From HuffPo:

Rachel Maddow: Romney Has ‘Issues Of Patriotism’ Due To Offshore Accounts

Now pay attention carefully. Maddow went after John Mica about Mitt Romney’s offshore accounts:

Rachel Maddow grilled Florida Congressman John Mica about whether Mitt Romney’s personal finances and work at Bain Capital were “unpatriotic” on Tuesday night.

and this one especially

Before the polls closed in the Florida primary, Maddow put Romney supporter Mica in the hot seat about another controversial aspect of Romney’s finances: his offshore accounts. She asked if he thought that the candidate’s holdings in “notorious tax havens” raised “issues of patriotism.”

Now let’s note that Maddow is specific- having offshore accounts is “unpatriotic.” It’s in the title.

OK, now who else has had offshore accounts?

1. John Kerry

Democrats were pushing for tax reform in 1984, and Lieutenant Governor John F. Kerry, candidate for US Senate, had some ideas.

“You need a major overhaul of the tax structure,” Kerry told a panel of reporters on a May 6 broadcast of WBZ-TV (Channel 4). “You need to close crazy loopholes that are non-productive.”

Though he did not share it at the time, Kerry had recently learned a costly lesson about loopholes in the tax code.

Weeks before that interview, Kerry, by his own account now, had jettisoned an investment of between $25,000 and $30,000 in an exotic tax shelter after his accountant questioned its legitimacy. In an interview with the Globe, Kerry acknowledged that fear of political embarrassment was a factor in his decision to swallow the loss.

Until now, Kerry has never disclosed details of this tax shelter, which utilized offshore companies registered in the Cayman Islands and a “straddle” scheme of forward contracts to buy and sell commodities, apparently worth up to $238,527.

2. Apple Computer

Apple (AAPL) has accumulated a whopping $54 billion of its $82 billion offshore. More startling, the company’s foreign coffers are increasing three times faster than its U.S. cash, and the trend is accelerating rather than plateauing. While nowhere near starving for capital, Apple’s growth potential is more constrained here than offshore simply because capital production is more efficient overseas. Apple’s wiser using pre-U.S. tax foreign money to make an investment than using its American cash. For example, it’s far easier for Apple to swallow ARM Holdings (ARMH) than Broadcom (BRCM) although both have similar market capitalizations.

3. Microsoft

Microsoft (MSFT) is even more lopsided in its cash position: $51 billion of its $57 billion in cash resides frustratingly offshore. In its 10K, the company explains its options to complete significant acquisitions or share repurchases: costly tax repatriations, debt or equity offerings. So far, Microsoft has not touched its foreign cash, opting to borrow $11 billion to fund its discretionary needs. The $51 billion sits tantalizing out of reach without incurring additional taxes. Microsoft may find itself struggling to increase its dividend without either borrowing money or accessing this offshore capital.

4. Cisco

Reportedly, when President Obama asked John Chambers how to jump start the economy, Cisco’s CEO suggested a tax repatriation holiday on overseas profits.

Indeed, for Cisco (CSCO), overseas cash is a big deal. Cisco holds a greater share of its money overseas than either Apple or Microsoft: $40.6 billion of its $44.6 billion cash.

Cisco has been quickly accumulating foreign capital: Since 2005, off-shore cash has risen almost four fold. Cisco’s approach to its foreign largesse: Hands off. The company meets its financial needs by borrowing money. In 2005, Cisco had no debt. Since, debt has increased to $16 billion. Cisco is a multibillionaire abroad, but here at home, it’s hungry for capital.

According to Maddow, John Kerry and these corporations are “unpatriotic.”

Not content to limit how big a fool she is, Maddow goes on to pound Romney for his taxes

Romney’s career and wealth, of course, have both been hot button issues in the campaign. The candidate released his 2010 tax return after much criticism about his reluctance to do so. The return revealed that he earned $21.7 million in 2010, and paid a lower tax rate than someone who earns $50,000 a year.

John Kerry paid a lower rate then Romney the year he ran for President.

What’s ever funnier is watching the creatures over at HuffPo twisting themselves in knots trying to assert that it’s different when these things are done by someone other than a Republican.

logic63

“we are talking about romney here. Kerry is old news and that was up to you to yell if you were opposed to him. Did you?”

htowncarrie

“Well, John Kerry didn’t become president and neither should Mitt.

LiberalDemIda

“Uh…is John Kerry running for president? No? Go play outside.”

If it wasn’t wrong for Kerry, it is not wrong for Romney either.

This really is hysterical. Once again it proves my axiom that liberals have zero long term memory. And they’re not very much for principle either.

Evidence that this country is on its way to the trash bin of history ala Rome:

In the first of what will be a closely watched selection process for a powerful new deficit panel, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced he will appoint Democratic Sens. Patty Murray (Wash.), Max Baucus (Mont.) and John Kerry (Mass.) as his three choices for a super committee charged with finding more than $1 trillion in spending cuts by the end of this year.

Murray will serve as co-chair of the 12-member panel. Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) will select her co-chair and two other panelists, as required by the next debt limit agreement signed into law by President Barack Obama last week. Minority Leaders Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell will each select three additional members.

