Friday, July 13, 2012


Posted by BH

‘The Communist’ Part I: Obama’s Mentor Frank Marshall Davis Exposed

Posted by BH

magine an American man so devout in his Communist beliefs, that during the Cold War the FBI placed him on its security index – meaning that if an armed conflict were to have erupted between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, Federal authorities would have looked to him as a prime suspect for treason.
Now imagine that man mentored the leader of the free world.
On July 17th, Mercury Ink and author Paul Kengor, PhD, will introduce the world to the real Frank Marshall Davis – the card-carrying member of the Communist Party U.S.A, and who all accounts indicate was Barack Obama’s closest role model and mentor. Devoid of outrageous conspiracy theories or sensational claims, Kengor painstakingly documents the historical facts of this dynamic, at times even sympathetic character, who walked the path from Republican roots clear through to the radical fringe of unfettered Marxism.

Kengor was also interviewed about Frank Marshall Davis’ past, as well as his connection to the president in Dinesh D‘Souza’s upcoming documentary on Obama. An exclusive preview is featured below
Presently, certain news and commentary outlets are focusing on the more outrageous aspects of Frank Marshall Davis’ life, such as his self-admitted penchant for perverse sexual escapades as well as for taking photos of naked women (including of Stanley Ann Dunham, Obama’s mother). In fact, the recently released documentary, “Dreams From My Real Father,” even posits that Davis is the president’s true biological father.  While much of Davis’ bizarre fetishes and sexual peccadilloes provide subject matter worthy of consideration, Kengor believes that his book, “The Communist,” focuses on the substantive ideological, rather than sensational aspects of Davis’ past.
At the end of the day, according to Kengor, mentors matter – and in no small amount.  The book opens by explaining how Ronald Reagan and Hillary Clinton’s role models were extremely influential in each of their lives, respectively. In fact, typically the first task of any biographer is to examine the mentors of the subject he or she is writing about.  Oddly, when it comes to our current president, left-wing biographers have somehow avoided this topic altogether.

Presidential mentors
Paul Kengors The Communist Reveals The Real Frank Marshall DavisDuring Barack Obama’s first presidential campaign, the media and members of the far left ignored discussing his influences and role models, leaving conservatives in shock over how lax the vetting process turned out to be for the man who would come to hold the highest office in the land. As The Communist reveals that the “transformative change” Obama promised to deliver (and did) eerily find their origin in the words and deeds of his closest mentor.


Posted By Woody Pendleton


We Need to Change the Politicians

In the end the Supreme Court of the United States didn’t untie the Gordian Knot, but as Alexander had done, they cut it instead.
And by doing so they demonstrated what we have known all along: The only new ideas Democrats-and D.C. bureaucrats- have are the old ideas of finding new ways to tax Americans and creating new bureaucracies to spend that money.
I won’t read the Obamacare opinion. I’ll leave that to legal scholars.
But I know this.
A tax is a tax is a tax.
Obamcare, when shorn of its Euro-Metro sophistication, is a tax.
A really big, fat, ugly tax, with a really big, fat, ugly bureaucracy attached to it.
Thus the Democrats- and D.C. bureaucrats- have created a system that promises to raise taxes on everyone. And still not make healthcare affordable for all.
Why did they do this? Not to “save” healthcare; nor yet to “reform” it.
As I have said before, no one in D.C. gets paid to solve problems. That would give lobbyists nothing to do.
Instead, we have just created another pot of money that can be used for cronies, anti-capitalists and special interests to keep D.C. as the one major metropolitan area where home prices are steady.
Washington median sales prices
Of course D.C. thinks things are great. For people in Washington the money machine is still open for business. You just have to have the right pin number.
Compare the two charts.
The one on top is the median sales price of all properties in the Washington, D.C. area since Jan 2000- which starts at $130,000. The real estate market peaked in 2007 at $460,000, yet home prices have remained remarkably steady, despite “the worst recession” since the start of time. The current median sales price for all homes in D.C. according to Trulia is $410,000. That’s about a 10 percent average annual return.
The chart below is the chart for the median sales price for homes listed in Chicago, IL. Remarkably, in January of 2000, median homes prices were at $145,000, higher than D.C. Chicago real estate values peaked at $329,000 in 2007 and now stand at $180,000. That’s about a 1.9 percent average annual return.
The rate of inflation over the same periods is just a tad higher.
Chicago median sales prices What’s clear from the Supreme Court decision is that our revolution for limited government and limited taxation is now broken. 236 years ago this country was founded on the belief that governments that governed least, governed best.
I think we still believe that.
But heaven forbid that that antique idea get in the way of the Washington wealth machine.
The six million people who live in the D.C. bubble may only add up to two percent of the population, but they truly are the One Percent that we’ve been warned about.
Wall Street?
Wall Street has done worse than the average home in Chicago.
In January of 2000, Wall Street peaked at 1498 on the S&P 500. The S&P now stands at 1362. That’s a rate of return of about .80 percent, or a 9.55 percent loss during the entire period.
“In many troubled relationships, both sides deserve some of the blame,” write pollster Scott Rasmussen. “But the United States is a nation founded on the belief that governments gain their legitimacy only from the consent of the governed. In the relationship between the people and the Political Class, that means the voters are right, and the politicians need to change.”
Or we need to change the politicians.
Now we know.


