« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Read Biden’s Lips: new taxes in 2013!

By: Moe Lane (Diary)  |  December 25th, 2010 at 03:30 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Vice President Joe Biden, bless his heart, is promising that there’s going to be a tax hike (including one on small businesses) in 2013.  This, despite the fact that that the Republicans used their 58/42 minority in the Senate and 256/179 minority in the House to somehow prevent the current ruling party from moving ahead on the promised tax hikes: no doubt the President will make a speech and shine the light of his countenance upon the 112th Congress, thus causing them to tremble and flee the righteous Hope-and-Change of the Lightworker.  Or the President will pout, which will probably have roughly the same effect.

VP Biden also promised that the administration would be hiking the death tax, speculated that the next post-DADT repeal step for the White House would be addressing the ‘so-called’ DOMA (although Biden apparently neglected to mention why he voted for it in the first place, just like a majority of his party’s Senate caucus), and walked back the White House’s walkback on Biden’s recent unilateral declaration that we’d be out of Afghanistan by 2014.  Biden then ritually slew a baby harp seal wrapped in the American flag on national television; the Vice President managed to gouge out the heart with his bare hands and offer it up to President Obama before somebody managed to switch to commercial.

Seriously: why do they let this man out without a keeper?

Moe Lane (crosspost)

Tags: , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • gillis7

    that is a hallmark of liberal thought. they have no capacity for the contemplation of fiscal responsibility. There is no such thing as a reduction in government programs, no matter how wasteful and unnecessary.Thus the productive must gather more to keep the same, and the looters will continue to buy votes from the parasitic moochers in exchange for wealth taken from those who make build and do what it really takes to make society operable.

  • jeffreywturner

    n/t

  • JadedByPolitics

    67% of the public wanted those tax rates to stay the same and they are not going to be any more giving in 2012. The American people have said quite clearly we are taxed enough already and it is time to STOP spending, period. There was no waffling in the majority. I say bring it!

  • powertothepeople

    and I wonder when the idiots we keep electing will every learn, we are growing tired of their incessant bulls**t. They can raise taxes some when they finally cut the budget in half and actually stay within their budget when it comes to spending. I do not mind paying a wee bit more to knock down the deficit, but I’ll be damned if they are going to get away with hiking my taxes again just so they can spend another $1.50 for the $0.75 they collect with $1.00 of that going to lazy people.

    Fire them all needs to be our new slogan.

  • froster

    nt

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    …I care about why Biden thinks that he can sneer at a law that he voted for with nary an explanation about why he changed his vote.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • rj1913

    1) Why in the world would there be a need or justification to “raise taxes some when they finally cut the budget in half and actually stay within their budget when it comes to spending”.
    2) What can we possibly cut to achieve this 50% reduction?

  • johnt

    Whatever happened to the “a heartbeat away from the Presidency’ line?
    Standard for just about every Republican VP or candidate.

  • gekster

    he doen’t have a heart.

  • gamechange11two

    Last dem to campaign on tax increases: Walter “Fritz” Mondale

    http://electoralmap.net/1984.php

    One more issue for republicans in 2012, and clearly not a “big tent” MOR issue. In fact, when it comes to big tents, Reagan took the record. He was shy of a fifty state electoral sweep by a mere 3800 votes (in Minnesota, of course). No pastels there.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    1. Department of Education.
    2. Department of Agriculture.
    3. Department of Commerce.
    4. Department of Housing & Urban Development.
    5. Department of Veteran’s Affairs (fold some functions back into Defense)

    For a comprehensive list from a guy a whole lot smarter than both of us put together see here…

  • froster

    “Nary an explanation”

    Forgive me…but isn’t his sleazy rationalization his explanation for why he changed his position? It’s like the countless politicians who change their views over time, for whatever reason.

  • d_lamar

    The true test of the next GOP controlled congress will be whether they have the will to eliminate, not cut, these programs or departments. A good start would be Obamacare and NPR. From there, the Dept. of Education would be a good target.

  • rj1913

    The 2011 budget requests for the DOE is $47.6 billion, DOA $25.7 b, DOC $9.1 b (down 34% from 2010), DHUD $43.5 b (down 2%), and the DVA is $125 b, up from $112 b in 2010.

