Freedom of BLEEP

Yesterday, President Obama announced that he would like to exempt small businesses from capital gains taxes for the next year to help them through the tough economic times.

How does this help small businesses? It doesn’t really. This is clearly a strategic maneuver to deceive feeble-minded Americans into believing that our Government is providing tax relief. And the Democrats know that they’ll get away with it since many Americans couldn’t define capital gains tax to save their own life!

Why encourage small businesses to invest in stocks and bonds if we want them to start hiring more workers? It’s not just a logical fallacy; it’s duplicitous trickery intended to avert our eyes from the many ways that Democrats are actually raising taxes on small businesses. Even the New York Times admits that Obama hasn’t brought much to the table for the small businesses of America.

How exactly are the democrats raising taxes on small business?

1.) Under the proposed health care legislation, employers with payrolls exceeding $250,000 will have to provide health care to employees or pay up to an 8% penalty tax. It’s important to emphasize this is based on payroll exceeding $250,000, not based on net profits exceeding $250,000. This is going to have a huge impact on many, many small businesses in America.

2.) In addition to the cost of providing insurance, a surtax of 5.4% will also be levied on some small businesses to pay for the new government-run health care system. Democrats argue that this will only effect 1.9% of small businesses, but these figures are misleading. They include sole proprietors (that don’t have any employees) as small businesses. It’s the successful businesses in the top 1.9% which produce the most jobs.

3.) Democrats have proposed a new tax to help pay for the war in Afghanistan. Again, this will be aimed at those “earning more than $200,000 or $250,000.”

4.) Democrats also plan to repeal of a form of inventory accounting that tends to reduce business taxes. This is a particularly sneaky way to raise taxes on small businesses without the general public noticing.

5.) Democrats have been pushing for mandates that will require investment partnerships to pay the regular income tax rate instead of the lower capital gains rate. Small business owners have spoken out against such reforms, yet Democrats passed this as part of a “Tax Relief” bill.

6.) Oh, and by the way, capital gains taxes are actually increasing by at least 33% for everyone in America, and up to 69% for small businesses. Sure, small businesses will be off the hook for one year, but in 2011 Obama will be increasing the base capital gains tax rate to 20% — and the 5.4% health care surtax will also apply to capital gains on top of that. So that’s a 69% capital gains tax increase for America’s job-producing small businesses.

Why are small businesses so important?

Here are just a few statistics taken from the US-SBA:

• Small businesses represent 99.7 percent of all employer firms.
• Small businesses employ over half of all private sector employees.
• Small businesses pay 44 percent of total U.S. private payroll.
• Small businesses have generated 64 percent of net new jobs.

Perhaps Congressman Wilson’s behavior last week was inappropriate for the venue, but he was right. President Obama is still lying about the Democrats’ health care bill.

Here’s what Obama said, which prompted Wilson’s outburst:

“There are also those who claim our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This too is false. The reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.”

Then why did Senators working on the legislation have to make additional changes to the proposal two days later? If Wilson hadn’t drawn so much attention to the issue, the democrats would have been able to include loopholes for illegal immigrants.

Furthermore, here’s what Obama said this Wednesday evening in a speech to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute:

“Even though I do not believe we can extend coverage to those who are here illegally, I also don’t simply believe we can simply ignore the fact that our immigration system is broken. That’s why I strongly support making sure folks who are here legally have access to affordable, quality health insurance under this plan, just like everybody else. [...] If anything, this debate underscores the necessity of passing comprehensive immigration reform and resolving the issue of 12 million undocumented people living and working in this country once and for all.”

Hmm… Sounds like amnesty. No illegals will be covered, but their won’t be any illegals! This is being completely deceitful. If Americans don’t want illegal immigrants to be covered by tax-payer funded health insurance, why would Americans want illegals to receive amnesty and then be covered by taxpayer-funded health insurance? Such is the logic of liberals.

After 3 AM on the same day it was up for vote, Democrats added 300 pages to the Cap and Trade legislation. Let’s take a close look at yet another bill that was passed by Congresss without even being read.

Section 217 says that the Federal Government will be able to require a homeowner to retrofit their home to meet certain environmental standards before it can be sold. Some homeowners may actually be required to replace their windows, faucets, toilets, water heaters, insulation, and anything else that doesn’t meet government efficiency standards - all before the house can be put on the market. This could easily exceed $20,000 in out-of-pocket expenses. Not to mention the hassle associated with trying to get a government employee to show up at your house for the inspection. It will be worse than waiting for the cable guy.

Section 433 is pretty interesting too: “Protection of Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds.” This section suggests that jobs will probably be lost because of cap and trade. That’s right, Democrats actually realize that this bill will hurt our economy. In a nutshell, administrators of Medicare and Social Security will be able to tap into general revenues of the U.S. Government, if it is determined that the Cap and Trade bill has resulted in a reduction of revenues going into those two trust funds. As if the government doesn’t already tax us enough for Medicare and Social Security.