Posted By Woody Pendleton


The Invincible Lie

The Invincible Lie
Anyone who wants to study the tricks of propaganda rhetoric has a rich source of examples in the statements of President Barack Obama. On Monday, July 9th, for example, he said that Republicans "believe that prosperity comes from the top down, so that if we spend trillions more on tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, that that will somehow unleash jobs and economic growth." Let us begin with the word "spend." Is the government "spending" money on people whenever it does not tax them as much as it can? Such convoluted reasoning would never pass muster if the mainstream media were not so determined to see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil when it comes to Barack Obama.
Ironically, actual spending by the Obama administration for the benefit of its political allies, such as the teachers' unions, is not called spending but "investment." You can say anything if you have your own private language.


Posted By Woody Pendleton


Merck Teams With Gates Foundation to Further Worldwide Depopulation

Susanne Posel, Contributor
Activist Post

At the London Summit on Family Planning (LSFP), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) pledged $560 million to their campaign to depopulate underdeveloped nations. World leaders, private-sector corporations, UN representatives and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) attended the LSFP.

Warren Buffet, friend and fellow Elitist, has agreed to hand over most of his wealth to charity; contributed stock valued at $1.52 billion in his annual gift to the BMGF.

Buffet asserted in a YouTube video in 2011:
I urge people to unbutton their wallet, pull out a check, reach into their purse, whatever it takes. You will find that when you give a dollar and something of yourself, a lot more than a dollar comes out the other end.
By 2020, Melinda Gates hopes to have extended the use of forced sterilization through manipulation of foreign governments to further the scheme of preventing 80 million of “unwanted pregnancies” in places like Africa, India and Southeast Asia.

Victoria Jennings, a director of Georgetown University’s Institute for Reproductive Health, said: “To have someone like her on the world stage saying ‘come on’, it does serve as a tremendous lever to ratchet up the concern.”

Pharmaceutical giant Merck announced in a formal statement that they will donate $25 million over an 8-year period as a “Merck for Mothers” campaign in line with the BMGF depopulation agenda. By claiming that this initiative is to “reduce maternal morality around the world” and will “advance efforts to help reach United Nations Millennium Development Goal 5, which calls for a 75 percent reduction in maternal mortality and universal access to reproductive health by 2015.”

