Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Justthefax

Who said, "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

163 posts in this topic

Who said:

 

"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

 

 

"It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."

 

"(We)...can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."

 

"We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own...in order to create this common ground."

 

"I certainly think the free-market has failed."

 

"I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."

 

 

These are actual historical quotes. Anyone want to guess Which leaders(?) Policital Persons made these quotes and when in history?

 

How well do you know your history?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who said:

 

"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

 

 

"It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."

 

"(We)...can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."

 

"We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own...in order to create this common ground."

 

"I certainly think the free-market has failed."

 

"I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."

 

 

These are actual historical quotes. Anyone want to guess Which leaders(?) Policital Persons made these quotes and when in history?

 

How well do you know your history?

 

HILLARY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who said:

 

# 1 "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

 

 

# 2 "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."

 

#3 "(We)...can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."

 

#4 "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own...in order to create this common ground."

 

#5 "I certainly think the free-market has failed."

 

#6 "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."

 

 

These are actual historical quotes. Anyone want to guess Which leaders(?) Policital Persons made these quotes and when in history?

 

How well do you know your history?

 

HILLARY.

 

 

Yes Hillary said them all

 

 

1. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/29/2004

 

2. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 5/29/2007

 

3. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007

 

4. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007

 

5. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007

 

6. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 9/2/2005

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
George Washington after the Whiskey Rebellion?

 

No silly, the Whiskey Rebellion was about taxes on booze. I dont think George was looking to "take" anything, he was trying to hold together this newly formed and founded nation and show that it can enforce the "law".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The smartest woman the world has ever seen?

 

:eek:

 

 

No Margaret Thatcher did not say any of these.

 

Or Condi Rice, a woman much smarter than Hillary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey JTF... you left out the one in my signature.;)

 

You have posted that, I just want to show how much of a Marxist she is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who said this?:

"Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who said this?:

"Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise."

Martin OMalley?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who said this?:

"Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise."

 

Ok.. I googled it. Thomas Jefferson. Taxes back then, though, were a lot different and lower than they are now.

 

"The nation had few taxes in its early history. From 1791 to 1802, the United States government was supported by internal taxes on distilled spirits, carriages, refined sugar, tobacco and snuff, property sold at auction, corporate bonds, and slaves. The high cost of the War of 1812 brought about the nation's first sales taxes on gold, silverware, jewelry, and watches. In 1817, however, Congress did away with all internal taxes, relying on tariffs on imported goods to provide sufficient funds for running the government." From the infoplease.com site.

 

I'd be willing to bet that Jefferson didn't have in mind the types and levels of taxes we have now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eminent Domain: Corporate Republicans vs. Religious Republicans

 

The political alliance between religious conservatives and business conservatives has always been a bit uneasy. The two do have some common goals, but they also have a number of competing interests; the latter is starting to come out in the wake of the Supreme Court decision giving government wider latitude in seizing private property.

 

Business interests like the ruling because they will likely benefit most directly; religious groups are concerned, though, because they think that churches will be in greater danger:

 

The Christian opposition to eminent domain shows how the often opposed religious and limited-government wings of the conservative movement have come together for the expected court fight. At a moment when the White House is urging its Christian allies to tone down their talk about abortion, school prayer or other cultural issues, others in the movement applauded their Christian counterparts for pulling together.

 

"If you are Jerry Falwell, it is probably wise to spend some of your time reminding the head of the chamber of commerce why he and you are on the same team," said Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform.

 

The notion of cities seizing churches seems like "a far-fetched scenario," but it resonates for many conservative Christians, said Lyman Kellstedt, an emeritus professor of political science at Wheaton College, an evangelical school in Illinois. The image captures the feeling that the evangelical vision of society is losing ground, often because of court decisions, he said. "From this community's perspective - and I am part of it - the culture is moving in a direction that is bad."

