This is amazing insight into Obama's background. For any who believe Obama is the person to lead this country, please come forward with specific documentation that supports his qualifications, and allegiance to the American way of life and beliefs. This man will never, never survive true public scrutiny to become President, unless we the American public allows the media to gloss over all of these facts! It's high time we get serious and put an end to this sham, so pass the following enlightenment info to all your friends before apathy and ignorance of the real facts lulls this smooth talker into office. Obama's 'Not Exactly's': 1.) Selma Got Me Born - NOT EXACTLY, your parents felt safe enough to have you in 1961 - Selma had no effect on your birth, as Selma was in 1965. (Google'Obama Selma ' for his full March 4, 2007 speech and articles about its various untruths.) 2.) Father Was A Goat Herder - NOT EXACTLY, he was a privileged, well educated youth, who went on to work with the Kenyan Government. 3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter - NOT EXACTLY, he was part of one of the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has ever had. 4.) My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom - NOT EXACTLY, your cousin Raila Odinga has created mass violence in attempting to overturn a legitimate election in 2007, in Kenya . It is the first widespread violence in decades. The current government is pro-American but Odinga wants to overthrow it and establish Muslim Sharia law. Your half-brother, Abongo Obama, is Odinga's follower. You interrupted your New Hampshire campaigning to speak to Odinga on the phone. Check out the following link for verification of that....and for more. Obama's cousin Odinga in Kenya ran for president and tried to get Sharia muslim law in place there. When Odinga lost the elections, his followers have burned Christians' homes and then burned men, women and children alive in a Christian church where they took shelter.. Obama SUPPORTED his cousin before the election process here started. Google Obama and Odinga and see what you get. No one wants to know the truth. 5.) My Grandmother Has Always Been A Christian - NOT EXACTLY, she does her daily Salat prayers at 5am according to her own interviews. Not to mention, Christianity wouldn't allow her to have been one of 14 wives to 1 man. 6.) My Name is African Swahili - NOT EXACTLY, your name is Arabic and 'Baraka' (from which Barack came) means 'blessed' in that language. Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama. Barack Hussein Obama is! not half black. If elected, he would be the first Arab-American President, not the first black President. Barack Hussein Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother's side and 43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father's side. While Barack Hussein Obama's father was from Kenya , his father's family was mainly Arabs.. Barack Hussein Obama's father was only 12.5% African Negro and 87.5% Arab (his father's birth certificate even states he's Arab, not African Negro). From....and for more....go to..... http://www.arcadeathome.com/newsboy.phtml?Barack_H ussein_Obama_-_Arab-Americ an,_only_6.25%25_African 7.) I Never Practiced Islam - NOT EXACTLY, you practiced it daily at school, where you were registered as a Muslim and kept that faith for 31 years, until your wife made you change, so you could run for office. 4-3-08 Article 'Obama was! 'quite religious in islam'' http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=605598.) 8.) My School In Indonesia Was Christian - NOT EXACTLY, you were registered as Muslim there and got in trouble in Koranic Studies for making faces (check your own book). February 28, 2008. Kristoff from the New York Times a year ago: Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it'll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as 'one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.' This is just one example of what Pamela is talking about when she says 'Obama's narrative is being altered, enhanced and manipulated to whitewash troubling facts.' 9.) I Was Fluent In Indonesian - NOT EXACTLY, not one teacher says you could speak the language. 10.) Because I Lived In Indonesia , I Have More Foreign Experience - NOT EXACTLY, you were there from the ages of 6 to 10, and couldn't even speak the language. What did you learn, how to study the Koran and watch cartoons. 11.) I Am Stronger On Foreign Affairs - NOT EXACTLY, except for Africa (surprise) and the Middle East (bigger surprise), you have never been anywhere else on the planet and thus have NO experience with our closest allies. 12.) I Blame My Early Drug Use On Ethnic Confusion - NOT EXACTLY, you were quite content in high school to be Barry Obama, no mention of Kenya and no mention of struggle to identify - your classmates said you were just fine. 13.)An Ebony Article Moved Me To Run For Office - NOT EXACTLY, Ebony has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn't, and never did, exist. 