    If you tally those, you’ll find they come up short in slicing the 2011 budget in half. Also, those are some pretty controversial issues that I don’t see happening. It’s a given that Dems would never go for it. Would Mitch McConnell of KY or others from farming states support the elimination of The Department of Agriculture? Would John McCain support getting rid of The Department of Veterans Affairs? Those eliminations are some pretty tall orders. I understand that there are folks a lot smarter than me and will concede that I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer but I’ve noticed that messing with farmers, teachers, and veterans can be a politically slippery slope.

  • itrytobenice

    In your first post, you implied that there weren’t sufficient areas that could be cut without raising taxes. In your second post, you said that our side wouldn’t have sufficient courage to do so.

    You were right the second time; they don’t have sufficient courage to sleep in the dark, but it could absolutely be done if our ruling class had not determined that they are our keepers.

  • itrytobenice

    Like rejecting Reagan in favor of Mondale wasn’t embarrassing enough, you had to elect Sen. Smalley just in case there was anyone left who wasn’t laughing at you.

  • d_lamar

    We had teachers, veterans, and farmers before the Depts of Education, Veteran Affairs, and Agriculture were created.

    The GOP needs to educate the population that the world is not going to end if a federal program is eliminated. In fact, those interests will be much better off if the stupid regulations and incentives to be non-productive are removed and they can perform their jobs without big-brother looking over their shoulder.

    It would be very easy to demonstrate that our public school system was much more efficient before the Feds got involved. Just look at the tests scores, and the bloated bureaurocracy. Granted, some would lose their jobs, but those people, when they perform their job, actually do more harm than good.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    :holding up hand: Yes, you are doing so, and I am not interested in pretending that you are not.

    Moving along, Vice President Biden may not skate on this: he will need to explicitly explain how and why it is that he is attacking the legitimacy of a law that he himself voted for. In full detail. Or he can admit that he’s a pandering coward. That works for me, too.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    Then who typed…

    2) What can we possibly cut to achieve this 50% reduction?

    My list was for starters. We will likely need some reductions in DoD as well.

    And, I’ll add Department of Health and Human Services to my previous list.

    Of course it will “be difficult”. What’s your point?

    With respect to the DoVA, there are legitimate programs there that should be continued, just continued under the management of the Pentagon. Lose the upper level administrative staff.

    With respect to teachers, just watch what happens at the state level in the next two years. And you’ll likely find that farmers aren’t the protected class they used to be. Veterans are and should be.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    Although he likely won’t do a whole lot of damage give a Republican Senate and House and the probability that he’ll spend a good chunk of his term in rehab.

  • Common_Cents

    She is Minnesota nice, rubber stamping the dem agenda.

  • acat

    This just gives bureaucrats something to do while they avoid getting real jobs…

    The DoVA duplicates a lot of effort of the DoD and various State programs.
    The DeptEd duplicates the same structure in each State, as well as each local school district.

    All of them can be eliminated at the Federal level, with block grants to the appropriate agencies (i.e. DoD, State school boards) to distribute. There’s no reason to have all these extra busybodies adding no value.

    Mew

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    Eliminate the DoE and 100% of the related funding. Absolutely not one federal dollar to fund what is a local responsibility.

    And, I would phase out subsidized student loans while we’re at it.

  • acat

    Absolutely agree re. student loans – sell the whole portfolio to Leahman Bros and let them try to figure it out.

    Too many local school districts are dependent on the Fed teat – doing a block grant to the States while dismantling the DoEd over 2 years would help keep teachers in classrooms while the administration get used to having less ablative meat* covering their backsides.

    Mew

    * ablative meat – analogy for hiding in a crowd, burying oneself in a bureaucracy where there’s always another layer of functionaries who can take the blame….

  • renny

    Biden will be retired in 2013.

  • gamechange11two
  • victrola

    If the current tax rates expire on Dec. 31st 2012, I see Obama being able to punt until the election is over, and just blame the “obstructionist Republicans” for not “giving” him the right deal.

    I was against the tax deal because my fear was Obama would be able to put this off until after the election. If Obama get reelected, taxes will go up. If he’s defeated, he almost certainly won’t extend the tax cuts, so they’ll also go up.