John friggin Kerry!

That same man who told the media to stop covering the Tea Party and then wrongly placed the blame for the debt ceiling crisis at the feet of that same movement.

And Murray? Even NPR calls this right:

By choosing Murray, who chairs the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee that will be trying to defend the 23 Senate seats currently held by Democrats, Reid ensures that whatever recommendation his people agree to will be deeply informed by the Democrats’ desire to hold onto their slim majority.

Baucus is the token centrist thrown in by Reid:

He comes from a red state, he’s an institution in the Senate, and he’s not up for reelection until 2014. He’s as insulated from a tough vote as one can be. He’s also, as noted in the quote, chairman of the Finance Committee, so if he blessed a deal, that would give it added credibility in the Senate. And he’s been reasonably good on taxes, so he might side with Republicans on tax reform. The bad news? He duly wet himself over Paul Ryan’s budget and he’s earned some fans at AARP for supporting “doctor fix,” which contributes mightily to Medicare continuously running over budget. He’s probably not signing off on any serious entitlement reform, in other words, although if the GOP can come up with some revenues via tax reform, that might encourage him to join them in a modest first step.

But he won’t accomplish anything because the Murray pick has ensured this committee will be nothing but politics 24-7, further ensuring that nothing will get done. But wait! Then those supposed spending cut triggers should kick in….right?

Wrong:

…As part of the debt-ceiling law President Barack Obama signed on Aug. 2, the trigger will be activated if the panel of 12 lawmakers can’t agree on at least $1.2 trillion in savings by Nov. 23 or if Congress rejects a plan they propose. All five ex- CBO chiefs said there are ways for Congress to circumvent the trigger, which wouldn’t go into effect until 2013.

“Even if it fires, the question is ‘how many of the bullets actually hit your body,’” said Peter Orszag, a onetime director of the nonpartisan CBO, which reviews congressional legislation and budgets.

…While the cuts are supposed to be automatic, Congress can delay or override them if they prove too painful — defense spending would be reduced by 9.1 percent over a decade while non-defense programs would be cut 7.9 percent. That’s what lawmakers did with the 1985 Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Balanced Budget Act, the template for the trigger.

The trigger mechanism also won’t include the entitlement-benefit cuts that rankle Democrats or call for tax increases reviled by Republicans, both of which may be necessary to pose a credible threat of mutual pain on the two parties that would motivate the super committee to reach a compromise.

…The former budget officials say there are various options for lessening the trigger’s impact, particularly since there would be a year-long period before it kicks in. “If they want to finesse it, it’s not hard,” said Rivlin.

The automatic cuts would be spread equally over the remaining nine-year window of the legislation, based on a formula drawn up by the White House Office of Management and Budget. Congress and its committees would then have to hit those spending targets through the annual appropriations process, which allocates federal dollars to specific programs.

Congress could delay some of the most politically unpopular cuts, such as reductions in reimbursement rates to health-care providers under Medicare, until the final years of the law, the ex-budget directors said.

…Lawmakers could also designate new federal spending as “emergency” funding that falls outside the caps. While the new law narrowly defines such spending, it’s the same language from previous budget-restraint agreements, said Orszag, who directed CBO from 2007 to 2009, and is now a vice chairman of Citigroup Inc. (C) and a contributor to Bloomberg View.

“It was just ignored,” he said. “You can always get Orwellian and call anything an unanticipated event.”

Marron, who now heads the Urban Institute’s Tax Policy Center in Washington, cited spending on the 2000 Census, which Congress designated as an emergency. “You have this classic arms race issue, and people become more and more creative about identifying things as emergencies,” he said.

Finally, lawmakers have no way of preventing future Congresses from overturning the cutbacks, which was the case with the 1985 agreement. In the five years the Gramm Rudman law was in effect, the triggers were activated twice — one of which was reduced by Congress and the other overridden by a subsequent budget agreement.

And we’re back to square one and the continuing demise of this once great Republic.

Captain America Dreams Of Power

Senator John Kerry, “Captain America” Democrat from MA, has validated the Liberal Media’s one sided coverage of political debate. On MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Friday Kerry insisted that the media has a moral obligation not to give equal time or credence to TEA Party philosophy.

With a blatant call for tyranny, Captain America, AKA John Kerry seems oblivious of his call for suspension of fundamental liberties.

SEN. JOHN KERRY: “And I have to tell you, I say this to you politely. The media in America has a bigger responsibility than it’s exercising today. The media has got to begin to not give equal time or equal balance to an absolutely absurd notion just because somebody asserts it or simply because somebody says something which everybody knows is not factual.”

“It doesn’t deserve the same credit as a legitimate idea about what you do. And the problem is everything is put into this tit-for-tat equal battle and America is losing any sense of what’s real, of who’s accountable, of who is not accountable, of who’s real, who isn’t, who’s serious, who isn’t?”

After the TEa Party representatives have been called terrorists and hostage takers, many americans are left wondering what Democrat leadership has in store for the TEA party through its propaganda outlets.