14.) A Life Magazine Article Changed My Outlook On Life - NOT EXACTLY, Life has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn't, and never did, exist. 15.) I Won't Run On A National Ticket In '08 - NOT EXACTLY, here you are, despite saying, live on TV, that you would not have enough experience by then, and you are all about having experience first. 16.) Voting 'Present' is Common In Illinois Senate - NOT EXACTLY, they are common for YOU, but not many others have 130 NO VOTES. 17.) Oops, I Misvoted - NOT EXACTLY, only when caught by church groups and Democrats, did you beg to change your misvote. 18.) I Was A Professor Of Law - NOT EXACTLY, you were a senior lecturer ON LEAVE. 19.) I Was A Constitutional Lawyer - NOT EXACTLY, you were a senior lecturer ON LEAVE. 20.) Without Me, There Would Be No Ethics Bill - NOT EXACTLY, you didn't write it, introduce it, change it, or create it. 21.) The Ethics Bill Was Hard To Pass - NOT EXACTLY, it took just 14 days from start to finish. 22.) I Wrote A Tough Nuclear Bill - NOT EXACTLY, your bill ! was rejected by your own party for its pandering and lack of all regulation - mainly because of your Nuclear donor, Exelon, from which David Axelrod came. 23.) I Have Released My State Records - NOT EXACTLY, as of March, 2008, state bills you sponsored or voted for have yet to be released, exposing all the special interests pork hidden within. 24.) I Took On The Asbestos Altgeld Gardens Mess - NOT EXACTLY, you were part of a large group of people who remedied Altgeld Gardens. You failed to mention anyone else but yourself, in your books. 25.) My Economics Bill Will Help America - NOT EXACTLY, your 111 economic policies were just combined into a proposal which lost 99-0, and even YOU voted against your own bill. 26.) I Have Been A Bold Leader In Illinois - NOT EXACTLY, even your own supporters claim to have not seen BOLD action on your part. 27.) I Passed 26 Of My Own Bills In One Year - NOT EXACTLY, they were not YOUR bills, but rather handed to you, after their creation by a fellow Senator, to assist you in a future bid for higher office. 28.) No One on my campaign contacted Canada about NAFTA - NOT EXACTLY, the Candian Government issued the names and a memo of the conversation your campaign had with them.
OBAMA'S NEW STRATEGY • In effect, he would legislate a 60 percent tax bracket for upper-income Americans, killing all initiative and innovation. He’d raise the top bracket to 40 percent. He’d apply FICA taxes to all income, not just that under $100,000 as at present. So add 40 percent plus FICA’s 12.5 percent plus Medicare’s 2 percent plus state and local taxes averaging, after deduction, at 5-6 percent, and you have a 60 percent bracket. • He would double the capital gains tax, saddling the 50 percent of Americans who own stock with dramatically higher taxes. • He’d double the dividend tax, hitting elderly coupon-clippers now retired and depending on fixed incomes. • He wants to cover 12 million illegal immigrants with federally subsidized health insurance, dramatically driving up costs and forcing federal rationing of healthcare. As in the U.K. and Canada, you will not be permitted certain medical procedures if the bureaucrats decide you are not worth it. • He proposes requiring Homeland Security operatives to notify terror suspects that they are under investigation within seven days of starting the investigation • He says that unless they can establish that there is “probable cause to believe that a certain individual is linked to a specific terrorist group,” Homeland Security cannot seize his documents and search his business. The current standard is only that the search be “relevant” to a terror investigation. • In effect, he would legislate a 60 percent tax bracket for upper-income Americans, killing all initiative and innovation. He’d raise the top bracket to 40 percent. He’d apply FICA taxes to all income, not just that under $100,000 as at present. So add 40 percent plus FICA’s 12.5 percent plus Medicare’s 2 percent plus state and local taxes averaging, after deduction, at 5-6 percent, and you have a 60 percent bracket. He does not oppose $5-per-gallon gasoline but only says that he wishes there had been a more “gradual adjustment” to the higher prices. Search News: capital gains tax Search the Web Search News: capital gains tax Search the Web
OK guys. How much money do you make? How many of you make over 2.9 million dollars? None? That's what I thought. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fbxpMw4mco http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNyNv_UfFUo (I'm just here for the party)
Yes but you might work for someone that does and that will affect whether he thinks your jobs is worth keeping or putting it back into his pocket......
