Posted by Tina
Found out tonight those so called faith based organizations receiving grants to “temporarily” house the children are not really “faith based.
Remember the meeting Obama had with Governor Perry? That meeting was also attended by “Kevin Dinnin, president of Baptist Child & Family Services, a BGCT-related agency providing care for children housed at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio” and “Chris Liebrum, who leads the Baptist General Convention of Texas’ disaster recovery program. Arne Nelson, president of Catholic Charities of Dallas was also in attendance.
But none of these organizations are associated with a church and none has a congregation or parish. Instead, they are organizations along the lines of community organizers such as ACORN. They are government funded non-profit groups…and boy are they funded, particularly Mr. Kevin Dinnin (see documents):
We recently stumbled upon Mr. Kevin Dinnin when we were looking around for the primary recipients’ of HHS Grants and we came upon the 2012 tax filings of BCFS, or more accurately BCFS EMD where Kevin Dinnin is the principal officer and CEO. Paid at an annual salary of $477,799+
This one group alone makes ACORN seem small ball in comparison.
Two days before this meeting with President Obama, on 7/7/14 Mr. Dinnin was given a grant from Health and Human Services in the amount of $190,707,505.
Yes, that is over $190 million dollars just before he met with the President. In 2014 alone BCFS has received almost $270 million.
These are staggering sums of money to just one of several taxpayer funded groups operating under the guise of “faith based organizations”. The amounts awarded to these “faith based” groups in 2014 far exceeds the money ever given to the fraudulent social assistance group, ACORN. And the 2014 grant amounts are EXPLODING in comparison to 2012 and 2013. …
…Catholic Bishops so far in 2014 $27 Million is another albeit smaller example, after receiving almost $70 million in 2012.
But the most staggering figure is what HHS has spent on Unaccompanied Minor Children (under grant code 93676) since the President’s 2012 Deferred action program began: $644,188,522.00
“Never let a manufactured crisis go to waste,” I always say.
Elsewhere in America: 22 shot in Chicago over 12 hours, including girl, 11, killed at sleepover.
In five years what exactly has been done that would substantively help American kids?
faith based does not mean a church has to be involved.
The biggest waste of money is the fake Tea Party Fundraising scandals… now can we have a refund on the fake IRS, benghazzi…. and shutdown please.
Or let’s look at giving big oil and gas about 21 billion! Americans do not benefit the stuff is sold on the world markets!
Or how about corporate welfare in general?
Or about the waste on congressional pay… so many elected just get their marching orders and play games… Congress does nothing but waste money
This is not a war of 2 parties… This is actually A war of actual American citizens of all beliefs and religion taking back our country from an oligarchy.
There are many names but the Koch brother money can no longer be hidden or the John Birch agenda… read david Koch’s VP agenda in the 80’s… they are not just a couple of rich biz owners
Americans will not put up with this much longer. World events will shake them in their boots.
I love how you think that corporations which want to deny contraception or refuse to bake gay wedding cakes–two things that are never once mentioned in the Bible–are legitimately faith-based, but religious charities that explicitly use religious reasoning to advocate for helping poor and needy children–which is explicitly mandated by the Bible–are “so-called faith-based.”
Dewey what Tea Party fund raising scandals are you referring to. If you are going to take pot shots you can at least be specific so that we can reply specifically.
“…let’s look at giving big oil and gas about 21 billion! Americans do not benefit the stuff is sold on the world markets!”
Sure Dewey there isn’t a single American who buys gasoline for his car or a product of any kind manufactured and shipped using petroleum. We also don’t use any petroleum based products either…and our governments, federal, state, and local doesn’t receive any tax revenues from the sale of said gasoline, diesel, and products, corporate taxes, or various fees and licenses. No American works in this industry either.
Blah, blah, blah!
I’ve said it before…get your own blog or kindly limit your challenges to one or two at a time.
” This is actually A war of actual American citizens of all beliefs and religion taking back our country from an oligarchy.”
And yet you have positioned your self against the Tea Party so obviously you don’t believe your own BS premise.
As long as you are willing to accept Soros money as legit I have no sympathy for your incoherent and ridiculous rants against the Koch’s.
I think you like the machine just fine as long as it comes from a left perspective and serves your own selfish interests…either that or you are one confused puppy.
Oh and Dewey…it’s 2014.
“I love how you think that corporations which want to deny contraception or refuse to bake gay wedding cakes–two things that are never once mentioned in the Bible–are legitimately faith-based…”
I have never argued the corporation is faith based. The people who run the corporation, however, do not have to leave their faith at the door as a test for the right to organize a business. That would be an egregious affront to the first amendment. And they did not deny any employee contraceptives…they cover MOST of them. They object to three.
The bakery in question is a small business owner and the same applies to him/her.
Where is the respect from the LGBT community and women for a person/persons with a different belief or point of view in a nation in which in most circumstances they will not run into this problem? This does not represent wide spread discrimination. What is the point of insisting that every single person bend to the will of these groups, who don’t represent everyone either, or be faced with harassment and lawsuits?
