Once a bully always one? Assuming the story is true. The alleged victims family says the story is not factually correct. So who do you believe. The guys family or team Obama? And they've expressed the wish that team Obama not try to use their family in a propaganda campaign.

Once a drug user always a drug user?
Once a Bill Ayers fan always one?

If republicans were smart, they'd just step aside and let deputy Fife continue to take credit for his courageous, "gutsy call". Jimmy Carter is starting to look like a real man's man by comparison.

I'm offended that you used the HBO bomb thrower and Reagan in the same sentence.

As far as the spin of Limbaugh's apology... let's not loose sight of the fact that this whole episode is nothing but a carefully staged political stunt. A political activist student from one of the most prestigious law firms in the country, guaranteed a starting salary of 160k upon graduation, stars in a political infomercial carefully staged by Pelosi as a congressional hearing, so that she can present the pathetic argument that womens rights are somehow being denied if the taxpayers aren't forced to subsidize her sexual activity.

Had this been a real hearing we could have enjoyed Ms. Fluke answering questions. If everyone else can get their birth control for $10-$12/mo at the health clinic, how did you come up with it being a $3000 expenditure? How much is the bus ride to the local health clinic? Or the obvious... If sex and access to free birth control are important enough for you to go on TV to claim it as a right, why not attend a different law school. Or... why don't you ask your parents or relatives for a $3k loan that you can pay off with a week of your salary after you graduate? That question really strikes to the heart of the entitlement mentality. People will demand taxpayers pay for things they would NEVER EVER ask their neighbors or relatives to give them money for.

Seriously. Are the liberal women out there really buying this charade?

BTW - If you're still holding any Carbonite stock you might want to call your broker today.

@Gavalues: Good point - the LLC cap gains are only taxed once but how much were the companies they invested in taxed? If I sell shares of a stock and only pay the capital gains tax rate the gain I'm paying on is based on the valuation of that stock after taxes. Either the capital gain or the dividend is based on after tax income.

Much will be made in media about Romney only paying a 15% federal tax rate. (At the individual tax level) Let's see how many understand the tax laws enough, or care about the truth enough, to also report that this rate, plus state income taxes, is paid on the remnants of investor earnings AFTER they've already paid 41%-45% federal and state corporate level taxes.

Reality check. For every $1 shareholders earn on their job creating investments they net out about 40 cents after the so called 15% tax rate.

Writer makes the same mistake many politicians make when abusing this study, he treats it as if it were tracking the same families over 30 years.

Of course most of the rich from 30 years ago are dead today. Most of the poor from the study 30years ago are now the middle class and affluent. The explosion of cable tv and internet magnifies the pay of today's affluent (think NBA or Microsoft) while at the same time 10s of millions of new immigrants, legal and illegal, weigh down the earnings stats for the bottom 5th. That doesn't lead to the moronic conclusion that the rich are stealing from the poor.

The stats say the income of the poorest Americans, including most first generation immigrants, is only 18% higher now than the poorest Americans were 30 years ago. Is that a bad thing? If it is then we need only lock down
the borders and eliminate all legal immigration for 30 years and we'll raise the average income of the bottom 5th, relative to the rich. BAM. Problem solved.

If the student population is included in this data then it's pretty meaningless since it just illustrates that Athens is a small town with a huge university.

If not it illustrates that Athens is thriving enough to attract and keep the affluent while also attracting and supporting the poor.

Would Carrollton or Statesboro be a better place for a poor person to live? Seriously folks. These kind of stats can be ridiculously misleading. What do Athens and Gainesville have in common with the other cities on this list? Does that make sense to anyone?

There's a good rule about statistical studies. If your results don't make sense you better go back and rethink your data.

"government entitlements being handed out via tax deductions" ??

This is the new marxist speak.

First demonize:
Those business owners who are carrying the country with jobs creation and tax payments are the recipients of a government subsidy if they deduct common sense and logical expenses used to generate the income they are paying taxes on.

What exactly are the "tax breaks" and "loopholes" being demonized now?
Deductions for (gasp) rent? Prior year losses? Lease expenses on drilling rigs? Equipment purchased to create a new job? Cost's of private jets?

Every one of these "tax loopholes" results from someone investing in the economy and creating jobs. In the marxist reverse logic being pitched from the left any dime not collected in taxes becomes a drain on the treasury and therefore, a "tax break" or subsidy. They've bought into the notion that all wealth is ultimately owned by the collective, and any device or tax law that restricts tax collection becomes a "subsidy".

And what do they call the actual subsidy checks being doled out to workers who don't owe any income tax? Tax Credits.

If you buy a shirt for $36 that was originally priced at $40, has your bank account been reduced by $36 or gained $4? When a business pays a check for $100k in taxes, did the govt lose money because there was a deduction for rent expense on a second location? Did the owner of the building rented have to pay tax on the rent income?

"government entitlements being handed out via tax deductions" ??

Sir, you are educated far beyond your intelligence.

SOTU speech:

Obama to taxpayers and lnternational lenders:

"Okay folks... Pelosi and I have run out of wealth transfer and economic fairness ideas to spend on, we've ticked off all the 20 year pent up wish list of pork spending, and all federal programs have run out of relatives to hire. If I agree to freeze at these new higher levels of spending can y'all spare a couple more trillion to kickstart this sluggish economy I inherited?

Cut spending? OK we do have one subsidy that increases national security, cuts costs for all industries, creates millions of jobs and returns hundreds of billions in net tax revenues. So I'll cut the wasteful subsidies we pay to oil companies."

The owner of the NY Yankees sure picked a good year to retire. His heirs hit the no estate tax lotto and he didn't have to witness the team's collapse.

They'll be some morbid tax planning decisions made in a couple of weeks, depending on how this lame duck session shakes out. What a sordid mess this congress has made.

Instead of holding the estate tax hammer over potential donor's heads, why not give them a dollar for dollar tax credit for any contributions to approved charities or colleges? That would cut out the DC overhead.

@Labumba: You're right. I added a zero. Per the National Taxpayers Union website the top 1% paid 38.02% of taxes in 08. Good call. It's also interesting to note that they are paying a slightly higher share of the taxes than they did in 2000, and the bottom 50% are paying slightly less now than they did before the Bush tax cuts ONLY for the rich.

There's no evidence that govt spending drives the economy more than investment, savings, or blowing $100k on a party in Vegas. California would be the most thriving job market in the world if that actually worked. The argument that we can't afford to leave tax rates where they are is a classic tail wagging the dog argument. How about the concept that Washington doesn't have a blank check that taxpayers are required to cash.

Are we falling into the trap of thinking that if someone doesn't spend their money in a way we would like they don't have a right to it? Or that somehow the government taking that money and deciding where it should be spent drives the economy better? Seriously? If subsidy based spending is a good thing, why was it bad for companies who borrowed the TARP money to have employee functions in Vegas?

Saving and investing are all just as important as spending in growing the economy.

As far as the 5% not creating jobs. The top 5% of small business owners actually create something like 40% of all jobs. And they're already paying over 40% of their income in taxes.

40% of all taxes collected come from the top 10%. The bottom 50% pay less than 3% of all taxes collected. Define fair share.

We're in far greater danger from the voting booth being turned into an ATM machine.

Indoctrination and propaganda? Too funny to hear the people who've been brainwashed by the Rolling Stone version of the sub prime meltdown calling fox news propaganda.

As politicians argue about whether the Bush tax cuts for the middle class should be extended without the provisions for "the rich" does it occur to the CNN/NBC viewers that they've been lied to for 8 years about the Bush tax cuts being ONLY for the rich.

And you're worried about the Fox viewers being brainwashed?