To tell you the truth, it was an off the cuff statement without any research or prior knowledge But here's a link: Tax Cheating By America's Multi-Millionaires & Billionaires 'Out of Control' Tax Cheats Called Out of Control By David Cay Johnston New York Times, August 1, 2006 Straight to the Source So many superrich Americans evade taxes using offshore accounts that law enforcement cannot control the growing misconduct, according to a Senate report that provides the most detailed look ever at high-level tax schemes. Among the billionaires cited in the report are the owner of the New York Jets football team, Robert Wood Johnson IV; the producer of the "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers" children's show, Haim Saban; and two Texas businessmen, Charles and Sam Wyly, who the Center for Public Integrity found in 2000 were the ninth-largest contributors to President Bush. Mr. Johnson and Mr. Saban, who are portrayed as victims in the report, are scheduled to testify today before the Senate Permanent Investigations subcommittee. They are expected to say that professional advisers assured them their deals to avoid taxes were more likely lawful than not. The Wyly brothers told the committee that they would invoke their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and thus were not called to testify. The report characterizes them as active participants in tax schemes. Cheating now equals about 7 cents out of each dollar paid by honest taxpayers, as much as $70 billion a year, the report estimated. "The universe of offshore tax cheating has become so large that no one, not even the United States government, could go after all of it," said Senator Carl Levin, the Michigan Democrat whose staff ran the investigation. Senator Norm Coleman, the Minnesota Republican who is chairman of the subcommittee, adopted the minority report on Sunday as the product of the full committee. The report details how the Quellos Group, a tax shelter boutique based in Seattle, "concocted a tax shelter" using $9.6 billion "worth of fake securities transactions that were used to generate billions of dollars of fake capital losses." Senator Levin said that when investigators asked for trading records they were first told the trades were private, over-the-counter transactions. He said investigators asked for trading tickets or other evidence of who owned the $9.6 billion worth of stock and were told the stocks were never owned by the parties involved. "They just wrote down numbers on paper and claimed losses," he said. "It was just like fantasy baseball, except the taxes not paid were for real." Quellos, in a statement, said, "we fundamentally disagree with the report, which presents a one-sided view." It said the transactions, which the Senate committee describes as fabrications, were real and involved "a significant possibility of economic gain and loss." The investigation, which took 18 months, involved 74 subpoenas, 80 interviews and the collection of more than two million documents, and yet Senator Levin said "the six cases we present are just examples, just a pinhole look." The 400-page report recommends eight changes, some of them aimed at going after the law and accounting firms, banks and investment advisers that the report says enable tax schemes that rely on complexity, secrecy and compartmentalizing information so that advisers can claim they had no idea that the overall transaction was a fraud. "We need to significantly strengthen the aiding and abetting statutes to get at the lawyers and accountants and other advisers who enable this cheating," Senator Levin said, adding that "we need major changes in law to stop the use of tax havens" by tax cheats. It also recommends new rules that strip away the underlying legal presumptions that make offshore tax havens like the Cayman Islands, Nevis, the Isle of Man and Panama attractive places for Americans to hide assets and income from the Internal Revenue Service. Senator Levin said the law "should assume that any transaction in a tax haven is a sham." He said that during the investigation he grew angry as he learned how common cheating had become and how existing government rules aided tax cheats. He said that complex schemes were broken into discrete pieces, allowing professional advisers working on each piece to assert that they had no idea that, taken as a whole, a scheme was improper. "I get incensed by people who use tax havens to not pay their taxes while the average guy has to pay his taxes because they are taken out of his pay before he gets it," he said. Both Mr. Johnson, the football