OK That Does IT!

I'm not a member of the Democratic party, but you know, it's time that the Dems and other liberals start giving the conservatives a little taste of their own medicine, so here goes . . .

small minded little hypocritical meanspirited lowlifes, like Bill O'Reilly last week talking about the broken promises of the Obama Administration (what broken promises? He's only been in there for two measley months!) and how Geithner should be fired . . . for what? He never said!

and now! NOW! The conservative slanderers are trying to sell the American public that the AIG bonuses were somehow Obama's fault! They said he was "asleep at the wheel" - WHAT!?

AIG got the bailout $$$ from last fall's $700 Billion - the BUSH bailout. ERGO, the AIG using that money for bonuses falls to the Bush Administration's failure to provide for any oversight . . .
oh, that's right - they never had ANY oversight! NONE!

FACT: the Bush administration did not ask the banks to give any sort of information on what they did with the bailout money.

FACT: the Bush administration for the previous eight years had relinquished any sort of oversight over the banking and investment industry.

FACT: that last fact led to the financial crisis.

FACT: the conservatives are trying to tell the American public that it was Clinton's fault.

FACT: Clinton left office with the government in a financial surplus. Ergo, the previous conservative assertion is moronic.

FACT: I heard Fox news run an article last month that tried to take the financial meltdown all the way back to the CARTER administration, stating that a bill that he signed into law making it easier for lowincome blacks to buy homes is what led to the meltdown.

FACT: investors yesterday and today rallied the stock market because the Obama administation is "finally" going to buy the banks' toxic assets - and the conservatives DARE to say, "About time!"

FACT: The first bailout of $700 Bil was INTENDED TO BUY THOSE TOXIC ASSETS! The moment that Henry Paulson got the money he said, "Nah! I think I'll just buy me some stock in the banks instead." He DIDN'T DO WHAT HE WAS SUPPOSED TO DO!! But, since Congress had been scared poopless by all the doom and gloom, they gave him this fat was of cash without asking for any sort of oversight. hm . . . that sounds familiar!

So . . . for the conservatives to ask Obama why he didn't do this sooner is so hypocritical that the only way for the American public to redeem themselves is to haul all these conservatives out into the street and beat them silly. Because let me tell you, if the American public is going to let itself be snowed by the conservatives' anti-American rhetoric, then we deserve what we get!

America, tell those conservatives that you are done with their lies, and you are done with their hatred! Tell them to stop spinning everything and tell them to stop selling misinformation! Tell them if they don't have a positive plan then they should shut up until they do!

You tell them, America!

They won't listen to me!

VG

Charity

NPR finally explained it to me this morning in a way this simple mind can understand - basically, charity breaks down like this:

I give $1.00 to charity I get 15¢ back on my taxes; Bill Gates gives $1.00 to charity he gets 35¢ back on his taxes.

President Obama's budget proposal would scale back what Bill Gates gets back to 28¢.

I knew even before I heard them say it that the argument would be, "If you take away the beneift for the rich, then they won't donate as much to charity."

Which is illogical, because they're not getting PUNISHED for donating, they're simply not getting AS MUCH BACK. They're still getting almost 30% BACK. Were I rich, I wouldn't cut back on spending, I'd simply move the money to a more lucrative investment . . . AH, so that's what they're talking about! The rich won't stop donating, they'll just put it somewhere where they can get over 1/3rd of it back. Hm, seems to me the only thing that would give that rate of return would be those shady investment deals that have already bankrupted us.

And besides, I should think that all those Republicans who purport themselves to be Christians should be stepping up to state that, as Christians, we are not supposed to expect anything back when we donate to charitable causes. In fact, that's what "charity" means - giving something without expecting anything back! If I donate just to get a tax break (and yes, I do turn in my Goodwill donation sheets each year, as well as my tithe) then it is not charity. I'm not being hypocritical, because I don't consider it charity - I consider it for what it is: donating for return.

Maybe the rich aren't hypocritical either - perhaps they only give just for the benjamins. Perhaps America has raised their incentive to 35¢ on the dollar in order to SPUR them toward donating more.

And that, my friends, is where this argument has led me to: the terribly sad conclusion that we have developed a culture that does not give in order to help, it gives only based on what we get back. That's a terribly sad commentary on us.

The only positive solution I can think of at the moment would be this: Say that the rich will scale back their donations because their tax incentives are scaled back. We keep that, but, knowing that President Obama was so skillful at organizing a grass roots movement to keep millions of small donations flowing to his campaign, perhaps now his administration can use the same tactic - get the word out, via Internet, YouTube, ads, whatever, to tell those under $250,000 about the 15¢ they get back, and increase their donations. Perhaps even make EVERYBODY's return to say, 25¢ on the dollar, and increase public awareness of the tax break (which I guarantee you most making under $100,000 don't know, bother with, or care about) in order to spur them on.

Leaving it like it is, frankly, is basically telling the majority of Americans that which we already know, that my $1.00 simply is not worth as much as Bill Gates' $1.00. A single dollar is worth different amounts - it simply depends on whose hands it's in.

And it seems to me that throughout all this mess, the rich are determined to keep it in their hands.

Please feel free to let me know if you think I'm wrong.

VG