Posted on The Heritage Foundation-By Andy Keim-On October 11, 2011:

How much do high-earning families need to pay before the Obama administration can finally say they are finally contributing their “fair share?” If such a number even exists, we have apparently not found it yet, if the latest proposed tax hike is any indication.

The Heritage Foundation’s Curtis Dubay explains the consequences of the President’s latest tax proposal:

“Taxpayers earning more than $1 million per year are investors and businesses that are directly responsible for creating jobs. Investors provide the capital to existing businesses and startups so they can expand and add new workers. Raising their taxes would deprive them of resources they could invest in promising businesses that are looking to add employees. Raising their tax rate would deter them from taking the risk to invest.”

In the long term, lower-income families will feel the sting of the tax hike as well. In another report, Dubay says job-creators immediately affected by the tax will refuse to hire additional workers simply because it won’t make any economic sense to do so:

“Many businesses pay their taxes through their owners’ individual income tax returns. The President’s tax hikes would be a direct tax on these important employers. A recent study from President Obama’s own Treasury Department shows that 90 percent of businesses that pay taxes through the individual income tax code and employ workers would pay the higher taxes under the President’s plan. Higher taxes would reduce these businesses’ incentives to hire new workers and their ability to retain or increase compensation for their existing employees.”

Ultimately, the U.S. government’s self-destructive policies will harm lower-income families far more than the more successful families and companies who can shoulder the burden at the cost of a reduced work force.

“The millionaire tax would end up costing the U.S. economy more jobs than the President’s jobs plan it is supposed to pay for would ever create. It would ruin American competitiveness among other developed countries,” Dubay says.

If the Obama administration truly values job-creation, it should focus on the real root of the deficit: runaway spending brought on by years of government expansion and poor decision-making.

What do you think? How can the President’s jobs plan create employment opportunities when it makes hiring new employees more costly?”


Note: The following articles and/or blog posts and videos relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. After Obama’s Jobs Plan Fails in Senate, GOP Pushes Its Own Plan!

Posted on Matt Cover-On October 12, 2011:

( – House Republicans say they are moving ahead with their own ideas on the economy now that President Barack Obama’s jobs plan failed in the Senate Tuesday night. They called on President Obama to work with them on their ideas.

Although the Democrats hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate, the president’s bill, the American Jobs Act of 2011, was defeated on a 50-49 vote, with two Democrats – Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Jon Tester of Montana – joining with the Republicans against the bill.

At a Capitol Hill news conference on Wednesday, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said that now that Obama’s plan had failed, the GOP would turn to its own ideas, adding that the GOP would also be willing to work with Democrats on areas of common ground.

“Nearly a month ago, House Republicans outlined – for the president – areas of common agreement where we could work together,” Boehner said. “The fact is Republicans have a plan – our plan for America’s job creators that we outlined back in May – and we have been working since then to enact the ideas outlined in this proposal.”

Boehner said that Republicans would keep working on areas of common ground, stressing that finding ways to improve the economy was what the American people wanted.

“We’re going to continue to work with the president in order to create a better environment,” he said. “Not everything the president outlined is something that we agree with, certainly not everything we’ve outlined is something the president would agree with.”

At the same press conference, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said that Obama’s campaign for his own proposal had “failed” and called on Democrats to work with Republicans instead of pursuing an all-or-nothing approach.

“[T]he Senate’s action last night proved that the month-long campaign that the White House has been on to promote the president’s bill failed,” Cantor said. “The president’s bill does not have the bipartisan support needed to pass because we believe that it is contrary to what is needed right now to help small businesses grow.”

Cantor said that Republicans would introduce some of their ideas after the planned congressional recess next week, including a bill to repeal a 3 percent income tax withholding requirement for government contractors.

Despite the calls for common ground, Republicans made clear they would not support Democratic ideas that contradict their basic principles, saying that they would oppose ideas that raise new taxes or incur more federal borrowing.

GOP Conference Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) said that part of the Republican agenda was opposing aspects of Obama’s plans that Republicans thought were bad policy.

“[W]hen this Congress began, House Republicans put forth a plan for America’s job creators,” Hensarling said. “Now, in this plan, it means that if the president wants to spend money we don’t have for jobs that we never get, we will oppose him. We believe that as part of this plan America has to be on a fiscally sustainable path.”

