When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Without in any way detracting from, or casting aspersion upon, the rest of what you have written, I would like to point out that the specific sentence above is a fairly accurate summary of an ideal President.
and/or congress.
but that's not what he did, that media was just good at painting that picture...
Remember everything bad was Bush's fault and everything good [earned or not] was because of Obama. Today everything orange, white, and straight is inherently bad.
CNN host Don Lemon on Wednesday challenged Sen. Kamala Harris’ African-American credentials.
“Jamaica’s not America,” he said, referring to her father’s native country.
Lemon made the remarks on his show, “CNN Tonight,” as part of a panel discussion about Harris’ blackness. The topic was inspired by the California Democrat’s appearance Monday on “The Breakfast Show” radio program, which saw her confront questions about her racial “legitimacy” that have been raised by some African-Americans.
“I’m black, and I’m proud of being black,” declared Harris, who is running for president. “I was born black. I will die black, and I’m not going to make excuses for anybody because they don’t understand.”
On the CNN panel, Lemon clashed with fellow black journalist April Ryan over whether Harris had the right to make such claims. Echoing a defense that Harris herself gave, Ryan suggested that the candidate was facing the same kind of divisive rhetoric that former President Barack Obama had on the campaign trail.
“She is a black woman!” Ryan insisted.
“OK, that’s fine. I agree with that,” Lemon said, raising his voice. “But is she African-American?”
“No one is trying to take anything away from her,” he continued. “All she had to do was say: ‘I am black, but I’m not African-American.’ That’s it.”
Ryan countered that Harris could very well have African heritage since her father immigrated to the United States from Jamaica, where most residents are the descendants of slaves shipped over from that continent.
my black coworker called my white coworker racist on Monday because he said he doesn't want to visit Africa. She also called him racist because he lives in the middle of VA (where the racists live). She also called him racist/ignorant because he didn't know blackface was a thing.
So, am I to take from that the impression that Ohio, Texas, California and New York are all equally awesome?
Because I have lived in all four states, and I can assure you that Ohio is not awesome. It's kind of uniformly rust-colored and depressing, with lots of corn, poverty, and weddings which double as a family reunion. It's kind of like Virginia, but with less political corruption, and therefore boring.
(I mean, this is a place where, at the State Fair, one of the activities is to try and catch an angry pig which has been smeared with lard.)
Guess it worked.
I wonder how much the various unions had to say about it.
Amazon officially dropped it's plan for having a presence in NYC.
"for Amazon, the commitment to build a new headquarters requires positive, collaborative relationships with state and local elected officials who will be supportive over the long-term."
Originally Posted by Joe Perez
So, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is apparently among those strongly opposing Amazon's proposal to build a new headquarters in Queens, NY.
I'm proud of my (formerly) fellow New Yorkers, who successfully prevented hundreds thousands of new, high-wage jobs from being created in a neighborhood which has historically suffered from a lack of secure employment opportunities. Economic prosperity is bad, and must be opposed at all costs. I mean, can you imagine a world in which everyone was gainfully employed, and no one was dependent on taxpayer-funded subsidies for housing and food? There'd be no reason to nationalize private industries, massively increase the size of government, and implement universal socialist policies! (Shudder.)
Sidebar: am I the only one who thinks that the number of congressional representatives and electoral votes apportioned to each state should be based upon that state's GDP, rather than its population?
"""Sidebar: am I the only one who thinks that the number of congressional representatives and electoral votes apportioned to each state should be based upon that state's GDP, rather than its population?"""
As best I remember from High School history 45 years ago, when our system was put in place only land owning males were allowed to vote.
Land owners would also include business owners so the original setup could be argued as being GDP based rather than population based.
We have deviated wildly from the original concept but perhaps an idea could be to limit voting rights to US citizens who can list a current employer or who are a property owner or tax paying business owner.
It would result in retired, non-working (housewife?), student, various deadbeat types, etc., not being allowed to vote without limiting voting rights by ethnic or sex or age background.
Summary: If you are a currently contributing member of society you get to vote.