Your preaching about this, when both of these groups have some of the most vicious, intolerant people on the planet is more than I’m willing to put up with today.
“…but religious charities that explicitly use religious reasoning to advocate for helping poor and needy children–which is explicitly mandated by the Bible–are “so-called faith-based.”
That’s one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is that they use these names to deceive Christians into making contributions to them or so they qualify under the faith based law for the grant money. If its a lie, as in either of those examples, YOU BET I have a problem with it…it’s criminal…its a fraud!
If they are part of a Cloward Piven strategy to overwhelm our system in order to institute government controlled wages you bet I am against it. In America we value freedom simply because it means that individuals can make as much money as they want through work, ingenuity, savings and investment.
You are a dangerous person Chris because you do not value freedom and you do not have a clue who the people are that are plotting to tear this country to shreds to institute a Marxist model. You buy into the BS that in a system like that things will be “fair” for everyone. Wake up, fool, before you lose your birth right!
“That’s one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is that they use these names to deceive Christians into making contributions to them or so they qualify under the faith based law for the grant money. If its a lie, as in either of those examples, YOU BET I have a problem with it…it’s criminal…its a fraud!”
Do you have any evidence that the leaders of these organizations aren’t really Christian?
“If they are part of a Cloward Piven strategy to overwhelm our system in order to institute government controlled wages you bet I am against it. In America we value freedom simply because it means that individuals can make as much money as they want through work, ingenuity, savings and investment.”
You give way too much credit for our modern political landscape to obscure ’60s academics, especially considering you don’t actually understand their arguments.
The guaranteed annual income is not an anti-American or anti-freedom policy. It has nothing to do with how much any individual American can make. And it’s also not exclusive to the left. The idea of a guaranteed annual income been supported in some form by figures as disparate as Thomas Paine, Napolean Bonaparte, Martin Luther King, Jr., Friedrich Hayek, and Richard Nixon. It’s gaining popularity among libertarians on the right who see it as a better alternative to the high number of welfare programs we have today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guaranteed_minimum_income
I don’t support the methods outlined Cloward and Piven to bring about this policy, but there is no evidence that anyone in the Obama administration does either. Is it so hard for you to believe that the Obama administration is handling the immigration crisis in this way for legitimate reasons? (Namely, because they have to under a law signed by George W. Bush?)
Reagan economist Bruce Bartlett has a great article about the increasing appeal of a universal income:
“…In 2006, the conservative scholar Charles Murray published “In Our Hands: A Plan to Replace the Welfare State,” which advocated a universal grant of $10,000 per year in lieu of the existing welfare system, including Social Security and Medicare.
Most recently, Matthew Feeney of Reason, the libertarian magazine, wrote favorably about the Swiss proposal in a Nov. 26 post. As a complete replacement for the existing welfare system, he thought it had merit and might even save money. He was especially critical of the paternalism of the current welfare system and the denial of autonomy to those living in poverty.
“Instead of treating those who, often through no fault of their own, have fallen on hard times, like children who are incapable of making the right choices about the food they eat or the drugs they may or may not choose to take, why not just give them cash?” Mr. Feeney asked.
Feeney cited Thomas Paine in support of his proposal. In Paine’s 1797 pamphlet, “Agrarian Justice,” he advocated a social insurance system for young and old, financed by a 10 percent tax on inherited property. Paine would have given everyone 15 pounds at age 21 and 10 pounds per year to everyone at least age 50 for life.
These are significant sums. It is difficult to calculate, but with the Measuring Worth calculator, 15 pounds in 1797 would be equivalent to approximately $17,500 today.
One purpose of giving young people a grant was in compensation for the loss of their natural inheritance in land, which had been seized by the state and given or sold to particular individuals for their exclusive use.
The libertarian economist David Friedman, son of Milton Friedman, and Professor Zwolinski, the philosopher, have both expressed sympathy for Paine’s idea that everyone today suffers from past injustices in terms of property rights. A universal income might be an appropriate reparations payment, they say.
Of course, not all libertarians agree with this recent interest in a guaranteed income. The Bloomberg columnist Megan McArdle notes the earlier problems with work effort identified in the negative income tax experiments. She also questions how immigrants would be treated and how politicians would react to stories about people blowing their checks on cigarettes and booze.
These are valid concerns. But it is worth remembering that we already have considerable experience with the basic income payment in Alaska. Since 1976, it has had a permanent fund to collect revenues from oil production and invest them, paying out an annual dividend to all state residents.”
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/10/rethinking-the-idea-of-a-basic-income-for-all/?rref=world&module=ArrowsNav&contentCollection=Business%20Day&action=keypress®ion=FixedRight&pgtype=Blogs
I getting so tired of reading the contributions from Dewey and from Chris.