    Republicans had Obama cornered, I’m mystified why they cut this deal with him. If Obama wins reelection, I agree with Krauthammer that you’ll be able to trace it back to this capitulation by Republicans.

  • davec43

    I hate to admit it being a Republican myself but we don’t have any idea of fiscal responsibility as well. The only time the budgets ever been balanced was under Clinton. That was with higher tax rates and a reduction of our military size. I agree that redunancy with all these departments should be eliminated but I’m not sure if I buy the argument that cutting income taxes creates jobs or spurts growth. If theirs money to be made in the private sector somebodies goingbto take the risk.
    [URL=http://img28.imageshack.us/i/defcon.gif/][IMG]http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/74/defcon.gif[/IMG][/URL]

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Bunny

  • powertothepeople

    but your argument topped with a poor understanding of the English language makes me wonder if you are a person who lives their life off the backs of other hard working citizens through entitlements and is deathly afraid that if Republicans do what needs to be done, you may have to actually go out and get a job. I really can not see where anyone who works to make a living would be OK with increased income tax especially someone who obviously is not making a ton of money such as yourself.

  • http://vladenblog.tumblr.com Vladimir
  • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

    I Hate You, But You Hate Yourself Too
    I hate to honest, but I’d hate to be you!

    Any time an individual’s post is best answered by Jimmy Pop of The Bloodhound Gang, they have problems. Please, seek remediation and trying that whole comment-posting thing from the actual perspective of an informed human being. Thanks, and Hippy Gnu Year!

  • Scope

    “If theirs money to be made in the private sector somebodies goingbto take the risk.”

    Drug dealing can be lucrative, risky and is tax exempt. All it takes is big ba!!s, and no brains.

  • rj1913

    But that’s a petty squabble.

    In 2004, KY Gov Ernie Fletcher attempted to get the budget under control with a “cut” of state employee benefits. It would have brought the monthly premium up to $521 a month with an $800 deductible and $4K out of pocket cap. It went over like crap in a punch bowl and drew mass protests. It didn’t happen. I wonder how well an elimination of benefits would fly.

    Being difficult mbecker, possibly impossible, as well as politically suicidal, is my point. When I look at your list of 5, that Serenity Prayer runs through my mind as does that adage about choosing ones battles. Ultimately, constituents in mass volumes will have their say in areas that they want from the government or expect from their tax dollars. We saw this with the social security privatization issue. We saw a hard public backlash in 1995 when there was an effort to eliminate the Department of Education with several polls showing a strong 80% against the elimination.

    I’m not saying I agree or disagree with each or any of your initiatives. I am saying that “eliminating” them will be a brutal fight that will only scrape a few coins free from the budget.

  • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

    with high correlation to calling what’s ours theirs.

  • powertothepeople

    and now to use the internet shorthand phrase, lol.

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    In order to get the tough cuts you have to show the public that you are serious by first cutting the easy stuff, the things that are not popular to begin with, but help politicians get reelected or make money,

    Such as Ag subsidies and other welfare for the rich. In addition, much could be pared from the military budget without making us weaker. We have troops in nearly 100 nations, most of which do not need our protection.

    After you do that then that is where the leadership comes in. You are correct to say that out right elimination will be hard to do, but short of that you can first institute a small across the board cut of a few percentage points. That can be sold easily to the public who understand that their own budgets and those of the private sector has had to cut back, government can surely do the same.

    Then you freeze increases, freeze hiring, and change the way COLA is figured (it overstates inflation.)

    Then, after all of that, you might go after some other cuts.

    Of course it will require a level of commitment from politicians I have not seen in the past, but maybe the specter of what is happening in Greece, Ireland, and California is enough to scare them into action.

  • audax
  • powertothepeople

    I am glad you were able to find one misspelling so that you could make yourself feel better. And yes one wrong spelling must equate to a lack of an English Language understanding.

    Kudos to you, but thanks for the corrected version. Next time it will be spelled correctly.

    Tissues………….?

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    your spelling if you didn’t call them names all of the time.

  • audax

    Went back and read your Diary’s. Love your photos too. powetothepeople and mbecker seem like insulting classless…..oops better stop the name calling…LOL. Dropped them from my future reading list if their arguments consist of calling names even though they try to disguise them with words like “rational” and “reasonable”. Doubt they would get any insights from my Diary’s either.