Sadly, it is probably not so much of a coordinated movement, but merely an act of desperation and fear by politicians who worry that they may have a short lease of their careers.

The Honesty of Yesterday

The outfitter told me I’d be taking out an older hunter, to be careful not to over do the hunting and to keep a close watch over him in case he needed to come in early. Whenever there was an unusual hunter, I was chosen to be his or her guide. I didn’t mind, it was a compliment actually; however, rather than thinking of myself as special, I figured I was more likely to remember and follow instructions than the other guides.

There were a bunch of young hunters in their thirties and forties, they were dressed in the latest from the big outdoor shops and they were excited about going on the hunt. They already had several days worth of whiskers, to have “the look” out in the mountains. Personally, the whiskers drive me nuts, but if whiskers made their hunt more enjoyable, then grow some damn whiskers.

I saw an older guy with white hair standing all alone. He wasn’t talking about killing Grizzlies and Elk, like the other hunters, he was just waiting silently for me, standing next to his gear. He was thin enough that he might need to run around in the shower to get wet, but he had that hardened look of a man who could take his share and give you back more than you wanted. “Are you Carl?” He shook his head yes. “I’m Skook, I’ll get us some horses, do you need a special kind of horse?”

He looked me directly in the eye, with a cold blue eyed stare and said, “Young with a bit of life and not too wide in the back. Should be a sure footed mare that can move fast and smooth with rythym, without being scared of every little thing.”

Whoa now, that was a different request; I started to ask him if he was referring to a woman or a horse, but you can’t count on everyone appreciating my sense of humor. Most men who know horses ride geldings, horses are much simpler without the huevos. There are a few mare men born every so often and they are a bit different from your average road apple; I knew all about this type of guy, both me and Barb Wire Johnny are Mare men. You see mares are the natural whole animal. Some are aggressive and mean, most are super aware of their surroundings and refuse to trifle with lesser human beings who lack the measure of horsemanship they require. Carl seemed to have the knowledge and skill of a mare man and I was going to give him what he asked for, if it didn’t work out, I’d put him on a different horse, but I figured he could handle the filly I had picked out. He’d be plowing a furrow with his nose if he was overstating his abilities.

There was a four year old paint filly in the corral; I’d ridden her, she handled like an expensive sports car (not that I had ever driven one), but she had way too much gas for most riders.

She was worried and confused with the guides catching other horses and shooing her away when she came near. I threw a loop around her neck. She stopped and turned to look at the man (me) who had just caught her. I was in no hurry, I looked her in the eye for a few seconds and then looked at the ground for another 30 seconds. She became curious and stretched her nose out towards me to get a sniff from thirty feet away. She took a couple of tentative steps toward me. Without looking at her, I walked toward her and stopped about six feet away. She really had her curiosity aroused by now. I looked at the guys, as they asked me what the Hell I was doing. I replied with a grin and said my hunter wanted a horse with a bit of spirit, they looked at me like I was nuts. Nothing new about that, in their world anyone who communicated with a horse like me and Barbwire Johnny was a few points off center in the head. That’s okay, horses for them were a struggle, for me and Johnnie it was often effortless or made to look that way.

I put a leather halter on the filly with the standard six foot lead shank. I stood directly in from of her about a foot away and looked her in the eye. I stepped into her and she stepped back; we were well on our way. I kept the lead rope draped over my finger like a slack rein and began to exaggerate the movement of my body to get her to respond. Two steps forward two steps back, she was moving with me and responding well. Her eyes were now trained on me and watching my every move. I walked toward her near (Left) side ribs just behind the shoulder she turned on the forehand and stepped over behind with the left hind foot crossing over in front of the right hind foot. Oh my, she moved like a ballerina naturally. I swapped sides and had her doing the same thing from the offside. Turning on the hind quarters is much easier and in twenty minutes she was loosened up and ready to be ridden. I led her through the corral with the lead shank draped over my index finger to show off to the guys. They stopped and watched me in silence. I halted in the middle of the corral and her pirouette on the hind quarters by following the lead of my finger with the slack lead shank.

We walked out of the corral and I asked Carl if he wanted me to saddle her, “Hell no, I’m not that old yet”, he replied. He put the saddle on without a pad to make sure it would fit well and then pulled it off and put a horse hair pad over a sheep skin. The technology for the best saddle pad ever made was thousands of years old I’d guess. You make it by saving the manes and tails of dead horses and weaving them into an un-symetrical pattern while they are wet. It takes the hair from five or six horses , but it is durable. has a great cushion, and provides ventilation to the back. They last for years. Carl handled the hair pad and the sheepskin without a second glance and I knew he was a horseman from the old traditions. I can just imagine the old Celtic horse tribes traveling Westward across Europe before the age of Julius Cesar used the same saddle pads.

I trusted him even more after watching him saddle her. I asked him if he used a hackamore, he turned to and said, “I’ll ride her with a postage stamp and bailing twine if I have to.” I assumed that was an affirmative. I told him to ride around a few minutes while I loaded the pack horses and another saddle horse for me. He was already reining the horse and turning her gently both ways.

I had a feeling this was going to be a good hunt.