Chris seems to think that contradicting your opponent is the essence of debate. You could say “The sky is blue” and Chris would find some negative comment about your observation because, of course, he is so superior. His approach to any statement made on this site (other than his own) reminds me of a Monty Python skit, “Argument Clinic”. Have a look and tell me I’m wrong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y
Dewey, on the other hand, would point out that it wasn’t the sky it was corporations and the corporations were not blue, instead they were taking over the world. That reminders me of a very interesting scene in the book “Catch 22”. One of the characters would walk around with crab-apples in his mouth and rubber balls in this hands. If any one asked him about the crab-apples in his mouth he would point out that they were not crab-apples, they were rubber balls and they weren’t in his mouth they were in his hands. Sounds a bit like Dewey doesn’t it. Heck, come to think of it, that kind of insane misdirection is what we seem to get daily from the current administration.
Of course Chris will tell me I’m wrong and Dewey will point out that I’m probably a Koche brother or at least a distant cousin.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y
Chris at #5 and #6
Whether or not they think of themselves as Christian people isn’t the question. Whether they are fraudulently claiming affiliation is the question.
It seems odd to me that an organization would give itself the name, “Baptist Child & Family Services” if it has no affiliation with the Baptist Church or a Baptist Church.
The Catholic Charities of Dallas at least has posted on the link below: “On behalf of the parishioners of the Diocese of Dallas”.
But that still doesn’t indicate direct affiliation.
Does this website indicate a charity that has stepped forward to help or an activist organization to aid and assist people who come to this nation illegally? I think it matters.
The page on DACA is very informative and suggests an intention to flood our nation, overwhelm our schools, welfare and other services, and bust budgets in local communities. It’s not really charity when you create the condition, its a political strategy.
We have moved well beyond any discussion of amnesty being granted to older people who were brought here as kids and know no other home.
America is a big country and we are a people with big hearts but no nation, no matter how wealthy, charitable or vast, can absorb hordes of people from various nations and cultures without experiencing major problems. We have too many citizens right now that can’t find work and an economy that is sputtering.
Our President doesn’t seem to be concerned about that or about seeing to it that the Congress is involved in these decisions, which is his job as the leader of our nation. Instead it appears to be that he has Harry Reid blocking any unwanted participation that interferes with his dictatorial decrees.
It bothers me a lot that you are not at all concerned about this aspect of the issue.
“You give way too much credit for our modern political landscape to obscure ’60s academics…”
And you not enough!
But that makes sense since you haven’t watched and experienced negative conditions as they have taken control and made changes over fifty years. But it doesn’t make sense when you consider that Bill Ayers has a lot of influence over how teachers learn to teach our kids, or that both Hillary and Barack are big fans of George Soros and use the tactics from his book to achieve their Socialist (collectivist) vision for America. In fact the fact that you don’t have an experience of a free America that you don’t think they have much control.
“I don’t support the methods outlined Cloward and Piven to bring about this policy, but there is no evidence that anyone in the Obama administration does either.”
The evidence is all around you; you just don’t see it, or don’t want to see it.
“especially considering you don’t actually understand their arguments.”
You don’t understand the consequences of their policies or the way they package their arguments to hide their intent. You actually believe it’s about caring for people rather than elitist power and central control. You don’t get that you are a peon, not a free citizen, and a pawn in their political game. You don’t have a clue who these people are or of what they are capable.
“Namely, because they have to under a law signed by George W. Bush”
A law written to protect young girls from the human trafficking sex trade! The law does guide what must be done but it has nothing to do with the dramatic increase in people crossing into our nation illegally! That we can lay at the feet of the President who would rather be popular than lead as a responsible adult. He is not following the law; he has found a loop hole in the law to exploit.
” Is it so hard for you to believe that the Obama administration is handling the immigration crisis in this way for legitimate reasons?”
Like what? What possible legitimate reason did he have to invite these children to flood our nation and overwhelm our cities, our courts, our education system, and our services? How does this benefit teachers already challenged with many languages and their bosses with stretched budgets? How does it help our kids who will sit in classrooms where many of the kids don’t understand the language? How does it help people dependent on welfare when the lines are longer? How does it help county and city budgets? A lot of these “kids” are working age…how does it help our young citizens to compete with these kids for jobs?
The one thing I can think of that it helps is the Democrat Party…IF the majority of Latino’s are pleased.
This is the problem with an all heart approach to leadership…or a slimy underhanded approach to politics…the unintended consequences are never considered or just don’t matter. the end justifies the means. The end is a permanent single party system. Welcome to Marxist America, a place where, when you are old, you “will spend (y)our sunset years telling (y)our children and (y)our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”
More Common Sense, you couldn’t be more wrong. It’s spelled Koch, not Koche. I expect a full retraction and apology by tomorrow at the latest, at which point I will tell you why your apology is not good enough and how you’re wrong about everything else. :p
Chris at #7
I have only one problem with any government run distribution program and that is that it will not remain as instated. It will be fooled with and increased and tweaked and reformed until it looks exactly like what we have today.
Liberals would soon whine that $XXXXX is not a “living wage” and that corporate CEO’s have too much “distribution” already and its not fair so they should be taxed at 90% to make up for it.
The healthiest possible scenario is a nation of citizens that take responsibility for their own needs, I would support anything that would move us in that direction.