    One of my best friends and the exec-VP at my company in Houston is also a Cajun, BS, MS and PhD in Chemistry from LSU and he taught me the difference between a coon @$$ and a horses @$$….the Sabine River…LOL

  • powertothepeople

    so be it and more power to them.

    Stalking again I see, hope you enjoy the lengthy trail…….

  • powertothepeople

    aren’t you just a clever tart. I feel I need to bring you tissues for some reason.

    If a side slang such as dimwit sets you off this bad, I would suggest getting a life and seeking some professional help for your insecurities.

    And sorry you dropped me and MBecker from your reading list, that made us so so so sad…..

  • davec43

    You attacked my grammar and hinted I was on welfare. You didn’t address that after cutting redundant programs we may need to raise taxes and that income taxes may not be tied to job growth. Good job at side stepping my comment.

  • powertothepeople

    you would understand it was a stupid comment and move on acting as if someone else stole your account and made the comment.

    I mean it is not that hard to understand that raising taxes is not the long term answer to cutting our deficit since it is the excessive spending that is the problem. I also assumed you would easily understand that when you take people money away from them, they in turn have less to invest. Less to invest in their own business, other business ventures, stocks, etc which causes economic growth the slow or even stop. And when people are not investing in business, business does not have the revenue to invest in new technology, research, expansion, etc all which cost jobs and job creation.

    Now slink away before all your pride is gone. I would hate for the site moderator to bring back out the bunny or all the other very intelligent people on here to again call you a moby, fool, idiot, or other fitting names. Slink away, move to another subject, and in time, people will forget the nonsense you posted here.

  • powertothepeople

    I am getting lazy in the proofing department:

    you would understand it was a stupid comment and move on acting as if someone else stole your account and made the comment.

    I mean it is not that hard to understand that raising taxes is not the long term answer to cutting our deficit since it is the excessive spending that is the problem. I also assumed you would easily understand that when you take(people’s) money away from them, they in turn have less to invest. Less to invest in their own business, other business ventures, stocks, etc which causes economic growth (to) slow or even stop. And when people are not investing in business, business does not have the revenue to invest in new technology, research, expansion, etc all which cost jobs and job creation.

    Now slink away before all your pride is gone. I would hate for the site moderator to bring back out the bunny or all the other very intelligent people on here to again call you a moby, fool, idiot, or other fitting names. Slink away, move to another subject, and in time, people will forget the nonsense you posted here.

  • davec43

    Then why during the high tax rates (and defense cuts) of the Clinton admin did we have a budget surplus and booming economy? Germany has high tax rates awesome social benefits as well as a decent economy. Reagan tax cuts saved us from insane inflation but added massive debt to the deficit. With all ideology aside if high income taxes are bad why are they doing so well and were doing comparatively horrible with historically low income tax rates? I honestly don’t think income taxes should be the focus.

  • powertothepeople

    much of what he had, he inherited. It takes years for major decisions made by an administration to come to fruition, not just days or months. An example will be this health care fiasco from Obama. Not only did he push off most of the burden past when he may be president (2016) the actual burden of it will not show up for even more years past that.

    While you could argue that with tax cuts must come spending cuts, that was not your main question. You could not believe that allowing people to keep their own money stimulated the economy and caused job growth. If you can not understand how people keeping their money helps stimulate the economy and allows them to invest in business which in turn causes job growth, not sure I can help you out of the fantasy land you dwell in.

  • davec43

    I agree that some policies take years to fully show their benefits or the damage they’ll create. One thing the leftirs like to bounce around is that the lower and middle class are the economy because they spend their money religiously. While the rich primarily invest their income. I understand investments and savings still circulate. I’m not a big fan of redistributing wealth by any means just curious to what your opinion is specially when they can afford the high taxes.

  • ohiohistorian

    (also posted to Moe Lane’s blog site)
    Moe,
    The explanation is simple. DOMA was passed because otherwise Congress was ready to put forward a Constitutional amendment to recognize marriage as between one man and one woman. Clinton and the Dems agreed to the law to subvert the Constitutional amendment. Biden was a willing tool to that subversion. He now thinks that he can win on repealing or executive ordering to death this law, which is much easier than to repeal an amendment to the Constitution.

