November 01, 2005
The IN DA CLUB star believes human intervention could not have prevented the effects of the hurricane, which killed over a thousand people in the US gulf states in August (05), and sees no point in reprimanding the President for something which was beyond his control.A rap star speaking up for a Republican President? Is this a sign of the Apocalypse?He says, "The New Orleans disaster was meant to happen. It was an act of God.
"I think people responded to it the best way they can.
"What KANYE WEST was saying, I don't know where that came from."
I still say Canadian Lorne Greene (Bonanza's Ben Cartwright) started rap with his release of "Ringo" (the number 21 hit of 1964). And Canada should be held to account for this.
Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.
Posted by: Bluto at
07:45 PM
| Comments (15)
| Add Comment
Post contains 159 words, total size 1 kb.
From The Moscow Times:
President Vladimir Putin said Monday that he would not seek a third term in 2008, but vowed not to allow "destabilization" in Russia following the vote, leaving the door open for drastic action in the event of a crisis.It seems to me that he is keeping a trump card. If Putin doesn't like the way Russia is being run, he takes "drastic action" to straighten things out. This is probably because of the fact that Russia has little experience with the peaceful transfer of power. Historically, someone customarily had to die or have been murdered.In an interview with Dutch media on the eve of a visit to the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands, Putin reiterated that he opposed changing the Constitution to prolong his time in power -- a possibility that has been widely discussed because of his popularity and control of the parliament.
But Putin said that the 2008 presidential election would be a "serious, difficult test for Russia" and stressed that full power and responsibility for the fate of the country would remain in his hands until the new president has been sworn in.
Companion at Interested-Participant.
Posted by: Mike Pechar at
01:47 PM
| Comments (21)
| Add Comment
Post contains 231 words, total size 2 kb.
Greenpeace blamed outdated maps from the Philippine government that indicated the 400-mile World Heritage coral reef site was more than a mile away when its flagship Rainbow Warrior II hit it, the BBC reported.
You'd think that if they were so concerned about the environement, they might actually take the time to make sure their charts are updated. You know, when you get that map that says "circa 1940" on it, it's probably not quite as accurate as when it was made. But I suppose that I'm actually expecting Greenpeacers to be able to read. That may be holding the standards too high.
Posted by: Drew at
10:43 AM
| Comments (18)
| Add Comment
Post contains 154 words, total size 1 kb.
Some of the proposed changes would include:
Eliminate the alternative minimum tax
The AMT is a parallel tax system originally intended to ensure the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes by eliminating many of the deductions and credits they get under the regular income tax system.
But because the income-exemption levels have never been indexed to inflation, by 2010 the AMT threatens to catch more than 30 million taxpayers, mostly from middle-income households. The estimated cost of repealing the AMT is $1.3 trillion over 10 years.
The panel was instructed to come up with proposals that are revenue-neutral, meaning they would have to produce the same revenue as expected under the current system. As a result, the panel had to take a hard look at the tax breaks offered under the current system to see where they could make up for that lost revenue, while at the same time ensuring a new tax code was fairer and more growth oriented than the current one.
So, basically, they are simply moving this tax upward in the pay scale. So once again, if you make more, they're going to take more away.
Alter homeowners' tax breaks
The panel recommended lowering the mortgage interest cap, which is the amount of a loan on which home owners would receive a tax break for interest paid, from $1 million to the average regional housing price in the range of $227,000 to $412.000.
The deduction would be converted to a credit equal to 15 percent of interest paid on mortgages up to the interest cap. A credit is a dollar-for-dollar reduction of the taxes you owe, while a deduction only reduces your taxable income by a percentage equal to your top tax rate.
Generally speaking, the higher your mortgage loan and the higher your tax bracket, the more likely it is that you'll see less of a tax break than you would under the current system.
And once again a Socialist's dream. Tax you on your mortgage based on how much you pay and how much you make.
Reduce the marriage penalty
All tax brackets, family credits and taxation of Social Security benefits for couples would be double those of individuals. Under the current system, some married couples filing jointly end up paying more in taxes than single taxpayers with the same income because of the way various deductions, creidts and tax brackets are structured.
Now this I can get behind. But why stop there? Why not eliminate the marriage penalty altogether? If it's wrong, it's wrong. It's not just a little bit wrong, in a certain bracket.
Reduce tax breaks on employer-provided health insurance
When you work for a company, your employer typically foots a large portion of your health-insurance premiums. That money, which is not reported on your W2, is tax-free to you.
The panel recommended capping the amount of tax-free money that may be used to pay for health insurance to $5,000 for single coverage or $11,500 for family coverage.