He and the mare liked each other and he seemed to be more interested in the mare than hunting. We rode into the remote camp about 2 pm and Carl helped me picket the horses and set up the wall tent. We had a bite to eat, beans, bacon, and potatoes with some ice cold tea. A nice Canadian meal. We would get in an hour’s hunt at one of the moose licks before dark.

Carl told me that this was probably his last hunt and he mainly wanted a nice young bull for the freezer. He didn’t want a baloney bull with a huge rack, a two year old or three year old would be just right. He had paid for a full supply of game tags, so we were bound to get something.

We sat in a tree stand I had built out of plywood about twenty feet up, between two poplar trees on a hill overlooking one of my favorite moose licks and our dark hairy friends started coming in, a few minutes later. A few of them were in the rut and they were ready to do a little fighting and bragging. Normally, I’d call like a young bull challenging everyone to a fight. The older bulls would often become enraged at this type of upstart trying to steal cows. The younger bulls were using the short higher pitched grunts and pushing against each other in a non-dangerous way to test their steel.

Eventually, an older bull stampeded into the lick. He was in a rage and was ready to commit mayhem. He charged a three year old so hard, the young moose was swept off his feet and piled up in the mud. The other young moose decided the sport was getting too rough and they scattered noiselessly into the trees. The show was pretty much over, it was too dark to see and the old bull had scared off all the young bulls.

Back at camp, Carl told me that tonight’s hunt or show was more fun than he could have hoped for. You see, not every hunter needs to kill an animal to have a good hunt; some just want a good experience with the wildlife and with nature.

Carl told me of working on ranches in Texas and Oklahoma before the First World War and of volunteering for the war.

After serving in the trenches, he no longer wanted the outdoor life of a cowboy. He bought a truck and began to deliver supplies to the oil rigs. Eventually, he had a fleet of trucks and served a huge piece of the oil patch and made millions. Now his grandchildren were jockeying for position to inherit his wealth and he wasn’t quite ready to give it up.

He told me he can feel the rage of the older bulls when the younger ones challenge them rather than paying respect. The young ones didn’t look so big and mighty when they were piled up in the mud, bruised and bleeding, and looking for a quick exit.

He didn’t talk about the war and the trenches, but I recognized the way he looked you in the eye when he spoke and that inability to show fear or indecision; as if he were to say, what do I have to be afraid of, I have already been in Hell. These intense guys who fear nothing intimidate a lot of people with their forthright and direct way of communicating, not that they are trying to scare people, it is just their way. I grew up around these men, so there direct way is natural for me; as a matter of fact, I prefer this look you in the eye honesty to the shifty never tell the truth darting looks of the average politician.

I began to realize what a treasure Carl represented. He had been one of the last of the cowboys who rode from job to job and stuck to an unwritten code of honesty and integrity.

War changes people. I have known several outdoorsmen who finished up their military careers saying they would never again go camping or hunting. Carl was one of those guys. He chose a good business and was successful and now he enjoyed living the life he left, as a vacation. One of the reasons he was successful was his direct and honest approach. Carl was used to winning, you could see that. Compromising a situation or giving up wasn’t a part of his vocabulary.

A couple of days later, Carl shot a nice two year bull, it was a nice shot from about eighty yards. He said if it was alright with me, he would just watch my handiwork as I field dressed the moose and loaded it on three pack horses. I laughed and said of course. A two year old isn’t that big and I can get it loaded fairly quick; besides, it was my job.

He said he had never packed horses and it was a pleasure to watch a man handle the ropes and lace on the quarters of moose on the pack horses.

We made it back to the base camp and he told me it was his last hunt and that the moose would last him the rest of his life. He thanked me, wished me well, and walked out of my life. Now this is a fairly uneventful hunting story except for the honesty that Carl portrayed. The direct and honest approach is almost never expected from our politicians; actually, we tend to like the ones who can lie the most convincingly. Carl and those like him are long gone- sadly it is for the best, for they would be terribly disappointed with the lack of honesty and integrity we tolerate from our politicians and from those in public life.

In a more modern world, we have President Obama telling us that increased drilling would have a marginal effect on the price of oil, but now that he is facing reelection, he releases a portion of our Strategic Petroleum Reserve to decrease the price of oil. This is a case of getting caught up in your own lies and compromising our Strategic Petroleum Reserves for his personal political advantage.

Yet these are the same high prices that he promised during his campaign, the difference is that he intended for the price increases to be tax increases and not real price increases, thus the high fuel prices have no advantage for him.

A similar situation is his decision to bring troops home in a war that is far from over, but at a time that will be strategic for his reelection.

In his campaign to promote job growth, our NLRB is trying to shut down a billion dollar assembly line for Boeing in South Carolina and European builders are getting the contracts as a result of unknown implications of a government agency representing unions trying to shut down a private manufacturing facility built in a Right to Work State. Leaving the average American asking why we have a government agency protecting unions and why are we forcing Boeing to take its factory offshore so that union jobs will be “protected”.