team owner and scion of the Johnson & Johnson health care fortune, and Mr. Saban, the television mogul, are portrayed in the report as victims. The two men, through representatives, said yesterday that they relied on professional advisers who told them the transactions were lawful, and that they were now settling with the Internal Revenue Service. Mr. Johnson, known as Woody, told Senate investigators two weeks ago that to buy the Jets in 1999 he had to sell assets, incurring the 20 percent tax on long-term capital gains in effect at the time. He said that a way to defer the tax was proposed by Larry B. Scheinfeld, who had been his accountant at KPMG until he joined Quellos, where he worked closely with Chuck Wilk, a tax lawyer. The technique involved a complex set of circular transactions using what the Senate report characterized as sham corporations in the Isle of Man with shell corporations given names like Jackstones. Their ownership was kept secret. "Ain't capitalism great!" Mr. Wilk wrote to Mr. Scheinfeld in an e-mail message extolling the tax benefits of the Johnson deal. Three weeks later, when the deal was set, Mr. Scheinfeld wrote back: "I just hope Woody doesn't get cold feet or have the I.R.S. select his return for an audit!" The report details a scheme created for Mr. Saban to avoid more than $300 million in taxes from sale of his half interest in the Family Channel and related properties. Mr. Saban told Senate investigators that he never understood the transactions but undertook them after asking two questions of Mr. Wilk and his personal tax lawyer, Matthew Krane. Mr. Saban said he asked whether the deals were legal and whether a major law firm would certify them as proper. The two lawyers, Mr. Saban said, answered "yes to both," so he went ahead. Later, when Mr. Saban learned that he had paid $54 million in fees to Quellos; Cravath Swaine & Moore, a New York law firm; and others for what turned out to be what the report described as fake transactions, he said he felt "misled, lied to and cheated." Lewis R. Steinberg, who as a Cravath Swaine partner helped design the deal and wrote an opinion letter attesting that it was more likely than not to work as a tax shelter, told Senate investigators last week that he relied on assurances from Quellos and Mr. Johnson that real transactions took place, not fake trades. Mr. Steinberg, who is now at UBS Securities, another firm named in the report, is a prominent tax lawyer and in 2004 was chairman of the tax section of the American Bar Association. The report also dissects deals by the Wyly brothers of Texas, showing how they made at least $190 million through stock option exercises offshore but had yet to pay taxes on most of the money. They then borrowed against their offshore accounts to buy jewelry, pay for portraits of family members, buy homes and operate properties named Rosemary's Circle R Ranch, LL Ranch, Stargate Horse Farm, Cottonwood Galleries and 36 Malibu Colony. Senator Levin said he might propose limiting or barring the transferring of executive stock options to others, as well as more disclosure when they are exercised. The report says that Credit Suisse First Boston, Lehman Brothers and Bank of America "all knew that the offshore entities" for which they made trades were associated with the Wylys, but ignored rules requiring disclosure of these transactions and helped them hide the true ownership of the assets. Only when Robert M. Morgenthau, the New York District attorney, issued subpoenas in 2004 did Bank of America close the Wyly accounts. William Brewer, a Dallas lawyer for the Wylys, said that while the Senate report "intends to present a balanced view, the committee report is reflective of a number of misunderstandings." "The Wylys believe they have paid all taxes due," he added. "And in any event, as the report makes clear, the Wylys were counseled by an armada of lawyers, brokers, financial professionals and offshore service providers to ensure that they were at all times fully meeting their obligations." Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
Oh, it's probably somewhat fuzzy There are no doubt other hidden taxes that make up some of those gaps. e.g. Estate tax
My dad picked up a brand new aviator a few years ago for $15k+ trade in. $50k car and he got to write it off since we have a small business
If true, why would P Puff D Diddy Daddy Do Day Colmes want to vote for him?* *obvious answer: b/c he doesn't want to die
why should they be shot? Because they are rich? If they are cheating their way out of taxes, they should be prosecuted, not shot.
