (11)