It looks like there is a new Republican working class hero: Tito the Builder. His name comes up now in all the Republican speeches and has been a rallying cry all week.
He is almost a home grown hero, discovered right here in Prince William County last weekend during the McCain rally.
The irony is staggering. Tito the Builder is actually Tito Munoz, we assume from Prince William County. Tito came to the rally dressed for the part of new Republican icon. The irony? Tito is an immigrant from Colombia. I guess he doesn’t know that Corey Stewart and John Stirrup belong to this same Republican party as Senator McCain?
According to Trailhead, the campaign blog in Slate:
Munoz showed up at a McCain rally in Woodbridge, Va. last weekend dressed in a yellow hardhat and orange surveyor vest, decked out in McCain-Palin flair and sporting a sign that read “Construction Worker for McCain-Palin” on one side and “Media—Tell the Whole Story!” on the other. During McCain’s stump speech, Munoz was behind the candidate, alongside “Phil the Bricklayer” and “Rose the Teacher.”
The video shows a verbal argument, mainly aimed at the press and led by Tito the Builder. It is hard to believe all this was going on in Prince William County. Expect to see Tito as the new mascot for HSM.
Hit it, Tito!
Some of this stuff you just can’t make up.
[sarcasm button on]
Maybe Tito will be the new Duecaster at citizen’s in upcoming BOCS meetings. Mascot for HSM, he appears a little too dark around the edges for GL’s taste. Maybe he can ride along with Maureen and use his construction knowledge to point out building code violations.
Next up: Angel the MS-13 soldier, Luis the pedophile, Pedro the home-invader (he’s Montgomery Co’s version), and Manuel the Day-Laborer. I’m cracking up over here!
The ugly white dude with the beard and no undershirt looks to be more their style. Tito’s just a tad too ethnic looking for Nativists.
I wonder what Tito thinks when he overhears McCain supporters bashing immigrants for being immigrants. When they start to say they have a culture of criminality and violence, that they are destroying the culture, blah, blah , blah.
Probably the same thing people think listening to Obama supporters telling black jokes.
Wow.
Just…wow.
Munoz seems to be an intelligent fellow. Presumably he is aware that Corey, Stirrup, and McCain are all Republicans.
I cannot believe the comments. You all would equate this man with the likes of Duecaster, Letiecq, et al because he’s a Republican? And because he’s taking members of the MSM to task for their unbalanced treatment of the candidates?
Amazing.
I’m amazed at the desire to paint Obama and the press as responsible for Joe the Plumber’s public scrutiny. Duh. Who walked over to Obama to express his opinions? Which candidate (and Vice) has harped endlessly on Joe the Plumber? Who should Joe blame for the exposure? BTW, there are already Joe the Plumber bobbleheads available on eBay.
Fontbonne, you need to ditch the “you all” accusations.
Fontbonne – part of the party mystique is to really dislike those you need to attract to win. That’s all! 🙁
Speaking of msm, I think Fox has been extremely biased in favor of McCain and Palin. I do consider them mainstream. That morning crew is very vocal and very much willing to discuss their likes and dislikes. I have gotten to the point where I can’t stand to listen any more because of the bias. I stick to CNN. They aren’t perfect but I don’t know who every person on there is going to vote for.
I just watched the video. I wish I’d remained under the mistaken impression that “Tito the Builder” was just an ordinary Latino construction worker who happened to be a conservative. Nope. He’s a nutcase. And then there was that other lady. I’m sorry to say this, but the people of color who support McCain/Palin are often even more dangerously imbalanced than the ones who usually get the bad rap (Caucasians who appear to be prejudiced).
Far from an “intelligent fellow,” I love how Tito has no problem with the standards of Fox News! Hilarious. Maybe that’s because on Fox News there are a lot of right wing extremists who scream at his preferred ear-splitting decibel level.
But you know, M-H, every once in a while I flip over there and they have this one guy on who actually dares to do some journalistic reporting. What’s up with that? Is that part of their cover, or do they allow the news reporters with any degree of pride to actually do some reporting if they wish?
