Election 2008: The Truth About Taxes

Since McCain seems to want to stretch the truth when it comes to taxes, here's a graphic I swiped out of the Washington Post that shows what both candidates tax platforms actually look like for the citizens of America.

I guess we shouldn't be surprised that over 60% of Americans (the lower income ones who need relief the most) would see less than a 1% decrease in their taxes while those making over $1 million a year see well over 3 times that percentage decrease, considering McCain can't remember how many houses he owns. Talk about someone so out of touch with regular Americans. I just hope the people of this country realize that. McCain isn't your average Joe people. He's super rich, and he plans on making sure him and his income bracket buddies stay that way with his tax plan.

Now for some humor that when you actually sit back and thing about the truth behind it, really isn't that funny:

The $6,000 question....

Commentary: Is McCain another George W. Bush?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/18/cafferty.mccain/index.html

I can't say I always agree with Cafferty and his gruff commentary, but he pretty much verbalized what I've been thinking for months now.

Forging (a letter and) our way to the Iraq War (Can you say IMPEACHMENT?????)

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/08/house_judiciary_to_examine_all.php

Considering the revelations of Suskind's latest book are absolutely explosive (that the Bush Administration and the CIA forged a letter linking Saddam to 9/11 in order to justify the war), it's amazing it's getting almost ZERO attention in the media or from our corrupt-ass government. I've literally lost all faith in our government, including the Democrats in the House and Senate who should be vigorously investigating these allegations. Fabricating evidence that lead to an expensive and immoral war is TREASON, and if the allegations are true, those responsible should be impeached and arrested.

Suskind seems to have pretty convincing evidence that his allegations are true, we're not talking about the National Enquirer here (although they did nail the John Edwards story surprisingly). I can't believe the American people aren't up in arms. This is fundamental deceit at the highest levels of our government. As a country, if we fail to protect our democracy and punish those responsible for usurping our constituion, we don't deserve to have a democracy in the first place.

Bush: Endangering the Endangered species

http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/08/11/bush.endangered.species.ap/index.html

Not content that they have fucked up this country enough, Bush and his cronies want to kick America a few more times while it's down. Since the environment is still technically not utterly destroyed, they want to make it even easier for developers and corporations to put the nail in the coffin.

Seriously... instead of working on alternative fuels, ending the Iraq war, or feeding the hungry, the Republicans want to make it easier to get rid of Bald Eagles. My question is... once we kill those things off, what's going to be our new national symbol?

I suggest the dollar sign.

Wolf(son) in Sheep's Clothing

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2008/08/iowa_without_edwards.html?hpid=topnews

So Howard Wolfson, Hillary Clinton's former direct of communications for her presidential bid, is now saying Clinton could have won the nomination if the dirt on John Edward's affair would have been made public earlier by changing the Iowa caucuses. Some people are also claiming it was some kind of far-left liberal media/Obama conspiracy that the Edwards scandal was kept silent. That's all great stuff to believe if you are a resident of Fantasyland, U.S.A.

The problem: NONE of the polls or previous wisdom of either campaign supports this. The numbers show Obama being a 2-to-1 favorite for second choice among Edwards voters over Clinton. This means if Edwards wasn't in the race that Obama would have won by even more. Also, the Clinton campaign knew Iowa was going to be tough for them and even considered skipping campaigning for them knowing their horrible chances.

So why all of a sudden is Howard Wolfson making this bold (unsubstantiated and clearly non-factual) claim? HE GOT A NEW JOB! For who you ask? FOX NEWS!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/08/top-clinton-adviser-howar_n_111335.html

Now you can claim it's just a coincidence that Wolfson, a FOX News employee, would be making headlines with a claim that is clearly going to stir up animosity between Obama and Clinton supporters before the convention. But boy is that one hell of a coincidence. I just hope that cooler heads prevail and the folks that supported Senator Clinton (who has almost the exact same policy positions as Obama) and the Obama supporters don't split the Democratic party and hand this election to McCain. The stakes are way too high this time. I know it sounds cliche, but the future our our nation truly depends on it. We can't allow the economy to continue to be run into the ground while we keep burning international bridges with horrible diplomacy and sabre-rattling.

Something smells fishy, and it’s not all the dead fish from an Exxon oil spill

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/46533.html

A middle class couple, the wife employed by Hess (she drives a 1993 Cavalier)... giving $61,600 to the McCain campaign days after he starts pushing for offshore drilling? Really???

Are Americans really that stupid? I'm starting to think yes, because once again McCain comes up with some ridiculous scheme (offshore drilling) that he pushes as a real solution to our energy crisis.

But besides that point, the most evil thing about this whole push for offshore drilling is who is actually going to benefit. Who is it, you may ask? Well let's see... it's not the American people... cause guess what... we don't keep the oil or get the money from it. Well who does? The oil companies. That's right. If they open up some of these offshore areas that have easier accessed oil (not taking into account the environmental devastation it causes), the oil companies have to incur less costs to get the oil out of the ground. Why does that matter? Because then they'll sell it for the same price we're paying now (it's not like the oil companies, who are making RECORD profits, actually want the price of oil to go down much, just enough for them to not be demonized so they can keep raking in the money). Now with a basic understanding of business and economics... you see what's REALLY going on here. The oil companies make the same amount of revenues (or maybe more with increased production) at the exact same prices we are paying now (because honestly, offshore drilling isn't going to affect the price, pretty much every expert agrees), except they incur less cost. What does that mean??? A SHIT TON OF PROFIT!!! WOOHOO!!!!! (Revenues - Costs = PROFIT!!!) HOORAY!!!! MORE RICH OIL EXECUTIVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm so happy I want to have a fucking party complete with crude oil wrestling matches.

GET WITH THE FRICKEN PROGRAM PEOPLE. IT'S NOT A SOLUTION. IT MIGHT POSSIBLY LOWER GAS PRICES IN 10 YEARS BY 6 CENTS. COME ON. AND WHY CAN'T THEY DRILL IN THE THOUSANDS OF ACRES THEY HAVE ALREADY LEASED FROM THE GOVERNMENT???? OH, BECAUSE IT COSTS MORE THAN DRILLING IN ANWR AND CERTAIN OFFSHORE LOCATIONS THAT ARE OFF LIMITS. :( SAD FACE FOR HIGHER COSTS FOR OIL COMPANIES MAKING RECORD PROFITS.

Download the new Walkmen album for $5 (all of it going to charity)

http://amiestreet.com/artist/the-walkmen/

$5 and it all goes to charity and you get the album before the release date of 8/19. That is a deal you can't refuse.

Plus, after a few listens, I can honestly say this album is tremendous. I'm already reserving a spot for it in the top 5 of the year.