BREAKING NEWS: MCCABE SAYS JUSTICE DEPARTMENT CONSIDERED REMOVING TRUMP
By Kevin Ryan
Andrew McCabe, the former deputy F.B.I. director who was fired after an Inspector General report found that he lied to or misled federal investigators at least four times, including three while under oath, has made a series of shocking claims this morning:
• HE is the one who ordered the obstruction of justice and counterintelligence probes against President Trump.
• He also ordered the FBI to investigate whether Trump had been working on behalf of Russia.
• Top Justice Department officials discussed removing President Trump from office.
• Deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein suggested wearing a wire in meetings with Mr. Trump.
McCabe says that, when he became acting FBI director following Trump’s firing of Director James Comey in May, 2017, McCabe met with the team investigating Russia’s election interference to discuss removing the President from office.
“We discussed the president’s capacity and the possibility he could be removed from office under the 25th Amendment.” He says and deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein indicated he looked into the issue and determined he would need a “majority of 8 of the 15 cabinet officials.” Mr. McCabe added that Mr. Rosenstein suggested that he might have supporters in the attorney general and secretary of Homeland Security.”
The concerns about the president’s actions also prompted McCabe to order the FBI to expand the scope of the investigation to include whether Trump had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests and obstructed justice by firing Director Comey.
The meetings occurred during the eight days from Comey’s firing to the point that Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel. McCabe is the first person directly involved in the meetings who has spoken publicly about them.
McCabe’s remarks were made in an interview on “60 Minutes” scheduled to air on Sunday. He was promoting his memoir, “The Threat: How the F.B.I. Protects America in the Age of Terror and Trump,” which will be released next week.
In reaction to the interview, a Justice Department spokesperson says Rosenstein “again rejects Mr. McCabe's recitation of events as inaccurate and factually incorrect.”
“The Deputy Attorney General never authorized any recording that Mr. McCabe references. As the Deputy Attorney General previously has stated, based on his personal dealings with the President, there is no basis to invoke the 25th Amendment, nor was the [Deputy Attorney General] in a position to consider invoking the 25th Amendment,” the spokesman said in a statement this morning, also pointing out that Rosenstein “directed that Mr. McCabe be removed from any participation in that investigation. Subsequent to this removal, DOJ’s Inspector General found that Mr. McCabe did not tell the truth to federal authorities on multiple occasions, leading to his termination from the FBI.”
We have deviated wildly from the original concept but perhaps an idea could be to limit voting rights to those who can list a current employer or who are a property owner or tax paying business owner.
I'm waiting for the day when anyone who is a recipient of entitlement payments (welfare, social security, EBT, etc) gets to have their vote counted twice, to make up for how disenfranchised and discriminated-against they are. I mean, if someone is going to receive free money, shouldn't that person have a say in determining how much free money they receive?
HMMMMM......... sort of like members of Congress setting their own rate of pay and benefits and expense allowance?
Also, how is it that McCabe is not rotting in a jail cell awaiting trial on charges of plotting to overthrow the duly elected President.
Maybe I am wrong but it is my understanding that he has just owned up to that very thing.
I'm proud of my (formerly) fellow New Yorkers, who successfully prevented hundreds of new, high-wage jobs from being created in a neighborhood which has historically suffered from a lack of secure employment opportunities. Economic prosperity is bad, and must be opposed at all costs. I mean, can you imagine a world in which everyone was gainfully employed, and no one was dependent on taxpayer-funded subsidies for housing and food? There's be no reason to nationalize private industries, massively increase the size of government, and implement universal socialist policies! (Shudder.)
Sidebar: am I the only one who thinks that the number of congressional representatives and electoral votes apportioned to each state should be based upon that state's GDP, rather than its population?
To be fair, one of reasons Amazon initially picked NYC was the $3 Billion in TAXPAYER handouts they were offered.
It's akin to the billionaire sports team owners asking the public to build them a new stadium, instead of using there own money. And more often than not, it's a horrible proposition for the taxpayer.