For what it’s worth, I don’t think Tito is as bad as Duecaster, just from this one video. Tito seems to hate Democrats. Okay. Well he’s been trained to do that. Yeah, he screamed out “socialist!” But that just means he wishes there were more stupid people who might actually believe that, and if he screams it at the top of his lungs, some of the educated people might believe it too.
My point is that he is a hard core partisan first, and an enraged zealot second.
I think Duecaster is an enraged and HATEFUL zealot first, and then gravitates to certain issues and positions in order to express his hate and his zealotry.
Uhhhh, Obama was in southern VA , like Hampton Roads, the same day as McCain was in Woodbridge. Great post of this farce, guys.
I am just sort of still in shock over the entire Tito the Builder phenomena and the irony of it all. I almost think this is a set up. I mean what’s the likelihood of an ultra conservative Hispanic guy showing up at a Palin rally in Prince William County and then becoming the new Republican icon nationally? Who would have thunk it, this time last year?
I have no opinion, good or bad. I am just mystified.
So, if the start is to be believed, Obama was in front of hundreds of thousands somewhere else? HMMM, sounds like someone is telling a fib I think.
kinda puts the whole piece into question doesn’t it?
Actually, Tito does seem disturbingly imbalanced but then again, when you expose Obama as the massive fraud he is, some of his supporters tend to channel Tito.
A Resident:
I believe the video says the 100,000 Obama supporters who gathered were in St. Louis. As in St. Louis, Missouri. I’m not sure where the fib is. Unless you counted all the dots in the still photo and it doesn’t quite add up to 100,000. I saw a similar photo taken somewhere in Oregon. Lots of people show up to Obama rallies. It happens. No need to be nasty about it.
M-H, are you saying that Tito the Builder is some sort of icon????
What is the evidence of this? I can’t believe that even a desperate and poorly managed campaign would make a poster boy out of this clown.
Why him and not the Palin rally creeps who kept yelling “terrorist?” He’s less angry, but no more aware.
Actually, a pw resident, I believe that Obama was in St. Louis near the Golden Arches before a huge crowd last Sat. I don’t think the size of the crowd means anything though. What difference does it make?
The Obama rally was an outdoor rally and I hear on real TV that it was huge, estimate 100,000. It looked like a sea of people. Why does this bother anyone? Who cares? That size crowd happens in Washington, DC fairly frequently.
I was at that rally. I am a Republican. And I sat next to Tito. He seemed to be a very friendly guy who is extremely upset that his candidate is getting a bum wrap in the press. Anyone who can not see that the mainstream media is almost completely in the bag for Obama isn’t looking at these news stories with an open mind in my opinion.
Just one example. McCain takes a few days off from the campaign to try to fix the financial mess in DC and the media says that he is incapable of multi-tasking, a fool and basically giving up the race. Obama takes a few days to visit his Grandmother and he is on a “personal journey” (what ABC News called the trip during a promo on GMA). They applaud Obama for visiting his Grandmother (of course he did stop to do a few interviews before leaving) and criticize McCain for doing his job. I am not saying that what one man did was better or worse. Personally, in both cases I think that McCain and Obama made fine choices to leave their campaigns to take care of more pressing issues. But as a Republican, it does get tiresome to watch month after month of the media fawning all over Obama while they attack McCain. You can not say that Chris Matthews saying that Obama’s acceptance speech was a “symphony” does not show some bias. Joe Biden says that with Obama as President we can expect an international incident in his first 6 months in office and it is barely a news story. Can you imagine if Palin had said that? The media would have run with it continuously for 48 hours, but with Biden it was a total after thought. That looks like bias to a Republican. Maybe not to a Democrat because it isn’t your guy getting the short end of the stick, but to us it is unfair.
I know that people will say that Fox News is Republican. What if it is? That hardly competes with ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC. You have to admit that the scales are a little unbalanced on that one.
All I know about Tito is what I learned sitting next to the man for a few hours. However, I am also saying that as a Republican I can totally understand his anger and frustration with the media. It is disheartening to watch you candidate continually get beat up while the other guy gets a pass. And yes, that is what it looks like from this side of the fence.
