Is Glenn Beck associated with James O’Keefe too?

glennbeckcryingjamesokeefe__whitenoiseinsanitydotcomphoto

(image created by KayInMaine of White Noise Insanity)

Hey, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least. This person seems to think there’s some kind of connection between Glenn Beck and James O’Keefe whether it’s through emails, phone calls, or something else, but we all do know one thing: just like Andrew Breitbart did, Glenn Beck came out after the story broke about O’Keefe’s plot that he had nothing to do with it and tried to disassociate himself! Denial right off the bat could mean guilt, but you know there’s gotta be some kind of truth to a connection when guys like Breitbart start yelling about ACORN when talking about O’Keefe, you know, to deflect any more questions about what he knew and what he was doing behind the scenes!

A REMINDER: there is no such thing as grassroots when it comes to the republic party! It’s all AstroTurf and funded by right wing powerful idealogues who hope they can fool ya into thinking that the lowly neocons at the base are the ones who are controlling everything! Wrong. You were duped for 8 years under George Bush so why are you letting these same people dupe ya again? Don’t.

The Plot thickens and the reason why many are comparing this to the Watergate break-in is because as usual…..it’s right wingers behind the scenes breaking the laws to make Democrats look bad, when in reality, it’s the right wingers who are the bad ones! Time changes some people. Republicans and the republic party will never change. They are the same gawddamn people they’ve always been: NOT TRUSTWORTHY!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Share

43 thoughts on “Is Glenn Beck associated with James O’Keefe too?

  1. Let me try to understand this.

    ACORN = Bad, Bad criminals. Hang the fuckers. TODAY!!!!

    O’Keefe/Breitbart/Beck = Misunderstood patriots. Why do you liberal bastards keep maligning their important work?

    Oh, now I get it. No duplicity. No hypocrisy. Just patriotism.

    Nothing to see here. Move along…….

  2. I am not surprised that our REICH-wing TROLL WILLIAM condones “ends justify the means” even if a crime is committed. The GOP has supported criminals back to the Richard Nixon Watergate years.

    If ACORN were criminals then WHY have they been cleared in several investigations including one by the Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshberger:

    http://www.proskauer.com/files/uploads/report2.pdf

    By a Congressional Hearing:

    http://judiciary.house.gov/hea.....091222.pdf

    The latter concluded:

    “There were no instances of individuals who were allegedly registered to vote improperly by ACORN or its employees and who were reported ‘attempting to vote at the polls.’”

    Who knew?! What a surprise! (At least to Faux “News” viewers, who probably didn’t hear about this report either as it would expose their own LIES.)

  3. Two postings blocked. Trolls come here during the day while Kay and others are at work and they know most of my rebuttals get blocked by Askimet.

  4. I am just glad that Obama is getting to the root of all the countries problems with his new budget and taxing the rich. Those scum bags in the top 1% who pay more than 40.4 percent of all federal individual income taxes deserve to pay more because they earned too much.
    http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html

    Maybe it is time for the bottom 50% to protest that they are discriminated against because they only pay 3% of the individual taxes collected, that is an outrage and they should not stand for it.

  5. The Obama administration’s plan to cut more than $1 trillion from the deficit over the next decade relies heavily on so-called backdoor tax increases that will result in a bigger tax bill for middle-class families.

    In the 2010 budget tabled by President Barack Obama on Monday, the White House wants to let billions of dollars in tax breaks expire by the end of the year — effectively a tax hike by stealth.

    While the administration is focusing its proposal on eliminating tax breaks for individuals who earn $250,000 a year or more, middle-class families will face a slew of these backdoor increases.

    The targeted tax provisions were enacted under the Bush administration’s Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001. Among other things, the law lowered individual tax rates, slashed taxes on capital gains and dividends, and steadily scaled back the estate tax to zero in 2010.

    If the provisions are allowed to expire on December 31, the top-tier personal income tax rate will rise to 39.6 percent from 35 percent. But lower-income families will pay more as well: the 25 percent tax bracket will revert back to 28 percent; the 28 percent bracket will increase to 31 percent; and the 33 percent bracket will increase to 36 percent. The special 10 percent bracket is eliminated.