To be fair, one of reasons Amazon initially picked NYC was the $3 Billion in TAXPAYER handouts they were offered.
It's akin to the billionaire sports team owners asking the public to build them a new stadium, instead of using there own money. And more often than not, it's a horrible proposition for the taxpayer.
$3B over 10 years or $300MM/year. This is in exchange for 25,000 new jobs with an average wage of $150k. If Amazon paid $0 corporate taxes (which is very unlikely) during the entire 10 years New York would still come out ahead every single year.
$150k x 25k = $3.75B This would be subject to NY state (~6%) and NYC (~3.5%) income tax which would result in $356,250,000/yr.
It gets better though. They would also be pulling in additional property tax, sales tax, and taxes from the businesses and new jobs that pop up to support Amazon employees and their business. I am guessing they would end up with between a $100-$200MM surplus each year from this deal and even more once the incentives are up. You could use that money to build some affordable housing for all of the displaced low income households if you want.
Now they get none of it and get to continue watching as more large companies move thousands of people out of the state to reduce salary and facilities cost.
Yeah, it's unfortunate that creating thousands of new high-paying jobs also has the secondary effect of feeding billions of dollars per year into the local economy (restaurants, grocery stores, retail stores, mortuaries, food trucks, newsstands, florists, shoe shops, delis, bars, the folks selling fruit from a cart on the sidewalk, hardware stores, bodegas, coffee shops, dog groomers, stationary stores, chocolatiers, dry cleaners, taxi drivers, nightclubs, jewelry stores, laundromats, tattoo parlors, and, well, literally every other business whose success is directly tied to the economic prosperity of their local neighborhood), because that decreases the need for socialist programs and large increases in the size of government.
And, in the end, increasing the size and power of government is really what matters most.
as a taxpayer, do you feel it personally when the government spends money on stupid/wasteful things? is not all taxpayer dollars spent a horrible proposition?
as a taxpayer, do you feel it personally when the government spends money on stupid/wasteful things?
I've become fairly numb to it. Just as Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia, the spending of my tax money will always be inefficient and wasteful.
$3B over 10 years or $300MM/year. This is in exchange for 25,000 new jobs with an average wage of $150k. If Amazon paid $0 corporate taxes (which is very unlikely) during the entire 10 years New York would still come out ahead every single year.
$150k x 25k = $3.75B This would be subject to NY state (~6%) and NYC (~3.5%) income tax which would result in $356,250,000/yr.
It gets better though. They would also be pulling in additional property tax, sales tax, and taxes from the businesses and new jobs that pop up to support Amazon employees and their business. I am guessing they would end up with between a $100-$200MM surplus each year from this deal and even more once the incentives are up. You could use that money to build some affordable housing for all of the displaced low income households if you want.
Now they get none of it and get to continue watching as more large companies move thousands of people out of the state to reduce salary and facilities cost.
From what I can tell, they (the state/city government) refused to make the exact details public, but no state tax was part of it. And more than one of his aides have been removed over misconduct allegations for very similar deals.
Originally Posted by Braineack
as a taxpayer, do you feel it personally when the government spends money on stupid/wasteful things? is not all taxpayer dollars spent a horrible proposition?
I point this out frequently to hard right R-tards that HATE socialism, but have no issues with my tax dollars paying to educate their worthless ankle biters.
From what I can tell, they (the state/city government) refused to make the exact details public, but no state tax was part of it.
Am I to interpret this as a claim that 25,000 workers in NYC were going to be exempt from paying State and City income tax on their salaries from Google, and from paying State and City sales / use tax on the money that they spend in NYC? And that all of the restaurants and apartment buildings and clothing stores and so on were going to be exempt from paying property / income / etc tax on the revenue which they earn from those 25,000 people?
my black coworker called my white coworker racist on Monday because he said he doesn't want to visit Africa. She also called him racist because he lives in the middle of VA (where the racists live). She also called him racist/ignorant because he didn't know blackface was a thing.
America, so racist, that you have to stage attacks to keep the narrative going:
02-14-2019, 08:42 AM
0
