Along with the general issue of fair weather regard for constitutional liberties, I’m perhaps even more troubled by the generally dismal state of literacy and diction. Rasmussen polled Americans to see if they believed that Julian Assange and Wikileaks are guilty of “treason” and 51% of respondents said yes.
Of course, Assange is Australian. So he can’t commit treason since he’s not an American citizen. Not even if he’s super-double evil.
Even if he’s triple-double evil.
Colbert: The estate tax is an injustice to the children of the obscenely wealthy. Watch.
The House is voting on an extension of the Bush middle class tax only shortly. We’ll have result of the vote as soon as it’s final.
After finishing up the middle class tax cut vote, the House is expected to turn to the sanctioning of Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) for ethics violations. That could come within the hour.
If we want people to work and keep up their work ethic, why are we keeping them on unemployment insurance to not work?
That seems to be Juan Williams take on the current situation. In this clip from Fox News today Juan Williams explains how continuing unemployment insurance is hurting the unemployed by keeping them from working and thus losing their work ethic, losing their values and also not dressing well or getting up from bed in the morning and thus not able to get a job. Watch.
The House is voting on the middle class tax cut now … more soon.
The vote is still going and it’s not a final tally, but there are enough yes votes for it now — 228 — to pass.
The final vote was 234-188. Three Republicans and 20 Democrats crossed over.
The Rangel ethics matter is now on the House floor. Ethics Committee Chair Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) is presenting the case against Rangel now.
Rangel supporters are now moving for reprimand, trying to head off the censure recommended by the Ethics Committee.
The House is voting now on the motion to amend the sanction from censure to a reprimand.
TPM Reader DB fights the good fight to get his local paper to understand how the tax code works …
I’m in a feud with the local paper over the exact nature of the tax cut the house just passed. The tax cut is extended *for all Americans* on their first 250,000 correct? It’s not as is typically reported that the tax cut is only for familes making less than 250,000. I mean, a family making 275,000 will still enjoy the tax cut on the first 250, right? My local daily is wanting to dispute that notion on the ground that “that’s not how the AP reports it.” I think this is a huge distinction, improperly handled by most media reports, but maybe it’s me that’s got this one wrong?
I was actually mulling a post yesterday about how much tax politics is driven by people not understanding how marginal tax rates work.
Just so we’re all clear, under this plan everyone in the country would pay lower rates on the first $250,000 of income. Bill Gates would get the same tax cut on his first $250,000 of income as everyone else.