Yeah, but shooting people is more gratifying... I'm sure if someone was so bored as to sit down and analyze everything McCain has ever said or done, or ANYONE else for that matter, they would likely come up with a list just as long as (if not longer than) the one shown above. Put anyone under a microscope and you'll find all kinds of dirt. It doesn't impress me, at all. It's negative campaigning, and it's lame. If you go looking for flaws in anyone, or anything, you WILL find them - a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts. Instead of this "vote for so-and-so, because the other guy is/isn't blah blah blah," how about "vote for so-and-so because so-and-so is/isn't this, this, and this?" Give people a reason to WANT to vote for one of these chumps, instead of trying to convince them for whom they SHOULD NOT vote. You can only elect ONE President at a time to the White House, so gimmie some legitimate reasons why that one person SHOULD be elected, based upon THEIR merits. Until then, I see no reason (yet) to vote for ANY of these losers...
Btw, if I judged everyone based on their father's actions, let alone one who abandoned their family, I would be glossing over quite a few great people. Furthermore, learn a little bit about islam and Indonesia, there are 34 sects, 11 are Fanatical. They have muslim schools here in Thailand, and guess what? They give the best education but don't preach islam, hell you still learn Buddhism... YAY! internet smear campaigns.
Just an FYI, people in every income bracket try to minimize their taxable income and fudge so they end up paying less. Additionally, "the rich" if we define it by the top 10% of wage earners, as of 2003, pay approximately 66% of all the taxes. Seems to me like they pay their fair share, and then some. They should be thanked, not shot. Source
Their share of taxes paid seems disproportionate to the average Joe Schmoe because their INCOME is disproportionately HUGE. These CEO's, VP's, and other old bastitches with money growing out of their ears get insanely huge retirement or severance package deals - much of that money, I'm sure, they have ways of moving around so as to avoid paying much (if any) tax on it. So of course, if you're looking at a total tax revenue figure that accounts for EVERYONE, and strictly look at the dollars the rich have paid into it versus the dollars everyone else pays, it might SEEM disproportionate to you. However, when you look at the actual PERCENTAGES paid by the top dogs, it's the same rate for the high end as it is for the poor ... and sometimes even less. Think of how many tax write-offs these big cheese goons can get away with. Sure, every goober in America will try to nickel and dime their way through as many tax write-offs as they can, but even the best of these folks can only muster pocket change savings on their taxes compared to the fat cats with the big bucks and more resources, financial advisors, and Swiss bank accounts than most folks would even know what to do with. And that figure of 66%, of course, is only their REPORTED and TAXABLE income. Who knows how much they've got in various unaccountable assets and such that ISN'T being taxed and/or reported to the IRS. I'm not suggesting a flat-tax would make sense as an alternative, of course. But to think that our current tax tables and IRS tax laws are even remotely fair (or logical) is simply incorrect.
You can justify it any way you'd like but I'd like to ask you is exactly what percent of someone's income do you believe the Government has a right to confiscate? Is there any point in which it becomes morally wrong? Since the top 10% pay 66% and you believe that is justified, do you believe they should be paying more (since you obviously believe that they are cheating in some manner) and if you do believe they should be paying more how much more should they be paying? What percent of income tax collections should the top 10% of wage earners pay? At what percentage point, if ever, does it become morally wrong to confiscate X% of somebodys income?
