1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

Jay Leno begged a question... a real question...

Discussion in 'Political Zone' started by sbark, Mar 21, 2009.

  1. sbark

    sbark Well-Known Member Zone Supporter

    3,530 Messages
    159 Likes Received
    This is apparently getting missed in the special olympics "crisis"..

    http://vocalminority.typepad.com/bl...ing-stone-toward-more-government-control.html

    President Golden Calf might have thought he picked the best time to go on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno. Playing rock star, rather than president, was a perfect distraction from the AIG bonus mess. At least it might have been until Leno asked this very astute question:
    Here's something that kind of scared me. Today they passed this thing that says we're going to tax 90 percent of these bonuses. And the part that scares me is, I mean, you’re a good guy—if the government decides they don't like a guy, all of a sudden, hey, we're going to tax you and then, boom, and it passes. I mean, that seems a little scary as a taxpayer, they can just decide...I don't like that group, let's pass a law and tax them at 90 percent.

    Here’s President Golden Calf’s answer, which was met with cheerful applause:
    THE PRESIDENT: Well, look, I understand Congress' frustrations, and they're responding to, I think, everybody's anger. But I think that the best way to handle this is to make sure that you've closed the door before the horse gets out of the barn. And what happened here was the money has already gone out and people are scrambling to try to find ways to get back at them.

    Obama thought he was dodging Leno’s question, but his message was loud and clear too: I stand by Congress on this one, and not the rights of private American citizens. And we will do whatever we please. We got the American people good and angry at these greedy capitalist *******s and now we are taking advantage of this opportunity for an unprecedented and unconstitutional power grab … for the people, of course.


    ........welcome to Mob rule......we know know how the Czar felt
  2. tyke1doe

    tyke1doe Well-Known Member

    19,136 Messages
    510 Likes Received
    With all due respect, Jay's question was too general, too simplistic and devoid of a very key fact.

    First, Congress is not taxing AIG because it doesn't like AIG. Congress is taxing AIG because it gave it billions of dollars in taxpayer money to rescue it from bankruptcy.

    Second, it was my interpretation of Obama's comments that the president doesn't think that's doable anyway. This is going to get shot down in court, if it ever gets there. I don't think you can tax people after the fact, especially if you failed to clarify the terms of the bailout initially. That is why Obama said ... "But I think that the best way to handle this is to make sure that you've closed the door before the horse gets out of the barn. And what happened here was the money has already gone out and people are scrambling to try to find ways to get back at them."

    It wasn't a dodge, IMO. Leno offered a general question, and Obama answered it specifically.
  3. Angus

    Angus Active Member

    5,064 Messages
    1 Likes Received
    Not true. And it doesn't make any difference WHY a government decides to pass punitive laws intended to oppress particular persons or a particular groups of persons instead of general laws applicable to everyone of the same description, it is unconstitutional.

    The next time it could be a law to tax at 90% fans of the Cowboys, and particularly those who post on CowboysZone. There are a lot of Redskins fans in Congress.

    Remember, Obama is a lawyer and claims to be a constitutional expert. He KNOWS it was unconstitutional, but he doesn't really care about the constitution anyway, except as a cloak if he needs it. He will destroy it altogether before he is through.


    :eek:
  4. sbark

    sbark Well-Known Member Zone Supporter

    3,530 Messages
    159 Likes Received
    from David R. Kotok co-founder Cumberland Advisors

    Members of the US House of Representatives who voted for this bill said they were reacting to the anger of their constituents. In failing to show leadership they have just undermined the entire structure designed to repair the financial system.

    Specifically the House did the following:

    1. They licensed the abrogation of contracts. Their message is simply that it makes no difference what rules we put into effect now; we can and will change them so you cannot depend on them. Global businesses take heed: Your previous judgment about the sanctity of US law has been rendered faulty by our political leadership.

    2. They passed retroactive taxation. Their message is that, whatever you plan with regard to the federal tax code, do not assume consistency and do not build any reliability about your government into your decision making. We, in Congress, can reverse our laws and confiscate your results.

    3. They made the tax punitive. A 90% tax on something is like taking all of it. The chairman (Rangel) of the House taxation committee actually admitted that by taxing the 90% he was leaving the remainder for the states. In other words, states are now encouraged to engage in the same form of behavior.

    ...........What a time for Congressmen to finally listen to their constituents.............

    ....or were they in a rush to beat the State Taxman to the biggest share of the money?????
  5. tyke1doe

    tyke1doe Well-Known Member

    19,136 Messages
    510 Likes Received
    I disagree.

    First, not everyone is asking for bailout money. That's where your comparison breaks down. The banks are asking for bailout money, i.e., taxpayer money. Congress can place stipulations on how that money is spent.

    Second, my only point here is that Congress can't do so after-the-fact. It can't give the money to AIG then say "because we don't like the way you're using it, we'll tax you heavily." That part will be overturned in court, at least that's my prediction if it comes to it.

    Don't be silly.

    First, Obama didn't say that this attempt by Congress would succeed.

    Second, let me get this straight: Obama is a constitutional expert. You're not. Yet he's trying to destroy the constitution? :huh:

    Obama asked his lawyers to see if there were anyway they could get the bonuses give-out voided, but I suspect his lawyers told him there was no way.


    Third, please, let's not talk about destroying the Constitution after eight years of Bush. ;)
  6. DIAF

    DIAF DivaLover159

    4,009 Messages
    12 Likes Received
    Well, I hate to put a damper on your OBAMA RRRAGE, but Obama has already come out and said that he DOESNT support the House's attempt of the taxing of AIG bonuses.

    http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2699172&postcount=42

    I said earlier in other threads that this crap wouldnt fly, and the obama adminstration knew it, and looks like that's what happened. Congress can rage all they want; Obama won't sign it.

    Obama IS capable of doing the right thing, even if he has that (D) next to his name.
  7. tyke1doe

    tyke1doe Well-Known Member

    19,136 Messages
    510 Likes Received
    Anyone who understands how things work in the United States of America recognized this had no chance of passing. You simply cannot retroactively apply conditions to an already established agreement.
  8. Dallas

    Dallas Old bulletproof tiger

    11,515 Messages
    1 Likes Received

    So you are saying that Obama and his folks were totally caught off guard w/ what Pilosi had planned for this tax?

    You are freaking kidding me. Do you even know the job of Obama's Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel?

    Please don't sit here and spin it like Obama and his folks had no clue what was coming out of the house. That is rediculous.


    :laugh2:

    Fact is they know and have been told that they dont have the votes in the senate for this to pass. Im sure after gaging that, to save face, they are now going w/ the above story.

    Politics. Helllooooooo
  9. tyke1doe

    tyke1doe Well-Known Member

    19,136 Messages
    510 Likes Received

    Obama was allowing Congress to vent and express its outrage at AIG and its decision to pay bonuses with tax money.

    He's a pretty smart guy. But he's also a politician.

    And if I, a layman, understand that you can't retroactively tax an established agreement, I'm sure Obama and Congress, for that matter, understands this.

    And, yes, it's a political power play. What else is new? :rolleyes:

    I simply said this wasn't going to work.

Share This Page