I like private charities because (when) they are not controlled by a central government nor are they connected by a central agenccy. the bad ones fail and drop off the effective ones are supported by people who see they have achieved a positive result. Those running the charity have personal hands on oversight and since it’s local the care is personal and directed toward specific individual problems.
Whatever we do, it must become a system that is remarkable for the few people who ever need it.
This would require a lot more from our educational system as well.
“…basic income payment in Alaska.”
Those are not government taxpayer payments. They are dividends.
The program is an appropriate function for state governments. The federal government really shouldn’t be involved. Our nations states are all different with different problems and resources.
Chris,
You just proved my point. You could resist that urge to point out my spelling error, could you. It was gnawing at you, wasn’t it. Of course it was. It is your purpose and destiny to point out every flaw you see, real or, as we see in many of your contributions on this page, imagined. How sad and lonely it must be to be you.
Don’t expect an apology.
A note to Jack and Tina. Chris and Dewey (and Libby) have turned a great blog into something painful to read. I do not believe in censorship but these folks are not contributing to the debate. It appears that their agenda is to be difficult as opposed to presenting differing views. It’s like trying to have a conversation with children constantly interrupting. Don’t get me wrong, I like children. It’s just that childish noise sometimes is inappropriate when people are having an adult conversation. Maybe you should put a stop to the noise.
“Whether or not they think of themselves as Christian people isn’t the question. Whether they are fraudulently claiming affiliation is the question.”
Unless you have actual evidence that they fraudulently claiming affiliation, it shouldn’t BE a question.
“It seems odd to me that an organization would give itself the name, “Baptist Child & Family Services” if it has no affiliation with the Baptist Church or a Baptist Church.”
Except that BCFS IS affiliated with the Baptist Church of Texas.
http://texasbaptists.org/ministries/partners/human-care
Your source was wrong.
That aside, faith-based charities do not necessarily have to be affiliated with churches:
http://nonprofit.about.com/od/faqsthebasics/a/The-Difference-Between-A-Church-And-A-Religious-Organization.htm
http://nonprofit.about.com/od/faqsthebasics/f/What-Is-A-Faith-Based-Nonprofit.htm
“The Catholic Charities of Dallas at least has posted on the link below: “On behalf of the parishioners of the Diocese of Dallas”.
But that still doesn’t indicate direct affiliation.”
Are you seriously saying that a branch of Catholic Charities is not affiliated with the Catholic Church? Do you even know what Catholic Charities IS?
http://catholiccharitiesusa.org/
“The page on DACA is very informative and suggests an intention to flood our nation, overwhelm our schools, welfare and other services, and bust budgets in local communities.”
Are you insane? It suggests no such thing! Only someone blinded by hatred and propaganda would even think such a thing.
Hatred causes hallucinations.
“Like what? What possible legitimate reason did he have to invite these children”
He did not “invite” anyone, ya raving loon.
“Liberals would soon whine that $XXXXX is not a “living wage” and that corporate CEO’s have too much “distribution” already and its not fair so they should be taxed at 90% to make up for it.”
You really do live in an alternate reality. We are nowhere close to a 90% top tax rate. Even proposing it would be political suicide.
But we have had a 90% top tax rate before. Ya know, back in those good old days you’re so nostalgic for.
You don’t know anything.
“Your source was wrong.”
Your sources would make it appear so. However, was it?
You sent me to Texas Baptists.org That’s not the same organization!
I looked again through the website (link provided at the bottom of the article I used as a source) for BCFS (Baptist Child and Family Services) and clicked on various buttons including this one that lists the partners BCFS (Baptist Child and Family Services) works with to provide services (none of them are religious that I could find). All of them are associated with government. Nowhere on the site does the word Baptist appear and nowhere does it indicate that religious services will be offered, provided, or available upon request. Very unusual for a “faith based” organization.
Now it may be that the organization calls on the people at the site you linked to for volunteers when they need them but yours is not the same organization and it is not the organization that has gotten over $270 million in grants and also operates in Latin America.
BCFS says it has 150 volunteers and 2,495 employees. That seems a little top heavy to me. The CEO makes a whopping $477,799 plus. In total, $39.9 Million is spent on salaries and employee benefits, according to the tax return. It’s also listed as:
Why wasn’t this organization helping these kids in the countries from which they have fled? Had they done that the ones that have died or been raped or robbed would be safe. No, Chris, they are coming in great numbers because they were told a treasure was at the end of the journey. That was an incredibly irresponsible (party political) thing to do and it will cost our nation dearly. The politics may turn out to be a stumble too. The President played Santa and invited these kids to come. It wasn’t a direct invitation…it didn’t have to be. Words like a “path to citizenship” and the “Dream Act” and “amnesty” are understood and interpreted accordingly and they spread like wild fire through a nation of desperate people.
$644,188,522.00 has been spent so far since the President’s “Deferred Action Plan” was announced in 2012…funny that’s when that surge began too.
“We are nowhere close to a 90% top tax rate. Even proposing it would be political suicide.”
Political suicide but not beyond the realm of expectation, eh Chris? You didn’t say it wouldn’t happen only that it would not work politically now.