Both Merck and BMGF have outlined a plan that focuses on 3 “key areas”:
  1. Use propaganda in the mainstream media to gain public support for reducing the world’s population.
  2. Employ drug and private-sector corporations to ensure “family planning” resources can be utilized in underdeveloped nations.
  3. Coerce governments, corporations and “civil society” to support the social meme of over-population and the BMGF remedies for quelling this problem.
The scheme for controlling the world’s population is the brainchild of Ban Ki-moon, the UN Secretary-General’s Global Strategy for Women’s and Children’s Health (GSWCH):
Every Woman, Every Child, and innovative public-private and civil society partnerships developed through the Reproductive Health Supplies Coalition. The Summit also aligns with the broader framework established by the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) almost 20 years ago.
The ICPD officially contended that universal education, reduction of infant births, protection of maternal mortality as an excuse to sterilize millions of women, and purveying “family planning” as a cover for preventing the most densely populated areas from continuing to freely procreate were the most effective course of action to ensure the agenda of the global Elite.

As of now, the ICPD Beyond 2014 offers a “global consensus on the human populations” as a policy to guide reproduction under the guidelines of social progress and environmental sustainability because “human beings are at the center of development.”

The ICPD’s plan of action admonishes the cooperation of governments to support BMGF family planning schemes in relation to “protecting the environment” from over-growth of human population.

The GSWCH, working with the World Health Organization (WHO) is a global plan to bring vaccines, international interventions and financing to the UN for the purpose of:
  • Controlling access to healthcare in underdeveloped nations.
  • Use pre-determined drug corporations to treat third world nations so that they are no longer allowed to freely procreate.
  • Monitor and evaluate the progress of depopulation in these areas. 
  • It is a sad day when American citizens join with other groups to plan and implement the murder of millions, possibly billions of human beings, to build a world in which they will reign as demi-gods over the rest.  TRULY THE LOVE OF MONEY IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL WHEN PEOPLE WILL SELL THEIR SOULS, THEIR HUMANITY FOR THE GAIN OF POWER AND MONEY.  MAY THE EVIL WITHIN NOT BE ALLOWED TO FESTER OUT AND HARM OTHERS.  THESE PEOPLE [ sic]  ARE TO BE PLACED WITH PEOPLE LIKE HITLER, GENGHIS KHAN AND OTHERS WHO ARE SO EVIL THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE CALLED HUMAN BEINGS.   by wp

Susanne Posel is the Chief Editor of Occupy Corporatism. Our alternative news site is dedicated to reporting the news as it actually happens; not as it is spun by the corporately funded mainstream media. You can find us on our Facebook page.

You can support this information by voting on Reddit HERE


Posted By Woody Pendleton


Retired Army Lt. Gen. William “Jerry” Boykin is warning that Islamic Shariah law already is in the United States, and is forming a cloud over the future of the nation.
Boykin, addressing a packed house at a synagogue today in Stoughton, Mass., said, “There is a threat to this country from Shariah and the Muslim Brotherhood,” noting the Muslim Brotherhood has had a presence in the U.S. since at least 1962.