Now hold on just a minute there, hoss. Maybe I'm misunderstanding that, but are you talking about taxing me for money that my employer pays for my health care? Or are you just talking about taxing my employer for the good thing that he's trying to do for me and my family? Either way it's a crappy deal. Kentucky politicians have already managed to make health insurance in Kentucky so high and so complicated that nearly no one will carry it. If you now start taxing the money we use to buy it, you're going to totally screw us out of health care. Small companies like the one I work for will simply not be able to afford to pay it anymore, so I'll end up losing what little I've got. How exactly again does that qualify as taking care of your constituitients? Oh, I get it now. When you do this, I'll go broke trying to pay for healthcare, and I'll be forced out of my job because my employer is broke too. Then I can take advantage of your wonderful welfare system that you've set up with the money you just stole from me and my employer! Oh wow! I can't wait!
Repeal the federal deduction of the state and local tax deductions
Under the proposals, taxpayers would no longer be allowed to deduct the state and local taxes they pay on wage income, investment income, and property.
Former Senator John Breaux of Louisiana, who is the panel's vice chair, on CNBC Tuesday morning explained part of the panel's reasoning this way: "If people in California want to pay extra taxes to have their trash picked up, people in Texas shouldn't have to subsidize it."
That's right, just because your state and local governments take your money doesn't mean you don't still owe it to the federal government. After all, they've got to have their piece of the pie too.
Reduce the number of tax brackets
Under the panel's first proposal, which is a streamlined version of the current income tax, the number of tax brackets would be reduced from 6 to 4. They would be: 15%, 25%, 30% and 33%.
Under their second proposal, which combines the income tax with a progressive consumption tax, there would be only three tax brackets: 15%, 25% and 30%.
In the long run, this would probably end up screwing me. But I'd certainly like to see more on this than the proposed percentages that they want to steal from me. Where are they planning on dividing these brackets? Will most of America fall into that 25% bracket? If that's the case, then my taxes are going to go up quite a bit.
So basically, what I'm reading is that you can kiss those nice little tax breaks that Bush gave you last term goodbye. Then you can prepare yourself to bend over and take it. Because everything I'm seeing here looks like a bunch of liberal appeasement programs planned to give the goverment plenty of pork to work with.
When are the American people going to say that we've been screwed enough? When are we going to realize that the current welfare system is a sham? When are we going to demand that our "leaders" get their spending under control and stop stealing our hard earned money? I say the time is now. If we don't get this situation under control immediately, than it is going to get much worse much faster. Conservatives were able to rally together and stop the nomination of Harriet Miers, why can't we rally together and start demanding that our elected officials begin acting like the conservatives they ran as? These proposals haven't been passed into law yet. It's not to late to change them. Write your congressman. Start lobbying. Take control.
Quotes in this article courtesy CNN
Posted by: Drew at
10:30 AM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1214 words, total size 7 kb.
150 textile workers striking for payment of back wages are surrounded by 200 police who then brutally beat the journalists.
In a positive development, the government *promised* to stop buying weapons from brokers and selling the surplus to individuals.
Political Assassination, while a big deal in Lebanon, is commonplace in Yemen and doesn't warrant a broad investigation, even if the regime is implicated in the murder of a major political opposition figure for his secular views.
Unfortunately the lack of any substantial democratic progress has disqualified Yemen from receiving any funds from the Millennium Challenge Account, and the World Bank is cutting funding by 34% due to corruption, lack of transparency and good governance, but crime and corruption are much more lucrative for the elite, so no biggie.
Posted by: Jane at
10:03 AM
| Comments (35)
| Add Comment
Post contains 160 words, total size 2 kb.
From Xinhua:
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is expected to visit Romania by the end of the year to sign an agreement setting up US military bases in Romania, Romanian Foreign Minister Razvan Ungureanu said on Monday.If a Black Sea naval base is included, which seems to be the case, the U.S. will be capable of easily projecting regional influence. Any prudent student of international affairs would deem the expansion of U.S. influence in eastern Europe and western Asia a major development.The military deals are close to be completed, Romania's Mediafax quoted Ungureanu as saying.
The foreign minister made the remarks after meeting with his US counterpart Rice in New York.
Romanian President Traian Basescu told visiting US National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley on Oct. 23 that possible locations for the bases might be Babadag, close to the Danube delta, Constanta, on the Black sea, and Fetesti, 200 km east of Bucharest.
Companion at Interested-Participant.
Posted by: Mike Pechar at
03:51 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 184 words, total size 1 kb.
123 queries taking 0.1106 seconds, 371 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