“If the president wants to increase taxes on job creators, we will oppose that,” said Hensarling. “We are trying to ensure that there is a fairer, simpler, more competitive tax code.”


II. Video: Executive Dictatorship: Obama Wants Stimulus Projects Without Congressional Authorization!-Posted on The Blaze-By Naked Emperor News-On October 12, 2011:

III. Obama’s Teachable Truthiness Moment: ‘The Pinocchio of Pennsylvania Avenue strikes again!’-Posted on National Review Online-By Michelle Malkin-On October 12, 2011:

IV. White House ‘Czars’ Threaten The Constitutional System of Checks and Balances!-Posted on Bob Unruh-On October 10, 2011:

V. Biden Warns of More Rapes and Murders If ‘Jobs Bill’ Isn’t Passed!-Posted on Conservative Byte-On October 12, 2011:

VI. How the Left has always exploited “crisis”-Posted on Patriotic Update-By: Nathaniel Davidson-On November 18, 2010:

Question: Is the AP in bed with George Soros, who funds approximately 30 news outlets?-You Decide:

AP Fact Checks GOP Candidates on Taxes, Jobs & the Economy!-Posted on The Blaze-By Billy Hallowell-On October 12, 2011:

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

Progressive group maps out President Obama’s strategy for next 2 years!

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

Note:  If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide.

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

Semper Fi!


Views: 18


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center



Reporter Kicked Out Of Michelle Obama
Conference For Violating ‘Black Girl Code’

The Black Entertainment Television channel recently hosted a conference in south Florida for black women known as “Leading Women Defined,” which featured a casual conversation between former first lady Michelle Obama and former senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett.

But according to the New York Post’s Page Six, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist who was in attendance was booted from the remainder of the conference after she wrote an article about some of the comments Obama had made during the discussion.

Robin Givhan, a fashion critic and staff writer for The Washington Post, documented the highlights of the friendly chat between Obama and Jarrett.

Some of the highlights of the conversation included the former first lady’s thoughts on President Donald Trump’s inauguration as the Obamas prepared to leave the White House, the role she played during the 2008 election, her difficulty settling in as “the spouse” to the president, how she described her White House garden as a “subversive act” to garner trust with the public and her upcoming memoir. Of course Givhan also wrote about what Obama was wearing … after all, she is a fashion critic.

But following the publication of the article, according to Page Six, BET demanded Givhan leave the conference early amid claims that she had violated a “sacred space” by publishing the content of the conversation.

They also canceled a panel discussion that Givhan initially had been asked to moderate.

However, Page Six noted that BET’s claim that Obama’s discussion was “private” and not intended to be shared with anyone else outside the small gathering in attendance didn’t hold up to scrutiny given the fact that BET itself posted clips from the discussion on its site.

Furthermore, Jarrett also posted those clips on social media and told everyone to “tune in” to the network so they could hear what Obama had to say.

Shortly thereafter, the dispute descended into a sharp back-and-forth on social media between Givhan and others who were irked at what she had done, as can be seen on Givhan’s Twitter feed.

Several of her critics asserted that the conversation had been “off-the-record” — an assertion Givhan flatly denied — and one user claimed the reporter had “violated a sacred trust” between black women.

Another said what she had done was a “complete violation of journalistic ethics and Black girl code, all at once,” while still another asserted through a hashtag that Givhan was “#notoneofus,” as if she were being banished from the exclusive realm of accepted professional black women.

For their part, a BET representative told Page Six that Givhan had been “invited as a guest (not working press) to moderate a fashion panel,” and noted that her travel and lodging expenses had been paid for by the network.

“She was made aware that it was an intimate conversation in a sacred space of sisterhood and fellowship,” the rep added.

Neither Givhan nor representatives for Obama responded to requests for comment on the report from Page Six.

If the WaPo reporter really was instructed ahead of time that the conversation between Obama and Jarrett was “off the record” and a private affair, but published anyway, then BET was justified in booting her from the remainder of the conference — though the mean-spirited commentary she received on social media still crossed the line.

But if Givhan received no prior warning on the matter — and given the fact that BET itself published the conversation later — then this is just a major display of hypocrisy and unnecessary infighting.

What do you think?


© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service