    Investors will pay more on their earnings next year as well, with the tax on dividends jumping to 39.6 percent from 15 percent and the capital-gains tax increasing to 20 percent from 15 percent. The estate tax is eliminated this year, but it will return in 2011 — though there has been talk about reinstating the death tax sooner.

    Millions of middle-class households already may be facing higher taxes in 2010 because Congress has failed to extend tax breaks that expired on January 1, most notably a “patch” that limited the impact of the alternative minimum tax. The AMT, initially designed to prevent the very rich from avoiding income taxes, was never indexed for inflation. Now the tax is affecting millions of middle-income households, but lawmakers have been reluctant to repeal it because it has become a key source of revenue.

    Without annual legislation to renew the patch this year, the AMT could affect an estimated 25 million taxpayers with incomes as low as $33,750 (or $45,000 for joint filers). Even if the patch is extended to last year’s levels, the tax will hit American families that can hardly be considered wealthy — the AMT exemption for 2009 was $46,700 for singles and $70,950 for married couples filing jointly.

    Middle-class families also will find fewer tax breaks available to them in 2010 if other popular tax provisions are allowed to expire. Among them:

    * Taxpayers who itemize will lose the option to deduct state sales-tax payments instead of state and local income taxes;

    * The $250 teacher tax credit for classroom supplies;

    * The tax deduction for up to $4,000 of college tuition and expenses;

    * Individuals who don’t itemize will no longer be able to increase their standard deduction by up to $1,000 for property taxes paid;

    * The first $2,400 of unemployment benefits are taxable, in 2009 that amount was tax-free

    (I SEE THE TROLL IS PLAGIARIZING AGAIN! ~ Kay)

  6. I love the idea of taxing the rich. Reagan taxed them at 80%! Woohoo! Goldman Sachs only paid 1% in taxes last year. PAY UP!

    From ABC News:

    The 2011 budget, which begins Oct. 1, is more than the current budget of $3.721 trillion, and the 2009 budget, presented by President Bush, of $3.518 trillion.

    I love the idea he’s scraping some of NASA’s budget! Wonderful. So Atlanta Ralph, where was your outrage when George Bush’s 2009 Budget was $3.518 TRILLION? Huh? Technically President Obama has only added $200 billion to the budget.

    Explain your outrage to us.

  7. Actually Kay it was 2.9 but whats a trillion here or there.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.....ral_budget

    I don’t believe Goldman paid personal income tax, think that was corporate.
    It makes perfect sense to tax people more who pay 40% of all income tax collected. After all they earned it and why should they be allowed to keep it. It still seems to be discrimination for the bottom 50% to only pay
    3% of the total, they should demand equal rights.

    • So, you’re admitting Ronnie Raygun hated the rich?

      By the way, where was your outrage when George Bush’s budgets were $3 TRILLION PLUS? Huh?

      Under George Bush, Goldman Sachs was treated like a favorite child:

      http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/.....bQVsZS2_18

      Goldman Sachs Group Inc., which got $10 billion and debt guarantees from the U.S. government in October, expects to pay $14 million in taxes worldwide for 2008 compared with $6 billion in 2007.

      The company’s effective income tax rate dropped to 1 percent from 34.1 percent, New York-based Goldman Sachs said today in a statement. The firm reported a $2.3 billion profit for the year after paying $10.9 billion in employee compensation and benefits.

  8. You want appropriate taxation? Bring back the FDR model.

    You’re making millions, and I’m supposed to feel sorry for you?

    How much is enough?

    Most of us live on amounts that dwarf Wall Street bonuses. Pardon me all to hell if you are forced to live on a lousy quarter mil (what I used to make in 4 Years in better times). Guess weaning ourselves from Dom Perrignon is simply unacceptable.

    Fuck You and your sense of entitlement.

  9. Correction:

    Most of us live on amounts that are DWARFED BY Wall Street bonuses.