 

Jared Leland, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty ... argued that letting cities use eminent domain to increase their tax base nonetheless increased the vulnerability of tax-exempt churches. "The decision will inevitably draw the bulldozers toward religious institutions first," he said. [The New York Times, emphasis added, via Rook's Rant]

 

One of the primary characteristics of the Christian Right is their persecution complex: despite wielding so much political and social power, they continually insist that they are being persecuted. Usually that persecution comes from the left but in this case the perceived persecution comes from corporate interests. Christian Leaders are clever enough, though, to avoid identifying this new threat as such and instead is trying to keep people's focus on the courts and the government.

 

Nathan Newman points out an interesting contradiction in the Christian Right's reaction to all this: the same people who are upset with this decision also, at the same time, typically support Israel's seizure of the land of Palestinians in the name of security.

 

The kind of abusive, politically targeted seizure of land, usually without compensation, that Israel engages with is the kind of violation the 5th Amendment Takings Clause was meant to prevent. It is pathetic hypocrisy for rightwingers to bemoan the Kelo decision -- which guarantees full compensation for landowners -- yet endorse Israel's full-scale destruction of any property rights for the Palestinians.

http://atheism.about.com/b/2005/07/15/eminent-domain-corporate-republicans-vs-religious-republicans.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok.. I googled it. Thomas Jefferson. Taxes back then, though, were a lot different and lower than they are now.

 

"The nation had few taxes in its early history. From 1791 to 1802, the United States government was supported by internal taxes on distilled spirits, carriages, refined sugar, tobacco and snuff, property sold at auction, corporate bonds, and slaves. The high cost of the War of 1812 brought about the nation's first sales taxes on gold, silverware, jewelry, and watches. In 1817, however, Congress did away with all internal taxes, relying on tariffs on imported goods to provide sufficient funds for running the government." From the infoplease.com site.

 

I'd be willing to bet that Jefferson didn't have in mind the types and levels of taxes we have now.

 

Your theory would mean more if the dates were not so far off. He said it before the Constitution was even written.

Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1785.

 

 

He also said this: "Many of the opposition [to the new Federal Constitution] wish to take from Congress the power of internal taxation. Calculation has convinced me that this would be very mischievous." --Thomas

Jefferson to William Carmichael, 1788.

 

And this: "Taxes should be proportioned to what may be annually spared by the individual." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1784.

 

 

But since you brought up the later dates:

"The rich alone use imported articles, and on these alone the whole taxes of the General Government are levied... Our revenues liberated by the discharge of the public debt, and its surplus applied to canals, roads, schools, etc., the farmer will see his government supported, his children educated, and the face of his country made a paradise by the contributions of the rich alone, without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings." --Thomas Jefferson to Thaddeus Kosciusko, 1811.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MLArthur-- off topic, but WELCOME BACK! (You were missed.)

 

I'm thinking, Jefferson's comments on taxes come under the philosophy: "Nobody wants to pay taxes, therefore taxation causes pain. Fairness in taxation includes causing each citizen equal pain."

 

In other words, a thousand dollars tax on a thirty-thousand dollar income pinches. A thousand dollars on a thirty-MILLION dollar income is lost in the rounding.

 

But, IMHO, it's wrong to exempt anyone from taxation. There are few more empowering words than: "I am a taxpayer."

 

Of course, in Jefferson's day, people who did not own property-- and were thereby exempt from taxation-- were also denied suffrage. They had no means by which to vote themselves money from the rich man's purse. That's always a consideration.

 

(And, a reason to make sure every voter is also a taxpayer, these days.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hillary Clinton is a Marxist.

 

A friend of mine calls her the "Czarina of the Universe"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like it's time for a new bird thread now that MLArthur is back.

 

Hillary is a socialist who believes that government is better at spending your money than you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You have posted that, I just want to show how much of a Marxist she is.

 

Come on, be reasonable... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
..."We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." ... How well do you know your history?
This is not history; it's androgynous cable TV quote-gasm. Was it good for you?

 

Anyway, completely senseless: if you really knew history, you'd know such drivel was made meaningless long ago.

"He who would do good to another must do it in minute particulars; general good is the plea of the scoundrel, hypocrite, & flatterer." --Wm. Blake.

Among our resident scoundrels, hypocrites, & flatterers, pres. candidates are faint blips on the screen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites