So let me get this straight. Obama is counting on an economic recovery to accomplish his goals but at the same time, he’s talking down the economy in order to push America towards communism.

You guys are beyond mere tools, you’re like Craftsman stainless steal tools.

WHA-WHA-WHAAAAAAAAA!

Dennis, you could always get your own blog so we wouldn’t have to visit it, and then you could choose the subjects yourself. You could call it “Red Herr-angue.”

So you agree that there are no new taxes on small business then?

It seems Mr. Obama is projecting a little more than 60 percent growth in GDP over the next 10 years. How do you suppose that works into his budget plan, Mr. Farris?

Mr. Obama is of course counting on an economic recovery.

They forget to tell why this is relevant to Mr. Obama’s budget plan. He’s counting on economic recovery to do what? Anyone? Anyone?

That’s right, Mr. Farris, an economic recovery will grow the GDP! As a good conservative, you should be able to tell us what happens to government revenues when you grow the GDP.

Why do I have to do everything?

Try looking under farm subsidies.

Just another broken promise. Sensing a pattern, I am.

Constitutional law professor and now President Obama’s Columbia and Harvard education is obviously no match for your insightfull economic opinions. I hope Paul Krugman doesn’t run in to you guys because he’ll have to humble himself in your all-knowing presence.

Your wisdom is on par with your masters, Rush Limbaugh and the Fox News cabal.

You really can’t tell when you’re being played, can you?

The writer argues against a proposition that no one, especially not Mr. Obama, is making. Absolutely no one is suggesting that the rollback of Bush era tax cuts will wipe out the budget deficit. And no one at all is suggesting that income taxes on the top 2% should cover the entire federal budget.

So what, exactly, makes this a “must read” in your opinion?

Yep. Sounds like you caught ol’ Obammy tryin’ to sneak one by us, allright allright.

So if we look at AGI instead of total earnings, AND if we assume the taxpayer in question is taking a home mortgage interest dedcution, then the value of the deduction will decrease by $70.

You’re taking a victory lap for that?

$249,001 Piece of cake!

I guess in all that time delivering flowing sermons praising the glory and salvation of Bobby Jindal, no one in the Republican Party took the time to notice he has the rhetorical skills of Emo Phillips.

made my day so far.

Dennis, we get it. You’re a-skeered of Obama. Settle down, it’ll be okay.

Obama wants to raise money via pollution caps, give to poor…

According to the Times, which cites unnamed administration officials, Obama’s budget will also propose reducing the tax benefit of itemizing deductions, a move that would mostly affect wealthy Americans

As he has said since the campaign started. Seriously, have you not been paying any attention at all?

Next thing you’re gonna tell me his preacher is a bit of a bloviator.

The 2% Solution

President Obama has laid out the most ambitious and expensive domestic agenda since LBJ, and now all he has to do is figure out how to pay for it. On Tuesday, he left the impression that we need merely end “tax breaks for the wealthiest 2% of Americans,” and he promised that households earning less than $250,000 won’t see their taxes increased by “one single dime.”

…..Mr. Obama is very good at portraying his agenda as nothing more than center-left pragmatism. But pragmatists don’t ignore the data. And the reality is that the only way to pay for Mr. Obama’s ambitions is to reach ever deeper into the pockets of the American middle class.
——————–

‘Your money, people. Give us your money. When we want your stinking opinions, we’ll let you know. Until then, just buck up and STFU, you stinking rat-bastard capitalist pigs.’