Why do we have Democrats who preach of the need for more taxes and of how we are not paying enough to beat back these massive deficits. Yet we must contend with an administration of tax cheats. Multimillionaire John Kerry goes to great lengths to avoid paying taxes on his elitist yacht so atypical of the Socialist jargon that he and other millionaires ride to glory, but wait, the Marxists in Washington don’t plan to be like everyone else they are Elites and they are supposed to lead a life of luxury that is above the law. These politicians that talk out of both sides of their mouth are legion within the Obama Administration Timothy Geithner, Charles Rangel, Tom Daschle, Hilda Solis all have their personal tax issues, while they tell us we are supposed to pay more and feel good about their willingness to spend our tax money in programs that will assure their political longevity.

While we have Marxists demanding more benefits to an ever growing army of those who feel they are entitled to the wealth of others, we have unscrupulous leaders who use these people to gain power and wealth. They promise to redistribute wealth, but not their wealth, heavens no, it is the wealth of others they pan to redistribute. In the tradition of every corrupt Marxist leader the world has ever known, they destroy wealth and prosperity by taking away from producers to give to the lazy and corrupt. Each month, the economy feels the lash of incompetence and corruption until the system begins to wither and die; until, there is no more wealth to steal and no more incentive to recreate wealth. This is the legacy of the Marxist and we see it about to reach the flash point in Greece, Spain, Portugal, and Ireland; unfortunately, with Obama at the helm of our ship of state we are only a short distance behind these failing Socialist states with leaders who are not leaders in any real sense of the word: they just know how to promise the world to those who don’t produce, but eventually they run out of money and the riots begin.

Personally, I much prefer the honesty of Carl when he gets up close and looks at you straight in the eye, as if every sentence is to be carved in stone. That is the kind of man we need in Washington and the kind of man I like to take hunting.

I’ll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up
Not me,
Not I,
Not me!
So there!
Never gonna be a man,
I won’t!
Like to see somebody try
And make me.
Anyone who wants to try
And make me turn into a man,
Catch me if you can.
I won’t grow up.
Not a penny will I pinch.
I will never grow a mustache,
Or a fraction of an inch.
‘Cause growing up is awfuller
Than all the awful things that ever were.
I’ll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up,
No sir,
Not I,
Not me,
So there!

Barack Obama further diluted the currency of the office of the President of the United States by appearing on Jon Stewart’s show. Not even attempting to maintain a sense of dignity for the office, Obama eschewed formality by not even wearing a tie. He made clear than Stewart was easily his equal.

Scott Johnson at Powerline:

Obama became a laughingstock as Stewart played on the distance between the fantasy of Obama’s messianic campaign rhetoric and the reality of Obama in power. This could be potent stuff if you bought the messianic rhetoric, and it should certainly be the grist for all-American comedy that cuts a pretentious politician down to size.

If Stewart and his audience bought Obama’s messianic campaign shtick, however, they might want to get a clue and grow up. Coming at Obama from the left, Stewart et al. aren’t inclined to meditate on the limits of politics. They prefer to take their disillusionment as a sign of their superiority.

Did you really believe that Obama’s ascent was the moment that the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal? Did he let you down? Obama was taking advantage of your credulity, dude. Deal with it.

John Podhoretz:

When an authority figure no longer radiates authority, he is no longer feared (see Machiavelli on the utility of causing fear as a means of exerting political will). Today’s unauthoritative authority figure might intimidate the people closest to him no less than an authority figure of an earlier age did. But in a democracy, an authority figure achieves dominion when the people invest him with that power. The affectation of egalitarian informality breaks down that authority bit by bit until it crumbles.

I watched this encounter, and it came to me that I was watching a meeting of the Peter Pan division of the Hypocrite Millionaire’s club.

And they won’t grow up.

The members of this club include or did include Obama, Ted Kennedy, Herb Kohl, John Kerry and Jay Rockefeller.

And Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert.

All these men are worth millions. Kennedy, Kohl and Rockefeller inherited their money.

Kerry married his.

Obama had his money funneled to him through curious land deals, his books and the jobs that were created for Michelle and not necessary once she left them.

Stewart and Colbert amassed their fortunes filling the mushy heads of young liberals with drivel. Stewart is reportedly worth $100 million. Colbert is reportedly worth about $45 million. I found those numbers astonishing. Keeping young people from growing up pays really well. Although these two would have you believe that they are libertarians, they cater primarily to a younger, liberal and mindless crowd.

Ironically, Stewart actually made some good points during a critique of Obama in June. Stewart noted Obama’s failure to deliver many of the key promises made during Obama’s campaign including closing of Gitmo, restoring habeas corpus and ending rendition.

“And no to wireless wiretaps.”

And the young mindless liberals applauded enthusiastically. Peter Pan Obama has learned a few things about the real world since then. If you’d like to see a truly naive amateur in action watch the entire interview here. The Stewart clip occurs at about 31:30 in the Schmidt interview. And don’t miss when Obama says

“Guantanamo? That’s easy.”

Side note: The interview is conducted by Google CEO Eric Schmidt. Google pays a whopping 2.4% in taxes each year.

Stewart noted that Obama not only continues to implement Bush’s policies, but has expanded them.