“The new Egyptian president, Mohamed Morsi, said he joined the Muslim Brotherhood in 1978 while he was in the United States of America. People who say that the Muslim Brotherhood is not in America are not dealing in reality,” Boykin said.
He said even Muslims pay a price for being indifferent to the agenda of the radical Muslim Brotherhood.
“Muslims who are not pushing for Shariah in the United States are pushed aside and don’t have a voice. They’re often marginalized in their mosques and sometimes not allowed to participate,” he said.
Boykin also says that Shariah law has deep ramifications for the United States.
Read Gen. Boykin’s own tales of heroism, in “Never Surrender: A Soldier’s Journey to the Crossroads of Faith and Freedom.
“People say that Shariah isn’t going to be a threat in the United States. Fifty-three cases in 28 states have been decided by Shariah law at the appellate level,” Boykin said.
“There are groups and websites in the United States pushing for Shariah law. They’re dedicated to spreading it and Mark Steyn has said that’s what’s happened in Europe.”
He continued, “The Europeans didn’t take the threat seriously and now Steyn has said that it’s not going to be more than a generation before Europe is overcome.”
Boykin told the crowd of the Muslim Brotherhood’s master plan for the United States.
“The Muslim Brotherhood is working to control the dialogue in the United States, ensuring that people don’t talk about Shariah or its objectives for the country,” he said.
“It’s gone into the deepest halls of our government too. It was no less than FBI Director [Robert] Mueller that had a March meeting with the Muslim Brotherhood. The leader of the Brotherhood complained about the counterterrorism training manual,” Boykin said.
“In response, Mueller allowed the Muslim Brotherhood to expunge over 1,000 documents from the training manual,” Boykin said. “So please don’t say it can’t happen here. You’ve been told a lot of lies and you’ve been told it’s a religion of peace. You’ve been told that Islam and democracy are compatible and that’s a lie.
In an exclusive interview with WND, Boykin addressed related issues:
“We’ve been told we all worship the same God. That’s a lie. My God, you can have a personal relationship with. With Allah, you can’t have a personal relationship,” he said.
He noted that the roots between Israel and the United States go deep, and it’s a necessary alliance for the United States to honor.
He also blasted the Obama administration for its neglect of Israel and for its failure to take Iran seriously.
“We make a major mistake if we think Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a clown. He is deadly serious,” Boykin said.
“People who think he’s a clown like Hugo Chavez are dead wrong and know nothing about the theology of Ahmadinejad,” Boykin said.
Boykin says that Ahmadinejad takes seriously the Islamic eschatological belief in an apocalypse of the Jews followed by a return to the final imam.
Yet, there’s more.
Academia has been infiltrated. Churches have been infiltrated. The first Muslim Brotherhood organization in the United States is the Muslim Student Association,” Boykin said.
Boykin said this as a professor at Luther College proclaimed that he believes Jesus was Muslim.
Boykin then turned his attention to the political relationship between the government and Israel.
“The last four presidents have actually harmed the country’s relationship with Israel, but this one is especially bad,” Boykin said. “This administration has told the Israelis to go back to the 1967 borders, and that’s like telling Israel to commit national suicide.”
The general had some very harsh words for the way Obama personally has treated Israeli leaders.
“We welcomed the Chinese to the White House. We had an official state function and rolled out the red carpet,” Boykin said. “But if some reports are correct, the president made Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sit in a room by himself for about an hour while the president went off and did something else.
“No president has ever done that to a sitting Israeli head of state,” he said.
WND reported recently that Israel and Iran may already be fighting a proxy war in the Sudans, with Israel supporting South Sudan and Iran developing deeper ties to Omar al-Bashir in Sudan.
A war between Iran and Israel is a matter of deep concern for Boykin.
“Prime Minister Netanyahu may be waiting to see if Obama is re-elected. If Obama is re-elected, the Israelis may be willing to launch a pre-emptive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities,” Boykin said.
Two Israeli news sites speculate on how adverse a second Obama term would be for Israel.
Boykin agrees.
“If Obama is re-elected and he doesn’t have to worry about another four years, Israel will be on their own to have to act apart from any U. S. help which will likely not be forthcoming in a second Obama term,” Boykin said.
Boykin also has stated that a war between Israel and Iran is inevitable, and the U.S. needs to stand with Israel.
Boykin also talked about similar concerns in the interview with WND:
“This whole issue of fighting to defend Israel is very personal to me. I try to make people understand the vital nature of Israel,” Boykin said.
“As an American I am appalled at how little people in the United States know about Israel. And I am appalled at the anti-Semitism that is coming from this country,” Boykin said.
“The Jews began coming to American in 1650, thirty years before the Germans and the Scotch-Irish,” Boykin said.
“It was Jews who ran the British blockade in the American Revolution. The Jews fought for the independence of the United States,” Boykin said. “And it was a Jewish banker who loaned the country money to keep the country solvent during the years of the Articles of Confederation.”
“John Adams said the Hebrews have done more for the civilization of the world than any other groups,” Boykin said.
Boykin also says the drive for a Jewish homeland may have begun in the United States during the Second Great Awakening. Christian pastors started a petition to gather support for a Jewish homeland.
The United West President Tom Trento also spoke and he warned of a cataclysmic war between Iran and Israel.
“A war between Israel and Iran is coming. The problem is that few will stand with Israel,” Trento said. “Seven thousand miles from here, a piece of dirt, the Holy City, is the global epicenter of terrorism and the fight for freedom.
“We go to war with only a few who can be trusted. Few can be trusted, but two of them are sitting behind me,” Trento said, referring to the rabbi and Boykin.
“You in Stoughton are so fortunate to have a rabbi who has the heart and academic background – the heart of a lion and the will of a warrior,” Trento said.