NGL, I do not know. I listened to the various stump speeches today. Lousy, rainy day. I heard Tito the builder mentioned several times. I thought, That’s our guy!!! [sarcasm button on] That is when I went in search of him to do a thread post.
On a serious note, actually Tito the Builder was only repeating what has been said in Republican rallies. I don’t think he is nuts. He was worked up and agitated. The taller, less excited man also was repeating common concerns of conservatives.
There was lots of yelling and screaming. The people were discussing issues they felt passionate about. Would some of us here to the same thing? I think I would over a couple of issues.
Time to throw in that Tito’s politics are not my politics, but I can respect his right to express his mind. Actually he was really on top of all the issues….Republican style of course. Would he be allowed to be so vociferous in Colombia?
I think it was important to note that at the end of the conversation, David Corn and the taller gentleman shook hands and had found common ground.
I have no problem with Tito belly-aching about news coverage of the campaign. He probably thinks that millions of Americans supporting Obama are not capable of making up our own minds. And if not for the media telling us what to think, we’d be supporting McCain.
On the other hand, it could be possible that the media is only reflecting the general tide of the American psyche. We are becoming less and less affected by cries of “socialism” like Tito screamed when his frustration overcame him. We are less inclined to vote based on fear and hate. So his “socialism” cry falls on deaf ears.
Like I said, Tito is a lot better than Duecater. I’d much prefer Prince William County be known for Tito.
Anonimom,
McCain’s “suspending my campaign to rush to do news interviews and not Letterman and CVS and a good night’s rest in a NYC hotel then a Clinton policy speach and then arrive in Washington to have a negative impact” announcement was intended to impress voters. It was planned and packaged for voters. Voters interpreted it differently than he intended. Journalists reported that it was unusual, perhaps unprecidented. They didn’t say it was erratic or fraudulent. We made up our own minds about that.
Obama going to see his grandmother was not a political stunt. It did not warrant political commentary. But we still had Rush Limbaugh telling millions of Americans that Obama was going on an emergency trip to deal with a crisis invovling his birth certificate, implying that he was not born in Hawai’i but in Indonesia or something dumb like that.
As an American, I will never get over my disappointment with our national press corp rolling over for the Bush administration when they lied us into the Iraq War.
You can be angry about Barack’s grandmother if you want. But nobody died when Barack went to Hawai’i. The same cannot be said about our troops being sent to Iraq.
I thought that the emergency trip to Hawaii to fix the birth certificate remark was probably one of the lowest remarks I have ever heard. I didn’t realize Rush Limbaugh first said it.
Someone sent me a copy and paste from the dark screen. Frankly I was very disappointed reading it. Just disappointed that any human being could be so low as to make a remark like that about someone going to visit a dying grandmother–a grandmother who had been so influential in Obama’s life. Toot, as Obama called his grandmother, had really played very much of a mother role for him and he claims to have gotten his toughness from her.
Hopefully the people who make such hideous remarks about ‘granny dying’ can find it in their hearts to be kinder for just a little while. Toot is well into her 80’s and is extremely ill.
NGL I don’t know where you are getting that I was upset about Obama going to Hawaii. What I said was “Personally, in both cases I think that McCain and Obama made fine choices to leave their campaigns to take care of more pressing issues.” If saying someone is making a fine choice is being upset I don’t know what happy looks like.
Clearly you and I see this race very differently based on your reaction to McCain’s campaign suspension. I could say the same about Obama. “Oh yeah right! He was in such a rush to see his ailing Grandmother. Of course he finished his scheduled campaign events and even fit in one more interview with Robin Robers Wow! What a rush he was in to see Grandma. And as far as I can tell he stayed all of 24 hours. Smells like a media stunt to get more sympathy for a candidate weak on family values. ‘How can we attack him when his Grandmom is sick?’ ” We can all play the second guessing game.
And as far as the cries of Socialism go, you are also hanging out with a very different crowd. Obama’s call to “spread the wealth” and write checks to folks not paying income tax scares the pants off most of the people that I hang out with, which is exactly my point. We tend to spend time with those who agree with us and therefore it is easy to believe that everyone thinks like we do.