But for conniving liberals who love to spend other peoples money that’s just a minor and temporary inconvenience; they do things covertly and incrementally. How do you think we have grown the government to the size it is with the layers of taxes and fees now imposed? In a little over sixty years the different taxes and fees has grown, the number of departments and the size of the bureaucracy has grown…the budget grows every year and the debt does too. The fact that the rate is no longer 90% doesn’t matter a bit…sure fools you though, doesn’t it?
“You don’t know anything.”
And you seem to think you know everything…big mistake. It must be a terrible burden being you.
Tina, what are you talking about?
The Texas Baptists page I linked to clearly lists Baptist Child and Family Services as a partner.
Here is what Texas Baptists says on their “about” page:
Mission
The Baptist General Convention of Texas encourages, facilitates and connects churches in their work to fulfill God’s mission of reconciling the world to himself.
Vision
We are a fellowship of transformational churches sacrificially giving ourselves to God’s redemptive purpose. Continually being transformed by the power of the Holy Spirit into the likeness of Christ, we join together to transform our communities and the world. Engaging culture, we reach people where they are for an encounter with Jesus Christ.”
Still want to claim BCFS isn’t affiliated with a church, or that they are “fraudulently” claiming faith-based status?
“Why wasn’t this organization helping these kids in the countries from which they have fled?”
How do you know they weren’t?
“Had they done that the ones that have died or been raped or robbed would be safe.”
Are you actually saying that if this charity was effective, they could have prevented millions of children from fleeing their countries for America?
You have got to stop attributing magical powers to your ideological opponents.
“No, Chris, they are coming in great numbers because they were told a treasure was at the end of the journey.”
And I’m sure conservatives constantly boasting about how we are the greatest nation on earth, the land of opportunity, the country with the greatest healthcare system in the world, etc. etc. does nothing to create that impression?
“It wasn’t a direct invitation…it didn’t have to be. Words like a “path to citizenship” and the “Dream Act” and “amnesty” are understood and interpreted accordingly and they spread like wild fire through a nation of desperate people.”
The only people using the word “amnesty” are Republicans.
“Political suicide but not beyond the realm of expectation, eh Chris? You didn’t say it wouldn’t happen only that it would not work politically now.”
Again, please stop attributing magical powers to your opponents. I cannot see fifty years into the future. Maybe some day we will have a 90% tax rate again. I doubt it, and it’s not something I want. But we’ve barely managed to get a 4% increase on the top rate over the past six rate, under a president who is, according to you, the biggest most radical Marxist who ever radically Marxed. Why even discuss a 90% rate at this point? You might as well say our country is on the verge of instituting the Hunger Games, it’s so impractical.
Chris: “The Texas Baptists page I linked to clearly lists Baptist Child and Family Services as a partner.”
That’s nice but the Baptist Church of Texas did not receive the grant money.
The organization that did receive the grant money does not indicate an affiliation with the Baptist Church. It’s more like a Haliburton type contracting company for health and human services. The volunteers they use number very low, or have in the past.
Still want to claim BCFS isn’t affiliated with a church, or that they are “fraudulently” claiming faith-based status?
I think I have the right to question the validity of the name they have chosen, yes. An organization that utilizes people of faith or calls on churches for volunteers isn’t necessarily faith based itself…and their webpage doesn’t reflect a faith based theme.
“How do you know they weren’t?”
Sorry, wrong question. Why wasn’t their help in Central America sufficient to keep kids from pouring across our border…a condition that now, surprise surprise, has resulted in a big fat multimillion dollar cash windfall for BGCT (Not the Baptist Church)?
“Are you actually saying that if this charity was effective, they could have prevented millions of children from fleeing their countries for America?”
There has been a very dramatic and sudden increase in the numbers of people coming across our border. I am saying all of this unusual activity is connected and one of the dots is that this company already works in the nations from where these kids are supposedly “fleeing.” Now, because they are coming here, this company gets millions of dollars from our government to facilitate their entry. What part might they have played in making it happen? What, if anything, did they do to discourage it in Central America? If not, why not…surely a company that deals in this kind of crisis KNOWS what a mess would result. Surely they were aware of the dangers, especially for young girls!
None of this makes sense…unless it was planned. This administration is known for its redistribution policies. some of those policies redistribute to organizations. Planned Parenthood was one of the organizations that got lots of money as facilitators in the exchange, for instance.
You have got to stop attributing magical powers to your ideological opponents.”
There is nothing magical about creating a crisis and awarding friends with wads of cash.
“And I’m sure conservatives constantly boasting about how we are the greatest nation on earth, the land of opportunity, the country with the greatest healthcare system in the world, etc. etc. does nothing to create that impression?”
It might create aspirations to come to America; it does not offer amnesty, free college, or a path to citizenship. There is a difference between “we welcome people to come legally to our great country” and “come on down, our borders are open and our services are free.” You know that.
“The only people using the word “amnesty” are Republicans.”
True Democrats don’t like to call it what it is because they know most people don’t favor amnesty and think our laws should be enforced and our border made secure…so they use euphemisms like a “path to citizenship” or the “dream act” when talking about amnesty and free stuff for illegal entry future voters.