But all of this went down the memory hole when Stewart actually came face to face with Obama. He won’t grow up.

Obama is now worth about $10 million.

One wonders- why?

Why is Barack Obama worth $10 million? This is the guy who wanted spread around the money of Joe the Plumber, who probably makes less than $50,000 a year.

“I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

Said Obama.

Obama is worth $10 million, He doesn’t spread his money around. He won’t need another penny as long as he lives but he is not spreading around what he has now.

WHY?

Stewart doesn’t spread his around. Neither does Colbert. Or Kerry. Or Kohl. Or Rockefeller. But they will spread your money around.

They won’t grow up.

A Department of Revenue spokesman said Kerry would be liable for Massachusetts taxes if he berthed the boat in the Bay State within six months of its purchase. If the Isabel were brought to Massachusetts after that period, the state would have to decide if it wanted to pursue the taxes.

Massachusetts, like most other states, has been grappling with plunging tax revenues. Last year’s budget deficit was $600 million, and officials are bracing for a $1 billion deficit this year.

The Republicans of Massachusetts spoke out meekly to criticize Kerry’s cost saving measures.

“While we can fault the senator for his hypocrisy on taxes or having his boat built halfway around the world instead of here in the USA, John Kerry proves an important point that taxes in Massachusetts are too high. If they are too high for someone as rich as Senator Kerry, they are absolutely too high for working-class taxpayers who are being squeezed at every turn,” said a statement issued by party Chairwoman Jennifer Nassour.

~~~

The 76-foot sloop has two cabins, a pilot house fitted with a wet bar and cold wine storage, according to the Boston Herald, which first reported its Rhode Island berthing. It derives its moniker from the middle name of Kerry’s mother and the name his wife, Teresa Heinz, hoped to give a daughter.

Perhaps the Republicans are concerned over their own Senator Brown’s taxes on the pickup he drove around the state during his campaign.

Obviously, a $7,000,000 yacht can have warranty issues, so why bring it next door to Massachusetts when your wine cooler might break down.  State Senators and yacht owners are faced with difficult decisions all the time.  Kerry has decided that his cash strapped state must function without his personal dollars, only because of the frailty of an ocean going yacht that was built in New Zealand and sailed to Rhode Island for delivery.

Although Mike reported on this story originally, I found the views of Steve Dennis and his New Englander’s blog enlightening and informative, an update:

First the national issue: We have been told constantly that as Americans we have to sacrificemore for the common good. In this economic downturn the president has told us that we must face higher taxes in order to help those less fortunate than ourselves. From healthcare reform to the stimulus package, future American taxpayers are being asked to bear the burden of this regime’s out of control spending.

At one point during the campaign while in Oregon, Barack Obama was apologizing to the world for what he deems as Americans over extravagant lifestyles, Barack Obama stated that “we can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times.”

So while ordinary Americans are being asked to drop our standard of living by keeping our houses cooler in the wintertime by turning down our thermostats; and while Barack Obama has declared that we can’t eat as much as we want; and while Barack Obama claims that we the ordinary Americans can’t drive SUVs, John Kerry doesn’t have a problem with not only buying a brand new yacht-even as the president dissed us for driving what many families think of as a necessity, SUVs– John Kerry doesn’t have a problem with spending $7 million on a yacht, which nobody can claim is a necessity, while evading the taxes that he rightfully owes by registering it in a state that is not his home state. These politicians are telling us that we have to live by one set of standards while they live a totally unneccessary and extravagant lifestyle themselves. John Kerry is a perfect example of the double standard and hypocrisy that is prevalent in Washington today.

Second, the local issue: Last year Massachusetts decided to crack down on residents that were avoiding the Massachusetts sales tax by buying high end goods in tax free New Hampshire. Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick decided to crack down on the state “use tax.”

Massachusetts requires its residents to report on their state income tax returns all goods purchased in New Hampshire that were to be used in Massachusetts, but because this law is unenforceable with Massachusetts residents, Massachusetts tried to sue a New Hampshire business in an attempt to make New Hampshire businesses collect Massachusetts sales tax for them when Massachusetts residents bought goods in New Hampshire. This was met with great resistance in New Hampshire. New Hampshire Governor John Lynch signed into law a bill that would exempt New Hampshire businesses from becoming tax collectors for the state on Massachusetts. Score– New Hampshire 1, Massachusetts 0.

It will be interesting to see if Massachusetts goes after John Kerry for avoiding Massachusetts taxes with the same zeal that they went after ordinary Massachusetts residents. Somehow I don’t think that will be the case. While John Kerry as a United States senator is not involved with the local politics of the state, he has been an advocate for the Obama regime’s tax increases. He has endorsed many of the Massachusetts politicians– including Deval Patrick– who support higher taxes, including the recent raising of the Massachusetts sales tax. By doing so he has also endorsed their tax increases.

Yet John Kerry looks to avoid paying higher taxes himself and this is a perfect example. When politicians like Barack Obama talk about sacrifice, and lowering the standard of living, they are talking about ordinary, hard working, middle class tax payers; they are not talking about themselves. They are unwilling to meet the expectations that they hold for us. And John Kerry’s tax avoidance is just the latest example of how Washington politicians are not willing to sacrifice for the common good themselves.