    And yes, fuck you if you don’t like the expiration of the un-funded Bush tax cuts which benefited the upper 1 percentile, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, George Soros, et al.

    I really feel sorry for people who earn more on investments and interest in a month than I will earn in my lifetime.

  10. “The ends justify the means” was originally made famous by Prince Machiavelli even though similar quotes go farther back into history. It has been a popular quote by dictators over the years both communist and fascist. Malcolm X once said “By any means necessary” which was a simplification and it was in context of American blacks standing up for themselves.

    “Our objective is complete freedom, justice and equality by any means necessary.”

    White racists tried to paint Malcolm as a dangerous radical by taking four words out of context.

    Bush/Cheney used the Machivellian phrase to justify their pre-emptive war on Iraq, torture, scaring the American people, etc.

  11. Cut-and-paste is even more LAZY than paraphrasing which is repeating a theme by using one’s own words but not actually stealing words from other’s minds, word-for-word.

    But TROLLS love to plagiarize, trying to fool others into thinking they are SMART when they really cannot think for themselves.

    • Grant, you should see the trolls plagiarizing over on Think Progress! They copy and paste paragraph after paragraph thinking they fool us that it’s them talking. *rolling eyes* So sick of the idiots!

  12. William,

    You can do better if you apply yourself. Why do you hate people who have achieved what you haven’t. You get ahead by risking everything you have and work your ass off to succeed. It’s not to late to join the ranks of the 1%ers.

    Obama has been very successful in demonizing the “rich”, if you consider 250,000 a year “rich”, the banks and the oil companies. Now he is saying he will make loans to small businesses, finally realizing that small businesses fuel the nation.
    Lets raise taxes on oil companies so everyone can pay more, corporations pass taxes on, they don’t pay them.

  13. When TROLL vocabularies are mainly words like nigger and cunt, and they misspell, use poor grammar, then post in intelligent language, they give themselves away. Maybe fools think everyone else is a bigger fool.

  14. It is so touching to see some clueless troll defend the very wealthy in our country.

    The top 1% may pay 40% of all individual federal income tax BUT they also own up to 60% or more of all of the wealth in this country.

    You must be one of the sheople who still believe in the redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor.

    Fact is, if this myth was true why is there still increasing poverty in our country? One would think poverty would decrease if you believe in a myth created by wealthy people and pushed by the republican party.

    The wealthy have so many ways to avoid paying taxes, between tax loopholes, offshore tax havens, Charities, Foundations…wake up fool, having them pay more isn’t going to phase them like it would having the middle class pay more.

    • Exactly Temple. As long as the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer the teabagging neocons are fine with this kind of redistribution! Under Reagan the wealthy were taxed at 80% and THEY GOT RICHER. Interesting…

  15. Comment block. I’ll check back tomorrow evening as Kay is probably catching zzzzzzzzzzz’s by now.

    :lol:

  16. “The wealthy have so many ways to avoid paying taxes, between tax loopholes, offshore tax havens, Charities, Foundations…wake up fool, having them pay more isn’t going to phase them like it would having the middle class pay more”

    You are speaking of the rich and obama is speaking of the well paid. 250 a year is far from rich, comfortable yes but not rich. At that level of income you don’t park money offshore and set up foundations. That kind of wealth is reserved for the Kennedy’s, Gore’s and Kerry’s not working people who are successful.

    The reason there is a larger poorer class is because there is no incentive for a lot of people to work, why work when you are taken care of for no effort.

    Since you claim the rich won 60% of the wealth, why not support the fair tax and have everyone pay for what they buy.

    • $250,000 for the large majority of workers in this country is a lot of money. How can you not know this? Drive around any non-wealthy town in America and look to see how people are living? The “poor” are not living on $250,000 and those who are are looked upon as being rich in these neighborhoods or surrounding areas!

      I’m telling you…..you neocons continue to be out of touch with average folks in our nation. YOU’RE SUCH LIARS TO SAY YOU REPRESENT THEM!