Chris: “I cannot see fifty years into the future. Maybe some day we will have a 90% tax rate again.”
What you can’t see is that the people are being taxed at a much higher rate than they think they are now because of all of the various costs, fees and taxes congress has imposed on people and on goods and services. What you haven’t experienced is the incremental encroachment on your ability to keep and use the money you earn as you see fit and the lack of purchasing and wealth building power that takes from every single citizen.
“Why even discuss a 90% rate at this point?”
Doh! Because you brought it up?
You might as well say our country is on the verge of instituting the Hunger Games, it’s so impractical.
High (Or uncompetitive) tax rates are impractical because they don’t work. The reason they don’t work is that they blunt and destroy the means of wealth creation, opportunity and abundance. They blunt human creativity, productivity, and potential. They don’t work because they encourage wasteful spending, fraud and abuse. They don’t work because they end up in the creation of a useless expensive huge bureaucracy. they don’t work because they even blunt tax revenue and cause otherwise law abiding citizens to seek relief (Like moving company headquarters overseas).
Our federal government was originally formed to protect the various states and to mediate in disputes between or among the states. The people and the states were the recognized sources of power. The power and freedom of self determination was revered and honored. The federal need to take money from all of the people has grown dramatically to astronomical heights.
We are discussing 90% because at the rate our leaders are going your generation will be faced with bills that will come due with interest rates that can no longer be held in check.
I know you think I’m against you and everything you love, Chris, but the truth is I am doing everything I can to preserve your future as well as the things you love…and that includes the people you love. I’m doing what I can to introduce you to ideas and concepts you didn’t learn about in school
While Obama fumbles and Chris launches another tedious and silly rhetorical tirade, Texas Govenor Rick Perry actually tries to do something about this intolerable situation.
“Pointing out the tens of thousands pf unaccompanied minors only make up roughly 20 percent of those being apprehended illegally crossing the border, Perry said he can no longer wait for the president to act as gang members and drug cartels flood into Texas, causing crime to skyrocket.”
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/07/21/Our-Citizens-are-Under-Siege-Perry-Sends-National-Guard-to-Border
This just in:
Breitbart:
Now where did they get the idea that amnesty was on the way for anyone that could reach our borders?
Dang, More Common Sense. Learn to take a joke. I was being self-deprecating.
Tina: “That’s nice but the Baptist Church of Texas did not receive the grant money.”
That wasn’t the question.
“The organization that did receive the grant money does not indicate an affiliation with the Baptist Church. It’s more like a Haliburton type contracting company for health and human services.”
That’s what an affiliation is.
“None of this makes sense…unless it was planned.”
This is silly. There are many real reasons for the increase in undocumented immigrants that have nothing to do with a planned conspiracy to drain America’s resources. These reasons are not hard to find. We’ve known this was going to happen for years.
Start here:
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jun/30/rush-limbaugh/limbaugh-says-obama-administration-planned-influx-/
“Obama did it” is not the answer to everything you don’t like in the world.
“True Democrats don’t like to call it what it is because they know most people don’t favor amnesty and think our laws should be enforced and our border made secure…so they use euphemisms like a “path to citizenship” or the “dream act” when talking about amnesty and free stuff for illegal entry future voters.”
Are you talking about true Democrats like this commie bastard?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128303672
““Why even discuss a 90% rate at this point?”
Doh! Because you brought it up?”
No, I did not. You did.
““Liberals would soon whine that $XXXXX is not a “living wage” and that corporate CEO’s have too much “distribution” already and its not fair so they should be taxed at 90% to make up for it.”
It turns out that AGAIN, lawless Obama has been doing an end run around the law —
[Wilberforce] Law ALLOWS Immediate Deportation Of Immigrant Children
http://www.dickmorris.com/law-allows-immediate-deportation-immigrant-children-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/
Chris: “That’s what an affiliation is.”
The affiliation is not acknowledged anywhere by the group that received the money. Your playing games Chris to avoid the obvious. The organization uses a Christian name, Baptist< but does not represent the Baptist church in any way shape or form and does not acknowledge an affiliation with the church on its webpages. I think their name is deceptive and I think the deception was intentional.
"That wasn’t the question."
Damn straight that wasn't the question. The question was whether the organization that received the money is faith based. It may be a good-hearted and compassionate organization but since it does not have, or at least does not acknowledge, a direct connection with the Church whose name it uses "so-called" is an appropriate way to refer to the organization.
"“Obama did it” is not the answer to everything you don’t like in the world."
Why not…"Bush Did it" and Dick Cheney did it" and "Halliburton did it" has been the reason for everything wrong in the world according to Democrats for twelve years! But lets put aside Politico's dismissal to observe a few indications: Start with this:
NewsMax
The surge of people suddenly crossing our border marks a dramatic increase over historical norms. Obama made statements that signaled an invitation. Mexico is suddenly not enforcing its own immigration law on its southern border.
There are all kinds of indications that this has been planned.