Our MSM has not purged itself of the Journolistas and why would anyone expect their editors to be so stupid they didn’t realize the blatant propaganda they churn out continuously as news; consequently, the facts and details of this story will be smothered like the Wright episode.  Thus we will need to be more diligent than ever to find the truth in these news stories.

On Thursday Hillary Clinton echoed a familiar theme among redistributionist Democrats- that wealthy Americans aren’t paying enough taxes.

“The rich are not paying their fair share in any nation that is facing the kind of employment issues [America currently does] — whether it’s individual, corporate or whatever [form of] taxation forms,” Clinton told an audience at the Brookings Institution, where she was discussing the Administration’s new National Security Strategy.

She stated that she wasn’t speaking for the administration

“I’m not speaking for the administration, so I’ll preface that with a very clear caveat,” she said.

That is politician-speak for “Obama made me do it.” Hillary has just floated the upcoming Democrat policy. Higher taxes are on the way. She went on to cite Brazil as an example of how high taxes are working so well.

“Brazil has the highest tax-to-GDP rate in the Western Hemisphere and guess what — they’re growing like crazy,” Clinton said. “And the rich are getting richer, but they’re pulling people out of poverty.”

Sure they are. I have been to Brazil many times. Clinton’s out of her mind.

If you’ve ever flown to Sao Paulo, you must travel a distance from the airport to the actual city. On the way you pass right by a shanty town in which the dwellings are constructed principally of cardboard and wood scraps. One is warned never to stop on that road- not for any reason.

The number of homeless, abandoned street children is frightening. It rips at your heart when you see them for yourself.

The biggest social challenge for the Brazilian government and society is the lack of education, housing, health care and nutrition for the homeless children. Thousands live on the streets, abandoned by parents unable to afford to raise them. These children often abuse drugs, commit crimes and resort to prostitution to survive. The government has developed programs through the Ministry of Social Assistance to combat the poverty and starvation of these homeless children.

“150 000 children under five die every year because of hunger” Frei Betto, adviser to Lula said. He felt the child mortality rates “a scandal”.

According to UNICEF about 42 percent of Brazilian children live in poverty. Also approximately one eighth of all Brazilian children live on the streets. The Brazilian government has kept a tight reign on social spending to meet its debt payments despite a firm commitment to end poverty and hunger. Only a fraction of the national budget is allocated to programs benefitting children.

Another view:

The poorest and most vulnerable groups among Brazil’s rural poor people are women, young people and indigenous peoples. Households headed by women account for 27 per cent of poor rural people. Either because their husbands migrate to other parts of the country in search of work, or because they are single parents, women bear responsibility for running the family farm as well as their households. And child labour is still common among poor households in Brazil.

Let’s put this in perspective. Poverty in the US:

For example, according to the government’s own data, nearly two thirds of households defined by Census as “poor” have cable or satellite television. Eighty five percent have air conditioning.

Overall, the typical American defined as poor by the government has a car, air conditioning, a refrigerator, a stove, a clothes washer and dryer, and a microwave. He has two color televisions, and cable or satellite TV reception. He has a VCR, a DVD player, and a stereo. He is able to obtain medical care. His home is in good repair and is not overcrowded. By his own report, his family is not hungry and he had sufficient funds in the past year to meet his family’s essential needs. While this individual’s life is not opulent, it is equally far from the popular images of dire poverty conveyed by the press, liberal activists, and politicians.

As for the rich and their “fair share”:

The top 25% of income earners pays 85% of the Federal income taxes.

There is a major problem with taxation and Democrats; they always want to kill those who are the most productive- those who do fairly well and work the hardest. Let’s take John Kerry for example. Kerry adds nothing to the economy. He doesn’t have a business and employs no one on a private level. He is not personally responsible for anything related to business and employment.

In 2004 Kerry reported an income of less than $400,000. He paid about $90,000 in taxes. Kerry has a net worth of somewhere between $165 million and $626 million and his wife is worth something approaching a billion dollars.

So together Kerry and his wife are worth $1.5 billion or so and he pays about $100,000 a year in taxes.

That is the problem. Kerry and his wife are not paying their fair share. Neither are the Kennedy’s, the Speilberg’s, Bruce Springsteen, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Jane Harman and lots more. Look for a future post for the solution to this problem.

Nancy Pelosi is worth at least $18 million and last year she paid- actually I have no idea what she paid because I cannot find anything that discloses her tax returns. I’d love to know exactly what her claimed income is and exactly how much she pays in taxes.

But make no mistake- what Hillary did was the open the door for Obama and the Democrats to begin an effort to raise taxes in a big way. It’s coming. And it will punish most severely those are the engine for growth in this country.

If you ever needed an example of the imbeciles we have forever ensconced in Congress, along comes John Kerry on cue. The Senator showed up on Fox & Friends Wednesday AM to tout his and Lieberman’s “American Power Act”… where he declared their “climate bill” would… get this.. funnel less US dollars to Iran for oil. (@ approx 50 sec in video below…)