As far as the media reflecting America, that is not their job. They are supposed to report the news without a reflection of anything. They aren’t supposed to heap praise on one candidate because a lot of people like him. Nixon won in a landslide with over 60% of the vote in 1972. According to your statement, because he was popular and the media should reflect the feelings of Americans, they should not have investigated the Watergate scandal. Then they would have been “only reflecting the general tide of the American psyche”.
The press should report not decide. And would more people be supporting McCain if we had an even handed press corps? We will never know.
Anonimom, you sound like a mediocre softball player blaming the umpire because you’re losing to a much better team.
I knew you had it in your heart to bellyache about Obama going to visit his grandmother. But I didn’t think you’d actually type it out.
The media does report on America, not just “Hannity’s America.” When Sarah Palin made her debut, America was spellbound and so was the media. They covered her non-stop and helped McCain’s numbers considerably. Then they uncovered some things that didn’t help so much, mostly just by asking her basic questions about the job she was applying for. How can you blame the media for that?
When Obama is winning, the media tries to explain why. They do polls, all of which say the same thing, in general. But they break down the numbers, look at key questions. What do you expect them to report when the numbers put Obama up by double digits, particularly in questions that are specific to what Americans care about most? If that is true, why shouldn’t they report it?
Was it unfair to show both candidates during the debates? Should they have been on radio so it wasn’t so obvious McCain is not able to maintain his composure under pressure? How is that the media’s fault?
Only a propaganda station could have reported on McCain’s “Here I Go To Save The Economy” stunt without a healthy dose of skepticism. This had never been tried before during a Presidential campaign. Never in history. Isn’t it fair to ask the question, WTF???
NGL- If you noticed the quotation marks, you might have seen that I was showing an example, not stating what I really thought. I said from the very start that both men MADE FINE DECISIONS. Perhaps if I put it in caps, you will actually see what I said the very first time and stop reading what you want to see instead of what I actually said.
As far as Sarah Palin’s debut, you and I were clearly watching different television stations. The elite media went after her from day one. They complained that her first campaign stop was not their studio. They erroneously talked about her banning books. They dragged her over the coals for her choice to campaign even though her daughter was pregnant. They even questioned whether her son wasn’t really her daughter’s son. Wow, if that is being “spellbound” then I hate to see what they do when they don’t like you. They were calling her a failure before she even gave her acceptance speech.
It was fair to show both candidates during the debate. But was it fair to have the VP Debate moderated by a woman writing a book in which Obama figures prominently? Who would clearly benefit from an Obama/Biden win? How is that fair?
Where are the reports on the fact that McCain called our Freddie and Fannie years ago? Where is the outrage that Obama flipped on public funding? Why is there an article on the front pages of the New York Times attacking Cindy McCain? Why do they tear down Joe the Plumber but never question Obama’s statement about “spreading the wealth”? Is that fair? Is that balanced? Is that reporting the facts, just the facts and nothing but the facts? No.
You don’t see it because it isn’t effecting your candidate. We all like to hear nice things about people we like. I am sure that you like hearing nice things about Obama and bad things about McCain. Therefore, you are probably pretty happy with the media coverage. It reflects your views.
I am all in favor of skepticism, but I would like it to be doled out evenly. I fully expect that at least one anchor will break down with tears of joy should Obama win on November 4th. Even then though, I doubt that you will see the media bias and will just state that he/she is reflecting the general feeling in America. But whose America?
Anonimom was NOT the person whose name was sent to me for making the very ugly grandma report.
There is a person posting on other blogs and in the mjm named anonmom. No i in there between n and m. I do not think AnonImom is this person.
Anonimom,
I know you may not think so, but there is enough investigative journalism to go around. The fact that we know what you’re talking about when you give examples shows that these things have been covered in the press.
The way you are talking, you would think that McCain, Palin, and their families have absolutely been dragged through the mud, while Obama, Biden, and company have been left completely unscathed. With lots of media coverage of people making socialist charges, investigating place of birth, investigating religious background, investigating ties to Ayers, etc…I think we can safely say that it is a b***h to be a political candidate (Republican or Democrat) in this day and age.
AnonImom, I think that each time something is ‘found’ on a person we like, it is magnified. My problem has been that I liked no one. My original person I supported is not in the running any longer.