Support for Morris’s suggestion:
Borgen Magazine:
Reuters:
Front Page Magazine:
And by the way Senators like John McCain who are apparently backing this are also wrong to be doing it.
“Are you talking about true Democrats like this commie bastard?”
Ignorant a$$! That would be the law in which Democrat commie bastards agreed/promised that it would settle the issue once and for all…the end…finito…because they would enforce immigration law…LIARS! They promised this would never be an issue again…LIARS!
Wikipedia:
One of the reasons conservatives are so angry about this is because once again democrats cannot be trusted to keep their word or honestly negotiate when writing law.
Kind of like Obamas promise that we could keep our doctors or that we would SAVE $2500. on our insurance.
“No, I did not. You did.”
Yes, but…you are the one who originally brought up the 90% rates as a positive on this blog. I would never propose such idiocy. I was mimicking you in my example…you can’t run away from that since are the only one who has ever proposed that figure as a positive for the economy.
Please take the time to watch this video of a 26 year retired border patrol agent’s threat assessment of the current border situation, in which he claims “asymmetrical warfare” being carried out against American Citizens.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnkSXosZhic
Sessions to Congress: Back Ted Cruz or Remain ‘Complicit’ in ‘Nullification of Border’:
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee and a key immigration hawk, took to the Senate floor on Monday afternoon to attack the efforts by President Barack Obama to grant amnesty via executive order to millions of illegal aliens.
During his floor speech, Sessions endorsed a bill from Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) that aims to curb the president’s executive amnesty efforts—and called on his colleagues to cosponsor it. Sessions said:
Senator Cruz has a bill that would stop this presidential overreach. Sessions said. It’s very simple. It lays out that we won’t spend money providing legal documents to people unlawfully in the country as defined by the law of America and as defined by the Congress of the United States. So, I will ask, will you cosponsor Senator Cruz’s bill and let’s defend our constituents, or will our congressional colleagues remain complicit in the nullification of our laws and basically the nullification of border enforcement?
Continued..
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/07/21/Sessions-To-Congress-Back-Ted-Cruz-s-Bill-To-Stop-Obama-s-Executive-Amnesty-or-Remain-Complicit-in-Nullification-Of-Border-Enforcement
conservative Treehouse points to a media outlet in Texas that has noticed the same thing.
“But lets put aside Politico’s dismissal”
Are you just intentionally trolling me at this point? Or are you physically incapable of seeing the difference between Politico and Politifact?
Tina: “The affiliation is not acknowledged anywhere by the group that received the money. Your playing games Chris to avoid the obvious. The organization uses a Christian name, Baptist< but does not represent the Baptist church in any way shape or form and does not acknowledge an affiliation with the church on its webpages. I think their name is deceptive and I think the deception was intentional."
This makes no sense.
I don't know if BCFS mentions their affiliation with the Texas Baptists on their website. But Texas Baptists DEFINITELY lists BCFS as an affiliate on their website.
Isn’t that better? BCFS is the organization you are accusing of dishonesty. If they mentioned Texas Baptists on their website, they could just be lying. But Texas Baptists–which is a group of churches–mentions their affiliation with BCFS on their website. Unless you’re saying that Texas Baptists itself is lying about being affiliated with BCFS–something they’d have no motive to do–then your argument does not make any sense.
BCFS is affiliated with Texas Baptists, a collection of churches. I already proved that. I can’t believe you are still arguing that point.
Your claim that BCFS is “not associated with a church” was false. Please just own up to that.
“Yes, but…you are the one who originally brought up the 90% rates as a positive on this blog.”
I have never done that, Tina. In fact, I have said more times than I can count that I believe 70% is too punitive a rate, and Reagan did the right thing for the economy by lowering it (though I think he overcompensated and ultimately made them too low).
I’d appreciate it if you wouldn’t make false claims about what I have or have not said. Be prepared to quote me directly if you want to go there.
I will not further address your conspiracy theory about how Obama planned an immigration crisis that is, if anything, bringing his approval rating lower. It is stupid, and not worth engaging. You could easily discover the real reasons for this crisis, but you’re not interested in the complexities of the real world. That’s not sexy enough. Complexity is boring. You’d rather have a clear villain to rail against. So you keep going back to the same poor sources. I mean, Dick Morris? Really? It doesn’t matter how many times these people have been wrong, all that matters is that they tell you what you want to hear.
Tina gives Chris another good and deserved fish slap.
Question: What are the html codes that work in the Post scripts blog comments? Is there a list?
“This makes no sense.
I don’t know if BCFS mentions their affiliation with the Texas Baptists on their website.”
I do…they don’t. Not to the Texas Baptists you found or any other baptist church. That is the point. And this is the last time I will address it.
“Isn’t that better?”
No! It is irrelevant.
“BCFS is the organization you are accusing of dishonesty. If they mentioned Texas Baptists on their website, they could just be lying.”
You have got to be kidding me! I have already told you. They claim to be faith based but have ZERO references to any church, faith, parish, coven, mosque, cathedral, chapel, synagogue or symbol.