  17. A flat tax of say 10% would hardly be missed by the AIG executives who are slated for a $100 million BONUS to be paid out soon (from our taxpayer monies) for their great job of running AIG into the ground. But such a regressive tax would hurt the middle class far more.

    REICH-wing corpfascists like Steve Forbes and his ilk bitch about the progressive tax while I don’t hear such sentiments from Kerry-Heinz, the Kennedys, Soros, etc. over paying taxes. Joe Biden was mocked by the REICH for saying paying taxes is our “patriotic duty”!

    What’s wrong with paying one’s fair share using the progressive tax that has been in place for many decades?

    • Has Glenn Beck admitted yet that he was talking/emailing/faxing James O’Keefe yet? Let’s hope his phone records are subpoenaed!

      Grant, it doesn’t matter what the tax rate is because the top tier has a free rein to hide their money and not pay it anyway. Do the neocons want to regulate Wall Street? Nope! Makes them cry like they lost a child!

  18. Under Reagan the wealthy were taxed at 80% and THEY GOT RICHER. Interesting…

    Where do you get your numbers Kay? At what point in Reagan’s days were the rich taxed at 80%? The only interesting thing in your comment is your falsely inflated numbers.

    • Not inflated…it was 70% to start and he lowered it down to 28%. The rich got richer under Reagan thanks to these cuts. Americans lost their jobs (he was a Union buster remember!) and the poor and middle class suffered because of it. The same kind of Reaganomics was done under George Bush where he gave hefty tax cuts to the top tier of the nation while the rest of the nation was screwed.

  19. First it was:

    Under Reagan the wealthy were taxed at 80%

    And then it became:

    …it was 70% to start

    You really and truly don’t know what you are blabbering on about do you Kay?

    • REAGANOMICS:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics

      During Reagan’s tenure, income tax rates of the top personal tax bracket dropped from 70% to 28% in 7 years,[10] while social security and medicare taxes increased.[11][12] Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth recovered strongly after the 1982 recession and produced five straight quarters of growth averaging 8.5%. The GDP grew during Reagan’s administration at an annual rate of 3.4% per year,[13] slightly lower than the post-World War II average of 3.6%.[14]

      Unemployment peaked at 10.8% in 1982 then dropped during the rest of Reagan’s terms, averaging 7.5%, and inflation significantly decreased.[15][16] A net job increase of about 16 million also occurred (about the rate of population growth).

      Except for the Obama Administration, Reagan’s administration is the only one not to have raised the minimum wage.[17]

      The policies were derided by some as “Trickle-down economics,”[18] due to the significant cuts in the upper tax brackets. There was a massive increase in Cold War related defense spending that caused large budget deficits,[19] the U.S. trade deficit expansion,[19] and contributed to the Savings and Loan crisis,[20] In order to cover new federal budget deficits, the United States borrowed heavily both domestically and abroad, raising the national debt from $700 billion to $3 trillion,[21] and the United States moved from being the world’s largest international creditor to the world’s largest debtor nation.[22] Reagan described the new debt as the “greatest disappointment” of his presidency.[21]

      Donald Regan, the President’s former Secretary of the Treasury, and later Chief of Staff, criticized Reagan for his lack of attention to economics: “In the four years that I served as Secretary of the Treasury, I never saw President Reagan alone and never discussed economic philosophy or fiscal and monetary policy with him one-on-one….The President never told me what he believed or what he wanted to accomplish in the field of economics.”[23] However, Reagan’s chief economic adviser, Martin Feldstein, argues the opposite: “I briefed him on Third World debt; he didn’t take notes, he asked very few questions….The subject came up in a cabinet meeting and he summarized what he had heard perfectly. He had a remarkably good memory for oral presentation and could fit information into his own philosophy and make decisions on it.”[24]

      Reagan himself claimed to be influenced by “classical economists” such as Frédéric Bastiat, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, and Henry Hazlitt.[25] Upon Reagan’s death, a memo released by Jude Wanniski, economics advisor to Reagan during his 1980 campaign, highlights Reagan’s firm grasp of economic concepts and his knack for conveying them so a layperson could understand.[26]

  20. I didn’t say $250,000 wasn’t a lot of money, what I said is they are not the “rich” that have foundations, offshore accounts. Mostly they are people who have invested their time, talent and money to better themselves. Of course the Kennedy’s, Gore’s and Kerry’s don’t object to taxes because they pay very little because they have foundations that support them and don’t pay taxes.