I think the media has been extremely sexist to the women candidates, each in different ways. There is no way they were judged as the men were judged. Before Hillary was ousted, I honestly had to pinch myself to make sure I was still in the 21st century.
Some of America’s initial reaction to Palin was 2 fold: The Evangelical crew and the Non Evangelical crew. Those of us who are not evangelical had never heard of her. She was quite well-known in evangelical circles already. Rightly or wrongly, that made the non’s very skeptical.
It is a very ugly election. Each one seems to get worse than the last.
Sure Anonimom, you just pulled it out of thin air, but honestly, I think most people reading this couldn’t even dream up a way to attack Obama for visiting his ailing grandmother. Speaking for myself, your rant in quotations was eye-popping because I just never seem to be able to anticipate what a really hatefully myopic world view is going to churn out next.
Your complaints about Palin surprise me, because I never heard about book burning or questions about her child rearing on a mainstream station.
Re. Gwen Iffles Anyone writing a book about the 21st century will be including many references to Barack Obama. That ship has already sailed. But she is an African American woman writing about the African American experience of the early 21st century. He’s going to be in there. The other three moderators where not African American, but they were reporters who had done countless stories about Obama. Want to freak out about that too?
It’s obvious to me that your outrage stems from the divergence between what journalists report and what the McCain campaign talking points are. I can understand your frustration, but the journalistic oath, if there is one, should not be “I promise to repeat the talking points of the Republicans and not do any fact checking.” They tried that from 2001-2005 and it didn’t work out so well for us. I think every single journalist working today is deeply ashamed of their complicity in lying this country into a strategically catastrophic, economically devastating, and tragically bloody war.
Perhaps some of them are overcompensating by pointing out the untruths when McCain tries to sell them a similar bag of b.s. Or perhaps they are remembering their job is to report the facts objectively, even if one side is lying.
But seriously, Anonimom, if you are one of those people who was happy with mainstream media during 2001-2005 when they ushered us into the Iraq War, then what am I doing talking to you? Of course you’re upset with the media post Katrina. They are no longer puppets of the extreme right wing.
Diversity Gal, great point:
If you are a serious-minded McCain supporter, you have to be frustrated that the only part of his message that is saturating the public is the hate campaign. I think they somehow thought the hate campaign could be shouted at rallies and whispered in robocalls and mailers that say “Terrorists!” on the front, while mainstream media would write only about McCain’s economic plan and his years as a prisoner of war. Not gonna happen.
AnonMon, where do you get the idea Obama will send out tax rebates to poor people? Palin is the only person I’ve heard say that. Obama and Biden say “if you make less than $250,000 a year, you will not see even one dime of increase in your taxes ”
Palin twisted that into “Obama says he will give tax breaks to 95 percent of Americans” (not true) and “but X percent of Americans don’t pay any taxes at all, how are you going to give a rebate to someone who doesn’t pay taxes at all? SOCIALISM of course!”
The line of attack begins with a slight of hand. A stretch, and then spirals into McCarthyism.
The news networks show Palin and other partisans say such things. But there is nothing more to report on that. If they did it would not be flattering to Palin or McCain.
Anonimom, I see that I was mistaking you for someone else. I would have been less infuriating in challenging your assertions. Sorry about that. Specifically, I wouldn’t have deliberately misinterpreted you, forcing you to clarify.
I do that because that’s a classic tactic of the right wing media and, in my opinion, a staple of the McCain campaign. I like to see how certain people react to the turnabout. I thought you were one of them.
The reason I am annoyed with McCain is I used to respect him tremendously. He was supposed to be a reformer within the Republican party. Instead, he has Palinized the party and I am afraid of what the future holds. During the past eight years, we have seen how corrupt and wasteful, ineffective and unscrupulous right wing extremists can be when they are in power. But now that they have been whipped into a frenzy of hatred and resentment just in time to be OUT of power, I shudder to think how they will behave.