” But Texas Baptists–which is a group of churches–mentions their affiliation with BCFS”
That’s nice Chris but nobody is questioning their ties to the organization, in fact they are not relevant at all. Whether or not they are recognized by BCFS IS…and they are not.
“Your claim that BCFS is “not associated with a church” was false.”
I disagree so no I will not bend to your will.
I agree the church is being honest. I don’t agree the organization getting government money is honest.
“I have never done that, Tina. In fact, I have said more times than I can count that I believe 70% is too punitive a rate, and Reagan did the right thing…”
You have suggested that times that I claim were great occurred when rates were at 90%, as if that were the cause of the greatness and you do argue for keeping rates high.
I’d appreciate it if you would quit treating me like a student, talking down to me as if you were superior. But I realize the futility in that.
“You could easily discover the real reasons for this crisis, but you’re not interested in the complexities of the real world.”
You could easily use this as an opportunity to inform our readers of the alternative possibilities…you do have them right…why else would you bring this into the conversation?
Instead you prefer to go find a church that didn’t receive grant money and attempt to make an issue of it as a means of discrediting me and THIS possibility. And I have to tell you this administration has a habit of doing things in the same. deceitful and unlawful way so this is entirely plausible.
But come on…tell us the other reasons for the sudden surge of people coming across the border…imagine one if you can’t find any evidence…make sure its nice and “complex”.
When all else fails just bad mouth the source, eh Chris, a person who has been on the inside, has participated in the game, and has intimate knowledge of all things Democrat and all things DC.
Last word for me…
Tina: “I agree the church is being honest. I don’t agree the organization getting government money is honest.”
So the churches of Texas Baptists are being honest when they say they are affiliated with BCFS, but BCFS is not being honest when they say they are affiliated with the churches of Texas Baptists. Got it. Makes perfect sense!
“You have suggested that times that I claim were great occurred when rates were at 90%, as if that were the cause of the greatness”
No, that does not imply that the 90% rate caused the greatness. It does prove that a high top tax rate alone is not enough to cause economic ruin. And it proves that the very modest tax increases currently proposed by Democrats are not evidence of an unprecedented Marxist takeover that will destroy America. (I’m not creating a strawman here; these are the exact phrases used by you and other conservatives, frequently.)
“Instead you prefer to go find a church that didn’t receive grant money and attempt to make an issue of it as a means of discrediting me and THIS possibility.”
I did not make BCFS’ affiliation with the Baptist church an issue. You did, when you falsely claimed that no such affiliation existed. I countered your false charge by showing that BCFS is indeed affiliated with the Taxas Baptist churches, as proven by the Texas Baptists’ website. Instead of admitting this like a rational person, you decided to use bizarre, absurd pretzel logic to pretend like you hadn’t been proven wrong.
As you always do.
Don’t lecture me about trying to “discredit” people. At least when I discredit people, I’m honest about it. You have just attempted to discredit a charity based on falsehoods, and you refuse to admit that your charges were false, even when faced with incontrovertible proof. There are no facts you’re not willing to deny if you think it suits your agenda.
“BCFS is not being honest when they say they are affiliated with the churches of Texas Baptists. Got it. Makes perfect sense!”
I comment only to reiterate: BCFS DOES NOT SAY they are affiliated with any church or acknowledge or say they are affiliated with the Baptist Churches of Texas or any other church or faith on their webpages…period! The use of “Baptist” in their name without the acknowledgement of affiliated churches on their own webpages suggest a fraudulent attempt to raise money and their tax return suggest their best charitable efforts are to their highly compensated selves. Noticing and discussing that possibility is what we do in politics. I have never claimed I am an authority and see no reason that anyone would assume guilt or innocence based on speculation.
If you construct a straw man it is that I am the final word rather than an observer with an opinion. that my friend is pure idiocy but indicative of your prejudice and biases.
How about I make it easy for you and anyone else who feels as you do.
Please, do not believe a single word I say…ever.
“And it proves that the very modest tax increases currently proposed by Democrats are not evidence of an unprecedented Marxist takeover that will destroy America.”
No but takeover of 6% of the economy with Obamacare, regulations that tie the hands of banks, taxes and regulations on business that force them overseas, five years of high unemployment due to leftist policies, practices that bypass Congress or blunt House participation, policies that target Americans, Policies that create more massive debt, policies that force more people onto government programs, polices the pick winners and losers, AND higher tax rates DO suggest “evidence of an unprecedented Marxist takeover that will destroy (IS DESTROYING) America.”
And you are in total denial about all of it! Wake the he77 up!
Pie: “Question: What are the html codes that work in the Post scripts blog comments? Is there a list?
The only ones that I’m aware of that work on PS are the ones that create links, which you already use, and the following:
i and /i bracketed for italics highlighting before and after a word or sentence you need to highlight
b and /b for bold highlighting
The bracketed word blockquote in front of something you wish to put in a quote box with /blockquote bracketed to close the box quote
Do these make sense to you?
Or, have I completely missed the question?
Jack may be aware of others.
Tina: “Please, do not believe a single word I say…ever.”
I never do.