"Please don't take our money", the millionaires cried...

[kentuck]

Nothing has gotten the attention of the greedy wealthy class, not to be confused with the "simply wealthy", like the proposed tax sunsets of George W Bush's tax-cuts from 2001. Some of the more greedy bastards, such as Rush Limbaugh, are attempting to provoke their listeners into doing something dreadful. "They must be stopped!", Rush screams. After all, he has worked so hard for his money, propagandizing low-IQ ditto heads with his constant barrage of right-wing propaganda.

Barack Obama has crossed the line with his ideas about "raising taxes" on those making more than $250,000 per year. They will have none of it. They will crucify him, if necessary, to protect their ill-gotten gains. They are on bended knee, begging, "Please don't take our money...."

[leftstreet]

1. My heart bleeds

NOT

[bumblebee1]

12. Let's start up those violins, big and small. n/t

[gratuitous]

2. Oh, these people don't beg

They're more into buying people off or threatening those who can't be bought. What's such a pathetic part of all this is how little it costs for the overrich to buy off key members of Congress. That is, those who need buying and aren't in their pockets already.

[TahitiNut]

3. Anyone with an annual income of over $250K while others are homeless and jobless ...

... obviously deserves it, don't you think? After all, times are tough.

:sarcasm: <-- anyone needing to see this is an imbecile.

[DearAbby]

4. These people dont beg

they get their uninformed base to do that, to defend them so passionately...to the point of slitting their own throats. They live in fear, if you don't allow the rich to rob you, they will pack up their companies and leave the country.

[KoKo]

5. True...they are all over it as if it's their Granny's Inheritance of Millions at stake...

K&R!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

6. $250,000 a year is a lot of money. Limpbaugh is a millionaire

I hope that he been redundant

[Catshrink]

7. Under Georgie's tax cuts, they were supposed to be creating jobs.

Since they didn't create jobs, they don't get to continue their tax cuts. If had worked the first time around, well, maybe. They screwed themselves -- and everyone else.

[SoCalDem]

8. George Bush MADE the bill , "sunset"... HE planned it this way

[sam sarrha]

11. no.. he justified that travesty by say'n it was temporary, no intension at all of leav'n it that way

[kentuck]

13. We will hear a lot about making Bush's taxcuts permanent....

I have no doubt.

[SoCalDem]

14. He wanted the credit for it, but punted it to the "next" president

so that letting it "expire", could be ..would be used as ammunition in the "he raised taxes, meme"..

It;s what republicans always do.. give their rich friends a gift , early on, and then make the "next guy" pay the price for going back to a more rational tax..

republicans never seem to "get it"...
and yet dems seem unable to use it as well..

If you take a 20% paycut to KEEP your job, and then a few years later you get a 15% "raise", is it really a raise:rofl:..republican logic says " yes it is" :)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. We shall fight on the beaches, in the streets, to defend our little islands of wealth!

Or, we well send money to our lobbyists to do it for us.

[sam sarrha]

10. the ReThuglicans believe that wealth is evidence of gods favor of a man, its a sin to tax a rich man

http://doggo.tripod.com/doggchrisdomin.html
"snip...Leo Strauss was born in 1899 and died in 1973. ... He is most famous for resuscitating Machiavelli and introducing his principles as the guiding philosophy of the neo-conservative movement. ... More than any other man, Strauss breathed upon conservatism, inspiring it to rise from its atrophied condition and its natural dislike of change and to embrace an unbounded new political ideology that rides on the back of a revolutionary steed, hailing even radical change; hence the name Neo-Conservatives.

Significantly, Dominionism is a form of Social Darwinism.<48> It inherently includes the religious belief that wealth-power is a sign of God’s election. That is, out of the masses of people and the multitude of nations, wealth, in and of itself, is thought to indicate God’s approval on men and nations whereas poverty and sickness reflect God’s disapproval.

(It was not until I read this article that I realized that this is a fundamental tenet of Dominionists.

Worldly wealth and power are signs of God's favor -- to attempt to limit or decrease one's wealth and power is to disrespect God.

On the contrary, God's elect on Earth are called upon to increase their wealth and power.

It is not sufficient for a man to be a millionaire, or for a country to have sovereignty within its borders -- a man must strive to increase his wealth as much as possible, and a Dominionist government's behavior toward its neighbors must be "invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity".

Furthermore, any attempt to decrease a person's or a country's wealth and power -- to take from the rich to give to the poor, to reduce military spending and power -- is a direct attack on God.)

If “Secular Humanists are the greatest threat to Christianity the world has ever known,” as theologian Francis Schaeffer claimed, then who are the Humanists? According to Dominionists, humanists are the folks who allow or encourage licentious behavior in America. They are the undisciplined revelers.

Put all the enemies of the Dominionists together, boil them down to liquid and bake them into the one single most highly derided and contaminated individual known to man, and you will have before you an image of the quintessential “liberal” -- one of those folks who wants to give liberally to the poor and needy -- who desires the welfare and happiness of all Americans -- who insists on safety regulations for your protection and who desires the preservation of your values -- those damnable people are the folks that must be reduced to powerlessness -- or worse: extinction.

What would a “reconstructed” America look like under the Dominionists? K.L. Gentry, a Dominionist himself, suggests the following “elements of a theonomic approach to civic order,” which I strongly suggest should be compared to the Texas GOP platform of 2002, which reveals that we are not just talking about imaginary ideas but some things are already proposed on Republican agendas.<60> Dominionism’s concept of government according to Gentry is as follows:

“1. It obligates government to maintain just monetary policies ... fiat money, fractional reserve banking, and deficit spending.

“2. It provides a moral basis for elective government officials. ...

“3. It forbids undue, abusive taxation of the rich. ...

“4. It calls for the abolishing of the prison system and establishing a system of just restitution. *...

“5. A theonomic approach also forbids the release, pardoning, and paroling of murderers by requiring their execution. ...

“6. It forbids industrial pollution that destroys the value of property. ...

“7. It punishes malicious, frivolous malpractice suits. ...

“8. It forbids abortion rights. ... Abortion is not only a sin, but a crime, and, indeed, a capital crime.”<61>
. . .

* Gary North describes the ‘just restitution’ system of the bible, which happens to reinstitute slavery,
like this:


“At the other end of the curve, the poor man who steals is eventually caught and sold into bondage under a successful person. His victim receives payment; he receives training; his buyer receives a stream of labor services. If the servant is successful and buys his way out of bondage, he re-enters society as a disciplined man, and presumably a self-disciplined man. He begins to accumulate wealth.”...snip"