That said, I grant that many journalists seem to prefer Obama. But I think this preference is fact-based. Let’s face it. Republicans have really disrespected journalists in the past 8 years by lying to them repeatedly. We know this on a smaller scale right here in PWC. How are they supposed to report what Bush/Cheney/Gonzales/Rumsfeld/Libby/Rove/Corey Stewart says when they know it isn’t true? The press feels exploited. They feel duped. In order to repair that relationship, McCain needs to bring back the straight talk express. But so far he has treated the press with equal, or near equal disrespect.
He’s saying things to them like “Sarah Palin is the most qualified VP candidate in recent history,” or “the public needs to hear more about Bill Aryes.” What are they supposed to think when he claims to believe the things he is saying? They are losing respect for him. But in my opinion, they are doing a good job of reporting considering what they are getting from McCain.
We clearly see the media differently. There is not reason to continue to go round and round with me saying “biased” and you saying “not biased.” It gets us nowhere fast.
However, as to the claim that Obama will give checks to folks who don’t pay income tax, that one I can back up.
Washington Times, October 13, 2008
“Mr. Obama’s campaign promise, which he has repeated in his speeches and in the presidential debates, stems from his “Making Work Pay” tax cut that will give a $500 refundable tax credit to every worker or $1,000 to each working couple. But because this provision in his economic-recovery plan is “refundable,” a large number of middle- to lower-income workers who have no income-tax liability after taking tax credits and deductions the that Internal Revenue Service allows, will be given the equivalent of the tax cut in the form of direct payments from the U.S. Treasury – funded by higher-income taxpayers. ”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/13/obama-tax-cut-refunds-those-who-dont-pay/
I guess you could say that you are taking the money from their Social Security payment, but will those folks be forgoing their SS benefits when the time comes? Probably not. So those of us who pay taxes will get hit twice. Once now and once again when these folks hit 65 years old.
Obama is promising to send a $500 to $1000 check to people who do not pay income tax as a tax credit against those same income taxes. In his own words, Obama called that is “spreading the wealth.” In times past we had another word for it.
AnoniMom,
The goal is no bias, but let’s be realistic, here. It is, quite literally, impossible to create a completely unbiased media, since “the media” (mainstream or not) is made up of PEOPLE. ALL people all have biases that they must constantly review and try to counter or keep in check. You can continue to go on and on about bias, but it exists in everyone, including all members of the media. That is not going to change. The best they can do is to try to keep it under control. I am guessing that you think most, save possibly one network, are doing a poor job of this.
Here is another take on the Making Work Pay program, from Michael Dobbs, a fact checker for WashingtonPost.com (You may say that the Washington Post is a biased source since it has endorsed Obama. OK, but take a look at the Washington Times, a paper specifically created by conservative Rev. Sun Myung Moon to counter what he considered the Post’s anti-Unification Church stance):
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/10/fighting_for_joe_the_plumber.html
Anonimom thanks for letting us know how this ideology is getting disseminated. I was genuinely curious because I don’t read The Washington Times. That’s a good thing about this blog. We can enlighten each other about where our ideas are coming from.
I guess Palin and McCain would call that the Trickle Up Theory of Economics, except that they think they can scare more old people with words like “socialist” and “communist ”
You know, I was not making much money in
2001, but I got a check in the mail from the federal government saying something about how great George Bush is. I guess that wasn’t socialist, just politicking for reelection. But if I’d known such things could be characterized as socialist, I’d have expected John Kerry to use the same robocalls and attack ads.
Anonimom,
Let me play devil’s advocate, what about the recent economic stimulus checks? That was $300 singles, $600 married plus $300 per child that was not dependent on anybody’s tax bracket. So, why was that not some form of spreading the wealth?
I have had relatives get tax credit checks during the Bush administration. Why is it that it is ok under Bush and not ok under Obama?
Kathy Z and MH,
There is no difference…some are just H-bent on trying to convince others that Obama is a socialist and his tax policies will hit the middle class hard and reward the poor. I’m not buying the nonsense, and if people (singles) are making more than $250,000/year and don’t want to part with an extra 1-2% of that to help support the nation’s absolute neediest, then they don’t seem like “true patriots” or “Real American’s” to me!