An equally disturbing matter is that the legislation seems to acknowledge cap and trade will be a tremendous cost to consumers. On page 1193, the bill describes an Energy Refund Program. Basically those making less than $50,000 a year will get checks from the government to compensate them for increased costs caused by cap and trade. If you make more than $50k? Well, you’re screwed. And where do you think money for refunds will come from? Tax payers of course! The same tax payers who will be paying higher prices for everything they buy, all thanks to cap and trade.

Wall Street Journal reported that cap and trade could cost families almost $2000 per year by 2020. That estimate was formulated before the last round of changes.

An Opinion Piece by Lenny the Liberal

The recent outbreak of sword fights across America should have you concerned. We need to act now to keep our streets safe from sword violence and ninjas. After we have banned guns and swords, murderous criminals will only be able to kill people with explosives. (Experts say that laws should effectively deter murderers from illegally using guns and swords.)

What Conservatives don’t want you to know about swords:

Over 1 million people were killed by swords, from 1147 AD to 1192 AD alone.

When guns have been banned, swords will become the second most common murder weapon (after guns).

Over 7,000 Asians are hospitalized each year due to sword related accidents.

Swords are the leading cause of Shopping Channel injuries.

This could be you. Sign the petition to ban swords and protect your family from ninjas.

Click here to sign the petition.

Democrats promise to serve the people through the expansion of government. In reality, these politicians only support big government to increase their wealth and power. This week’s corrupt politician is Congressman John Murtha.

As the head of the Defense Committee, Congressman Murtha controls hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars. How does he distribute funding? Seemingly, it all depends on which contractor gives him the most money.

Murtha is granting $8 million to Argon ST. The CEO donated the maximum amount allowed by law toward Murtha’s last campaign. Murtha is directing a $5 million earmark toward Advanced Acoustic Concepts, which also gave the max to his campaign. CBS News reports, “10 recent Murtha donors are slated to receive $31 million in Murtha earmarks for 2010.”

Who isn’t getting earmarks? One defense contractor was set to receive $1 million from Murtha. He was told in order to get the money, he should “consider opening an office” in Murtha’s hometown. Officials distributing the money also chided the contractor for not giving “enough campaign contributions to Murtha,” and for not making “a showing at Murtha’s annual defense contractor fair.” The defense contractor didn’t care to play that game… And they didn’t get the funds.

Murtha has not commented on quid pro quo suspicions, but he did recently tell his local newspaper that he’s only trying to bring home the bacon.

Rock on!

Murtha isn’t the only one bringing home the bacon. Murtech, his nephew’s company also gets about $1.4 million every year from the Pentagon (without competitive bidding). Conveniently, everything Murtech does for the government is classified.

Don’t forget the John Murtha Airport he had built in his tiny hometown with $180 million of tax payer money (that also received $30 million in military upgrades which have never been used).

Come see our airport!

Speaking of corrupt liberals…

You may have noticed that this site was down for a few hours earlier today. The database was corrupted by what was most definitely a malicious attack.

Note to the hacker: Your ability to hack an open source framework with publicly known vulnerabilities is most impressive. But I have automated backups running so you wasted a lot more time than I did.

You may have noticed that the liberals are blaming all their problems on Republicans these days. And now they have even gone so far as to blame cancer on the GOP. Democrat convert Arlen Specter suggested that Jack Kemp (Bob Dole’s running mate) would still be alive if the Republicans had pursued a more moderate agenda.

I’m scratching my head on this one. Does this moron really think the Republican agenda killed Jack Kemp? Or is Arlen Sphincter just spewing more BS?

Under President Clinton, annual NCI funding rose from about $2 billion to $3 billion by the end of his second term. Under President Bush, that increased to about $4.6 billion in fiscal 2003, and then stayed at between $4.7 and $4.8 billion in subsequent years. US funding for cancer research has massively outweighed funding from the EU and funding for other institutions has risen dramatically as well.

On the other hand, we see that increases in funding actually leveled out when Democrats took control of Congress in 2006:

Annual Percentage Increases

NIH and NCI Funding Increase Percentages

What else can the Democrats say to discredit themselves? They’ll probably be blaming swine flu on Republicans next. Oh wait, they already tried that. (In reality, flu vaccines stockpiled by the Bush Administration have prevented a large scale pandemic.) The lies being propagated by Democratic Party are really getting out of hand…

As the world watches and waits to see whether the swine flu will become a global pandemic, the White House has decided that it’s not worth it to close the border with Mexico, the only country thus far to have fatalities associated with the illness. Over 2,000 people have been hospitalized, and 149 people  have died in Mexico, many between the ages of 25-45. The outbreak is so serious that the country is literally on the verge of shutting down. Other countries confirming infections include Scotland, Spain, and Canada, while New Zealand, Brazil, Israel, Sweden, Switzerland, and France are conducting tests.

