There is something wrong with you. This obsession you have with Obama-bashing, and Democrat-blaming, and Liberal-baiting… it’s unhealthy. You need to focus on something else.

Thou shalt not touch the Lord’s anointed. This is the man who deliver us.

Thank you, Michelle, for a cross-party chuckle. Obviously Obama is not your sacred cow.

Jon Stewart blasts Limbaugh
http://tinyurl.com/cpkh4j

Jon Stewart blasts Limbaugh
Breaking news…Dog bites man

breaking news… jay leno cracks political jokes.
seriously?
he’s actually funnier now that he can crack them of on obama instead of having to rely on bush material which he just never had much heart in doing.

Next, please.

“There is something wrong with you. This obsession you have with Obama-bashing, and Democrat-blaming, and Liberal-baiting… it’s unhealthy. You need to focus on something else.”
That’s right, attack the messenger instead of face the issue. Obama wants to warranty cars, how is he going to do that? If GM goes under, where do people take their cars to be fixed under the new OBama warranty? Where is the legislation that puts the pieces into place. He just can’t say without approval by Congress that the government picks up the tab for the warranty.
And stop impersonating other people are your comments will be unpublished and you will be wasting your effort. You can’t face her arguments so you try to silence her by harassing her.

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Tax Cuts: Myths and Realities – May 2008
Since 2001, the Administration and Congress have enacted a wide array of tax cuts, including reductions in individual income tax rates, repeal of the estate tax, and reductions in capital gains and dividend taxes. Nearly all of these tax cuts are scheduled to expire by the end of 2010. Making them permanent would cost about $4.4 trillion over the next decade (when the cost of additional interest on the federal debt is included).
Because important decisions about these tax policies must be made in the next few years, it is essential to understand their effects on deficits, the economy, and the distribution of income. Supporters of the tax cuts have sometimes sought to bolster their case by understating the tax cuts’ costs, overstating their economic effects, or minimizing their regressivity. Here, we address some of the myths heard most frequently in recent tax-cut debates.
Myth 1: Tax cuts “pay for themselves.”
“You cut taxes and the tax revenues increase.” — President Bush, February 8, 2006
Myth 2: Even if the tax cuts reduced revenues initially, they boosted revenues and lowered deficits in 2005 to 2007.
“Some in Washington say we had to choose between cutting taxes and cutting the deficit… Today’s numbers [the updated 2006 budget projections] show that that was a false choice. The economic growth fueled by tax relief has helped send our tax revenues soaring.” — President Bush, July 11, 2006
Reality: Robust revenue growth in 2005-2007 has not made up for extraordinarily weak revenue growth over the previous few years.
Myth 3: The economy has grown strongly over the past several years because of the tax cuts.
“The main reason for our growing economy is that we cut taxes and left more money in the hands of families and workers and small business owners.” — President Bush, November 4, 2006
Reality: The 2001-2007 economic expansion was sub-par overall, and job and wage growth were anemic.
Myth 4: Even if economic growth and the job market were weak during the early stages of the recovery, the capital gains and dividend tax cuts turned the economy around in 2003.
“Since the tax rates on capital gains and dividends were reduced in 2003, we have seen strong steady economic growth, resulting in higher employment.” — Representative Bill Thomas, then Chair of the Ways and Means Committee, May 17, 2006
Reality: The available evidence indicates that the capital gains and dividend tax cuts were not the cause of improvement in the economy in 2003.
Myth 5: Extending the tax cuts is important for the economy’s long-run health.
“To keep this economy growing and delivering prosperity to more Americans, we need leaders in Washington who understand the importance of letting you keep more of your money, and making the tax relief we delivered permanent.” — President Bush, October 28, 2006
Reality: Extending the tax cuts without paying for them would be more likely to reduce economic growth over the long run than to increase it.
Myth 6: The tax cuts have made the tax system more progressive.
“The President’s tax cuts have made the tax code more progressive, which also narrows the difference in take-home earnings.” — Council of Economic Advisers Chair Edward Lazear and Katherine Baicker, then a member of the Council of Economic Advisers, May 8, 2006
Reality: The tax cuts have made the distribution of take-home pay more unequal — at a time when inequality in before-tax income has also increased.
Myth 7: The tax cuts have made the tax system more fair to small business owners.
“We cut the taxes on the small business owners… [I]t makes sense to let small businesses keep more of the money they make.” — President Bush, April 13, 2006
Reality: The President’s tax cuts affect small business owners much as they affect the population as a whole: they provide large gains to those with high incomes and little benefit to others.
Myth 8: Even if high-income taxpayers have received the largest gains from the tax cuts, taxpayers across the income spectrum have benefited.
“President Bush’s tax relief benefits all taxpayers.” — White House Fact Sheet, May 11, 2006
Reality: Taking into account the fact that their costs eventually must be paid for, most American families likely will lose from the tax cuts over the long run.
http://tinyurl.com/d56cyc considerable detail

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
History Contradicts Claim That President’s Budget Would Harm Small Business Job Creation
Critics have claimed that President Obama’s proposal to roll back tax cuts for families with incomes above $250,000 would kill job growth in the small business sector. But under the Clinton Administration, when the tax treatment of high-income families was very similar to what President Obama has proposed, small businesses generated jobs at twice the rate as under the Bush tax code.
High-Income Households Would Face Lower Tax Burden Under Obama Budget Than In Clinton Years, When the Economy Was Strong
House Republican Budget Would Aid Wealthy Individuals and Corporations, Cut Public Services, Slow Economic Recovery
April 2, 2009

So you want to ban me for “impersonation”? Talk about shooting the messenger!