My last paycheck was a few hundred more than it usually is. When I checked my paystub, I saw that I was no longer paying a tax because I had already made the amount for the year that is subject to the tax. So now until the end of the year, I have bonus money. Do I REALLY need that money? I’ve been okay so far this year without it. Would it really kill American’s making over this arbitrary amount that they have to pay this tax for the whole year and not just until they make a certain amount? I’m not sure, but I think it’s a SS tax, too! Does SS not need those $$$? Everything I have heard said they need every penny.
$250,000 a year is a HELL of a lot of money! But I suppose those who have it quite often think they don’t have to share it even when they earned it from OUR (not “THEIR”) economy. (TWIN, you’re not included in the “selfish” category. I just know they are out there.)
Just for the record, no I didn’t think the “stimulus checks” were a good idea. Based on our economies current situation, they didn’t work either.
TWINAD- Do you plan to send that extra money back to the government? If not, why? You said you haven’t missed the money so far. Wouldn’t you want to help the neediest families? How about instead of sending it to the government you donate it to charity? How would you feel if the government forced to you donate it to charity?
Obama is not being the Jimminy Cricket of government acting as a conscience so that the rich will help the poor. He is taking their money at the point of a gun and forcing them to give. How you would you feel if they did that to the little bit of extra money that you found in your paycheck?
Besides that, he wants to raise the income tax on those making $250,000 a year AND on all businesses, big and small. I know lots of small business owners and very few of them make anywhere near $250,000. Plus, more taxes on businesses means less jobs which will create more of the neediest of the neediest. So, TWINAD, enjoy that little bit of extra that you have now, because under an Obama tax plan you won’t be getting it much longer.
Anonimom,
Yes, I would want to help the neediest families, and yes, I will be giving it back to the government anyway. For the last 4 years I have owed more after I finished my tax return and I don’t expect this year to be any different since I haven’t bought any property to shelter that money. All I’m saying, is that me and people in my situation CAN afford to pay a little extra. Can everyone? I doubt it. If a man makes what I make and has 4 kids and a wife that doesn’t work, well then, I can see how that extra few hundred could make a small difference, but really, if they were getting along all year without it, I think they could make it through the last 5 paychecks of the year without it. And for your second paragraph, I think I said that I wouldn’t mind if they raised the amount of money people have to make before they stop paying that tax. People making under a certain amount don’t pay anything and then it is only a tax on people between that low mark and about $100K. After that, all the money between roughly $100K and I think up to $250K don’t pay anything! That just doesn’t seem right to me. You can call me a socialist…I don’t think that is a bad word.
I also run a small business, and no, we do not come close to clearing $250K on that, but really, the only tax we are paying on the income from the business is the payroll tax. This is only our second year, so we have only filed once, but I have to say, I certainly expected to pay more than we had to last year. It was almost nothing.
Sorry…I meant third paragraph…
I suspect Republicans have been programmed to interpret the Obama tax plan as a Robin Hood tax plan. Right now, he isnt taking anyone’s money since he has not yet been elected.
I have no problem with the $250k cut off. I also agree with Twinad about the social security tax. Raise that bad boy. How else are we realistically going to raise more money for social security? Twinad should not be expected to be a lone voice in the wind. Of course she can’t send it back nor should she be expected to. She was illustrating a point.
Twinad, the only time *I* ever maxed out this time of year was on matching contributions for my 401K. grrrrrrrr.
Since we have seemed to have gone to payroll taxes, I have a question for everyone. How do you feel about Federal retirees who have to pay social security taxes on post-retirement earnings in a job but cannot receive social security benefits?
And, Twinnad, if I understood your comments, I agree that the upper limit for taxing for social security should be raised. Does anyone actually know why it stops at a certain income level? It has been around since social security started but I don’t know why the ceiling exists.
PW County Resident, I’m a Federal Retiree. I am vested in SS. At a retirement seminar before retiring I asked the moderator about the Federal Retiree SS penalty. He told me(3 years ago) that there was over 300 signatures on a bill to eliminate the penalty in Congress. However, the chairman of the committee ( a Rep. at the time) would not let the bill come to the floor for a vote. Perhaps with the Dems. in control of the House, this bill will be voted on and the penalty will be eliminated. You may have to write a few lettters to your representative to get this going.