Within the United States, New York, Ohio, Texas, Kansas, and California have already confirmed cases of the swine flu. Yet, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano believes that passively screening entering Mexicans is perfectly adequate to contain the virus. “We are simply in preparation mode. We do not yet know how widespread this flu will be within the United States.” Considering the fact that a person infected with the virus might not exhibit symptoms for 24-48 hours, they may be feeling fine when they are screened.  Not that it matters, since even people who claim to feel unwell have not been allowed entry.   Napolitano is relying on “personal responsibility” and “common sense” of persons entering the United States. Good thing Mexicans coming into our country are taking this risk so seriously.

Napolitano’s rationale is at best naïve and at worst a flagrant disregard for the safety of Americans. But she’s already proven she’s not the brightest crayon in the box. The cases found in the U.S. have luckily been mild, but just because the virus has already been found in certain states doesn’t mean we need to allow many more infected people into our country. That would do nothing more than increase the chances of a larger outbreak in the U.S.  Although the World Health Organization has raised the pandemic threat to 4 out of 6, Obama promises that the situation is “not a cause for alarm.”  Let’s hope that a more serious problem doesn’t arise before Washington decides to act with common sense. No me gusta.

Up until now, content on this blog has been rather one-sided. You might call it freedom of speech.

But the Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats have other words for conservative opinions. Words like “unfair, racist, and extremist.” Accordingly, they’ve passed a bill that will allow them to censor the media (but more on that later).

In an effort to promote “fairness,” Freedom of BLEEP will now feature a new writer - Lenny the Liberal. Lenny will be writing on various social issues and the splendors of socialism whenever he finds the time. He is very busy so this may or may not happen often. Also, he doesn’t have an email address or Facebook account since these services were created through the free enterprise he opposes.

Thanks for reading.

Obama’s Power Grab, Part II

President Obama has altered the U.S. Government so that he will directly oversee the census in 2010. It’s important to consider why he would want this control, and why it violates the Constitution.

First, the census directly effects congressional redistricting. This can ultimately determine which political party a district favors. The first census after the American Revolution was taken in 1790 under Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson to keep the census out of partisan hands. This is also one of the primary reason why the Department of Commerce was created in 1903. Expect gerrymandering to be much more prominent when 2010 comes around.

Second, the census determines how government funding is allocated. Everything from spending on schools to roads is dictated by the census.

Even though we have a Department of Commerce specifically dedicated to “gathering economic and demographic data for business and government decision-making,” Obama wants to oversee the census himself for inarticulate reasons. Starting to see why Obama’s first two picks for Commerce Secretary turned down the job? And remember, liberals have also allocated an extra $1 billion dollars to the census this year through the the porkulous package. You can sure change a lot with that kind of cash.

R.I.P.

Obama’s Power Grab, Part I

Thanks to the liberals in office, our government will now be deciding where your donations to charity go. They will be taking money out of your taxes to give to charities of their choice. Charities like tattoo removal. Obviously they are selecting charities backed by their campaign donors, possibly making this one of the most corrupt pieces of legislation in American history. So much for Obama’s promise to clean up Washington…

You don’t think tattoo removal is a worthy cause? Adding insult to injury, the Obama tax plan will also reduce the deductions for voluntary charitable contributions (in addition to increasing the taxes of those making over $250,000 - otherwise known as the top 2% of Americans who already pay more than 40% of all federal income taxes!!). Many are rightfully angered by the proposition, arguing that not-for-profits can barely survive amidst the downturn in the economy. They rely on each and every dollar coming in from donors, and reducing the charitable donation tax deductions will most definitely decrease donations.

Liberals love to vilify the rich by painting them as selfish misers, only out for the tax benefit of donating. Of course those who are already predisposed to donate will continue, but when you take away the additional tax benefits, it is only reasonable to assume that people will reduce their contributions during tough times.

But charities be comforted! Peter Orszag, Obama’s director of the Office and Management Budget, assures that in the recovery act “there’s $100 million to support nonprofits and charities as we get through this period of economic difficulty.” That is, if you are one of the liberals’ pet charities. As NYT-labeled “fundraising expert” Robert Sharpe Jr. says “The administration’s proposal is doing just that, reordering charitable priorities by taking money wealthy people would have given to other charities and making it go into the health care system.”  Unfortunately, health care is only one of the many “charitable contributions” that the government is making with taxpayer dollars.

I’m curious where it says in the Constitution that the government is equipped to “reorder” American citizens’ priorities. This is just another way that the democrats are taking personal decisions out of the hands of Americans and making the decisions for them. Should the government really decide which charities are worthy and which aren’t?