“Well it’s really an energy/jobs bill, more than anything. It’s a bill that will increase America’s energy independence. For the first time in thirty years we can actually reduce our…our…our foreign oil dependency by about 50% and… and that’s very significant. We’re putting a hundred million dollars a day into Iran today.”

What a dipstick. Perhaps someone would like to fill the bill co-sponsor in on the fact that the US doesn’t import a single drop of it’s oil from Iran…. something that can be verified with a quick trip to the DOE website. It’s also embarrassing that the blond bimbo news hound didn’t know any better to nail him on that glaring error…. Woe to us and the quality of our media pundits these days.

But the Senator’s misrepresentation doesn’t end there.

Actually, the average American makes out very very well on this bill. uh, the lowest two … uh, the lowest 40% of American income earners will actually have more money in their pockets w2ith this bill. It improves their household income and.. uh… the amount of money they get to… to.. uh.. spend. For the rest of American, this is entirely, uh uh more than affordable. It’s a very very minimal cost because most of the revenue in this bill goes directly back to the American consumer. It goes back thru their energy bills at home where they’ll get a rebate, and it goes directly back thru a tax credit. After the transition phase, where we help certain companies to be able to be able to transition into this new.. uh.. energy economy, uh… the… the.. the about 98% of the money will go directly to the American consumer. And that means there will be really very very little, if any, cost increase to the American consumer.

Jobs? Since Sen. Kerry can’t be bothered to know from which nations the US purchases oil, he also probably can’t be in the know that Spain’s grand alternative energy experiment was found to lose 2.2 private sector job for every “green” energy job created in the short term. That’s the soft blow… the in-your-face jawbreaker was over five jobs lost over two decades.

But then, perhaps the Senator is beaming with pride over all the government jobs it will be “creating”…. As Investors Business Daily points out, this 1000 page draft “…creates some 60 new agencies and projects to eat up our tax dollars and buy support.”

But wait… there’s *more*, as the Senator sez in his cheesy FOX infomercial. What’s all this about “more money” to spend, and “very very little, if any” increased cost?

According to a leaked draft summary, there is “$7 billion annually to improve our transportation infrastructure and efficiency” to be paid for by a gas tax that is not called a tax but a “linked fee.” There is “$2 billion per year for researching and developing effective carbon capture and sequestration methods and devices.” There is even “a new multibillion-dollar revenue stream for agriculture through a domestic offset program.” Tilling the soil releases carbon dioxide, don’t you know?

Ironically, the draft summary acknowledges the bill will cause energy prices to necessarily skyrocket by promising to “provide assistance to those Americans who may be disproportionately affected by potential increases in energy prices.” How about lowering prices and creating jobs by increasing domestic supply?

So let me see if I get this straight. The American taxpayer is going to have pay a gas tax, described as a “linked fee”, which we’re supposed to get back paying for more expensive energy in a tax credit or rebate? And to boot, a whole bunch of Americans are going to be subsidized by the rest of us as well because they won’t be able to afford “very very little, if any, increase” in energy costs?

… wanna watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat, Rocky? Or how about a few more dollars from my posterior?

And what’s this “we”, Kemosabi, when Kerry says “we” will help *certain* companies transition. So the taxpayers will be on the hook for subsidizing the utility changeover even before these “rebates” and “credits” show up?

Exactly why on earth does this man, or his leadership, think they have a lick of credibility? This is the same bunch who has managed to quadruple the budget deficient in just a year’s time. Yep… from $20.91 bil in April 09 to $82.69 in April 2010. A month when the revenue rolls in, and is traditionally a surplus in 43 out of the last 56 years. Then, of course, there’s the less than impressive deficit savings from O’healthcare, deliberately misadvertised by this same group of math challenged elitists in order to slam that puppy thru.

Just how many times is the American public willing to fall for this BS spewing from the beltway of our nation’s Capital? How many more companies and households are we supposed to subsidize in the name of climate change and social justice?

Well… if you’re watching the rapid demise of the incumbent sweeping the country like I am, I’d say more and more are less willing to play the fool to the elected ones merely to be blindly herded off the financial cliff. And it’s about time.

This is just too rich…. the short and sweet version? Kerry warns that Brown rallies are “…reminiscent of the dangerous atmosphere of Sarah Palin’s 2008 campaign rallies.”

“I’m no stranger to hard fought campaigns, but what we’ve seen in the past few days is way over the line and reminiscent of the dangerous atmosphere of Sarah Palin’s 2008 campaign rallies. This is not how democracy works in Massachusetts,” Kerry said in a written statement Monday.

“Scott Brown needs to speak up and get his out of state tea party supporters under control. In Massachusetts, we fight hard and win elections on the issues and on our differences, not with bullying and threats,” he added.

Well, at least he’s not reminiscing about Ghengis Khan anymore…

Does make you wonder if the now Sr. MA Senator’s handlers, who ought to be keeping him in touch with the doin’s of the common folk, mentioned that the bullying and threats, as well as physical assaults, aren’t coming from the Brown supporters.

But it’s good for a laugh today, eh?