    “What’s wrong with paying one’s fair share using the progressive tax that has been in place for many decades?”
    What do you consider fair share. The “rich” pay 33% of their income. Somehow that is a lot more then 25% of a lesser income. Since math escapes some here $250,000 x 33% =$82,500 where $50,000 x 25% = $12,500. Somehow the $82,500 seems more than fair to me but I am not at the public trough.

    Grant, you obviously have not read anything about the Fair Tax. It is revenue neutral for the government but is FAIR because you pay what you spend. It does take a lot of power away from the politicians which is why it will never pass.

  21. I’m telling you…..you neocons continue to be out of touch with average folks in our nation. YOU’RE SUCH LIARS TO SAY YOU REPRESENT THEM!”

    I have never considered my self average and have always worked to be above average. I taught my kids to always strive to be above mediocrity and to not accept average, it worked.

  22. Really? So there is no failure in your life. You all walk around with your noses in the air acting better than everyone? Wall Street companies start to fail and when they do, THEY ASK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO BAIL THEM OUT! Wow, sounds kind of like your life. Right? No failure and you don’t care how you remain in your lifestyle or who you hurt to stay there….as long as you don’t dip down one single notch.

    LOL PATHETIC! Did you know it’s people like you who the teabaggers hate? LMAO! And you’re a teabagger! Looks like you morons have to go back to the drawing board (Freedom Works) to find out how to fix this little problem!

    The average American is the majority of Americans. We don’t care what you above average people think, because you’re the ones who have destroyed our nation and have applauded this destruction for years!

  23. Never said I didn’t have failures I just looked at them as a opportunity to improve. I was against the bailouts, tarp, cash for crap and all of the other rewards for failure. What is hurting the country more than anything is the entitlement mentality.
    I am entitled to free healthcare
    I am entitled to own a house
    I am entitled to get money for no work.

    We look at things from different sides, your not bad just mistaken.

    What would really be nice is for the political parties on both sides to say, lets do what is right for the people of this country, but that will never happen because they are politicians.

    I am for throwing them all out and starting fresh, can’t be any worse.

  24. Yeah I’ve heard of Wikipedia too Kay but you still haven’t said where you got that the rich were taxed at 80% under Reagan.

    Did you just pull it out of the air or what?

    • Yep! I pulled it out of my ass, realized my mistake, threw it at your face, and then pulled the real numbers out! Does Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh ever do that? Nope!

      So, is 70% good to you? If so, LET’S GO BACK TO THAT NUMBER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I would love it.

  25. I remember the Reagan days, unlike you Kay due to your youth. It was AGI and there were a lot more deductions at that time to offset some income. I don’t know what the comparison to today would be but it would probably be more then than now.

    Taxes are part of life but it would be nice to see us get something for it. The bailouts, cash for crap, and all of the other giveAway programs are not reducing unemployment, just increasing the debt.

    Chicken, Kay is OK, just a little misguided in her thinking but she will come around in time, I take that back, she probably will not come around but is still OK.

    • Reagan wracked up TRILLIONS in debt by the time he left. Here’s a good chart of the debt levels of the various presidents before Obama:

      http://media.photobucket.com/i.....alDebt.jpg

      I remember the Reagan years too. Americans lost their jobs, the rich got richer, Reagan told the rich to gloat about their money and to not share it, the poor got poorer, he sold arms to both Iran/Iraq, financed and made deals with the enemies, created death squads, and cracked jokes the whole time he was doing it! He was also an opportunist who took credit for things he didn’t do. I hated his guts.

Comments are closed.