  • mspector

    I recently went through a personal bankruptcy, and part of the process under existing law requires you to take a credit counseling course. It is basic, but not a waste of time.

    And I couldn’t help but think that this would be a good idea for our President and the whole of Congress. Convene a joint session, with everyone mandated to be present, and have them sit through a two-hour video on managing finances. Complete with quiz at the end.

    Then they might learn that there are two schools of thought when it comes to money management: (a) don’t spend money you don’t have, or (b) don’t have money you don’t spend. Most doctors agree the first is preferable.

  • jwfan

    To paraphrase the great Will Rogers – “I never met a spending program I didn’t like”– just so I can take it back to my state for their slice of the $$ pie. By a strange twist of fate — it helps me keep me re-elected…

  • jwfan

    victrola has a good point. If the Republicans had to compromise like they did, why not set the new Sunset on the deal as of Sept.1, 2012, call it a continuing resolution or whatever…

  • williamjameson

    Nothing like threatening the people with new taxes. Let them talk of stealing for entitlements, they will lose the election by a wider margin. They have no intention of reducing spending, Obama could have cut billions by now and pushed legislation to cut mandated programs.

    Idiot liberals in DC gamble on ignorant voters and those with short memories. Obama will play hell trying to hoodwink voters in 2012 so 2013 is just a greedy liberal dream. It will not work this time around, the people do not trust this man.

    If you participate on political forums, continue to remind members that Dems obstructed banking reform in 2002 and 2005 whining that cutting sub prime loans will kill the housing market. Sub prime is one mess Dems should be held accountable for, the people will not forget dems were responsible too. Dems said its racist to deny loans to minorities………now minorities can’t get a loan as easily because both parties couldn’t come together to fix the problem sub prime problem. Obama and dems did not fix the sub prime problem because there is a new CRA and the public can still buy a CONDO with FHA loans and there are other issues. FHA was only intended for the poor and lower middle class.

  • jwfan

    And of course Bill did all this magnificent work in DC totally on his own ,with the help of Hillary and the Drive-By-Media. The Republican House and Senate majority were on a long vacation from DC for the last 6 Clinton years.

    Political revisionists such as you and yours would have fit right in with the good ol’ Hitler-Stalin days of old. Ah, those were the days my friend, THEY thought they never would end… And the Band plays on…

  • davec43

    Political revisonist? Where did this nonsense notion that Clinton did all the work by himself come from in my post?

  • powertothepeople

    and quite frankly I have no interest in playing this lefty game with you.
    But just for hells sake, I will once again try to answer your nonsense.

    I can pretty much guarantee I make more than you do. I can also pretty much guarantee you make more than a segment of this country, that is if you work. Are you willing to pay more for some bum who makes less than you or sits on their ass making kids? If not, why do you find it appropriate to take more money from those who have studied hard, invested smartly, and worked their way up to the top?

    The leftist are not the only ones who know the middle class and lower class spend a vast majority of their income, it is a known fact. And it is also a known fact that most of the rich and upper middle class invest. And it is also a fact that when you tax any of the groups, spending goes down as well as investing. Once these go down, the economy suffers, business suffers, and jobs are lost.

    But to answer your question, it is nothing more than theft to steal from the rich to pay for bums even if you call it taxes or excuse it by saying they can afford it. But the thing you lefties conveniently leave out, is that taxes jump way up for anyone making 250,000 or more and they are def not rich by any stretch of the imagination. It is a socialist/communist view when you take from those with more to pay for those with less. It is nothing more than legalized theft and is absurd. I did not go to school, work hard, take a chance by starting my own company just to have bums sitting on their asses reaping the benefits of my hard work. And I could care less who thinks I could or can afford to pay more, I should not pay any more than my fair share which is the same % you pay. In the end it comes out to more dollars, but should not be a higher %.

    My hard work, education, and my chance taking is the reason people have jobs at my place and when the government takes more of the companies money and my money, it is my employees who take the hit and lose their jobs. I have to keep the company afloat, so labor has to be cut. It is that easy to understand and if you can not grasp that, not sure I can help you out any nor should I waste time going back and forth with you.

  • Pingback: Homepage

  • Pingback: sikhbook.com/

  • Pingback: Web Hosting Provider

  • Pingback: hip hop