Thursday, July 12, 2012


Posted by BH

The Oval: Trust – a Two-Way Street

They say America has a trust deficit. That we don’t trust our institutions any more. We don’t trust Congress. Or the White House. Or the Supreme Court. Everyone’s cutting deals! Everyone’s looking out for themselves! Liberals and conservatives agree – you can’t trust the media. The stories are slanted to fit an agenda… or just flat-out wrong! And you sure can’t trust the banks! If you’re late on your loan, they might foreclose on you. If you invest with them, they might sell you junk wrapped in a pretty wrapper. And we just learned this week, that they’ve been lying. Lying about the interest rate they charge each other. All so they would look better to regulators. And so they wouldn’t have to pay savers and investors as much.
We profess to be shocked. Shocked! How could banks lie? How could the media get it wrong? How could politicians be so inept?
I wonder. I wonder what the trust deficit means. Does it mean that America’s great institutions. Its leaders and functionaries. Have their work cut out for them? And that all they have to do is start telling the truth? Start being honest? Start being accountable? I am not so sure.
It’s not just because I don’t think they CAN be honest. It’s because I don’t think we should EXPECT them to be honest.Because frankly, that’s not how America was designed. The Founding Fathers were suspicious of big institutions: The Church of England, the big trading companies of London, the King.
Exploiters. Taxers. It was their way – or banishment.


Posted By Woody Pendleton



Here Is a List of Global Taxes Proposed by the United Nations Last Week

UN Proposes Global Carbon, Currency Transaction, Billionaire Taxes | Global Development
Survey author Rob Vos (Photo: UN)
According to Reuters, The U.N. World Economic and Social Survey has determined that the needs of developing countries are not being met, and new taxes will help fight dilemmas like “climate change” and the “record of broken promises” by donor countries.
Though the United Nations has no authority to enforce global taxes at the current time, its propositions hold sway and are not unlike schemes proposed by American politicians.
(Related: Biden to Crowd: ‘We Want…A Global Minimum Tax)
Survey author Rob Vos explained in a statement, after lamenting the shortfall of international donations because of budget cuts:
“Although donors must meet their commitments, it is time to look for other ways to find resources to finance development needs and address growing global challenges, such as combating climate change…
“We are suggesting various ways to tap resources through international mechanisms, such as coordinated taxes on carbon emissions, air traffic, and financial and currency transactions.” [Emphasis added]
The related Huffington Post article includes this video, titled “What is the New World Order?” with the Chairman of the World Economic Forum USA, to explain why global governance will solve our issues:

CNS News summarizes a few of the proposed changes:
Carbon Tax: A tax of $25 a ton of carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted in developed countries…The money could be collected by national authorities, but be earmarked for international cooperation. CO2 is the “greenhouse gas” blamed most often for climate change.
Currency Transaction Tax: A tax of 0.005 percent on all trading in four major currencies – the U.S. dollar, the euro, the yen and pound sterling – would yield around $40 billion a year for international initiatives. The decades-old idea of levying a small charge on financial transactions is sometimes called a “Robin Hood tax” since it supposedly taxes rich nations to benefit poor ones.
The European Union’s executive Commission has proposed the introduction of such a tax – 0.1 percent for shares and bonds and 0.01 percent for derivatives – in the 27-member union with effect from January 1, 2014, an initiative expected to raise just over $70 billion a year. The WESS says a portion of that could be earmarked for international cooperation.
SDRs: Allocation of International Monetary Fund Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) could yield $100 billion a year to purchase long-term assets that could then be used for development finance. Set up in the 1960s, SDRs are used by governments and some international institutions. It is not itself a currency, but its value is based on a basket of the dollar, euro, pound sterling and yen. Some countries, including Russia, China and Brazil, have been pushing the idea of SDRs replacing the greenback as the world’s reserve currency.
Billionaire’s Tax: A tax of around one percent on individual wealth holdings of $1 billion or more, “with the revenue destined to finance internationally agreed global development purposes.” The WESS says this mechanism, which it estimates could raise $50 billion a year, is an option that could be explored but needs further technical elaboration.
“Realizing the potential of these mechanisms will require international agreement and corresponding political will, both to tap sources as well as to ensure allocation of revenues for development,” said Vos.
However, conservative organizations (and those that value national sovereignty), worry about hundreds of billions of dollars more being allocated to the United Nations.
(Related: Director of New Documentary ‘U.N. Me’ Tells Beck About Murder, Corruption, and Ineptitude of the United Nations)
Myron Ebell, director of energy and global warming policy at the free-market Competitive Enterprise Institute, noted that the taxing authority would be unaccountable to a sovereign authority, and Phyllis Schlafly, president of the conservative Eagle Forum
argue, s that the day the United Nations tries to impose a global tax should be the day the country pulls out of the U.N.
After all, we would essentially be paying the institution to tax us.
Conservative blog Hot Air sarcastically concludes: “It’s truly a brave new world, comrades…Welcome to the age of international peace and prosperity.”

 The UN has proven to be as inept and full of corruption and dishonesty as the Federal Government.  The type of taxes they wish to force on everyone will benefit only the despots and tyrants of the world and the people will continue to suffer.  GET OUT OF THE UN AND GET THE UN OUT OF THE US.    by wp


Posted By Woody Pendleton


It's Not the Clinton Economy Anymore

Bringing back 1990s tax rates won't bring back that decade's economic boom.
Like Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz, we're not in Kansas anymore. That is, if Kansas is defined as the 1990s Internet boom. But Barack Obama has constructed an odd time machine to take us back: returning to the Seinfeld decade's top two income tax rates in exchange for keeping the rest of the Bush tax cuts.
President Obama called on Congress to pass a one-year extension of those tax cuts, with the exception of letting the 35 percent marginal rate rise to 39.6 percent and the 33 percent rate jump to 36 percent. That will deliver a tax increase on individuals making more than $200,000 and families earning over $250,000 while ostensibly protecting everyone else from tax hikes.
The planted axiom is that the good times rolled under those tax rates during the '90s, so returning to them shouldn't hurt economic growth. After all, Obama reminds us, we simply revert back to what "we were paying under Bill Clinton."
Except the additional 0.9 percent payroll tax imposed under Obamacare and the 2.9 percent surchage on investment income would actually make marginal tax rates a bit higher than under Clinton. We didn't have an individual mandate, backed by a penalty the Supreme Court has pronounced a tax, during Slick Willie's tenure either.
But note that Obama doesn't think it would be good for the economy to go back to the Clinton-era bottom tax rate of 15 percent from the post-Bush rate of 10 percent. Only raising the top rates will help. "By the way, these tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans are also the tax cuts that are least likely to promote growth," he said Monday.
Savings and investment don't do anything to promote growth? This kind of raw Keynesianism holds that burying canisters at the beach is a good way to create shovel-ready jobs and that the broken window fallacy is a truism. Raw politics is likely the bigger consideration: several polls have shown more than 60 percent of the American people -- including a majority of self-described Republicans -- in favor of tax increases on the wealthy.
Yet those same polls show the public understands such tax hikes won't do much good. According to a Washington Post/ABC News survey last year, only 4 percent thought raising taxes was the best way to deal with the deficit. Eight times as many -- 32 percent -- preferred spending cuts. And if Obama was serious about deficit reduction, why not get the larger amount of revenue theoretically available from letting all the Bush tax cuts lapse?
Obama dismisses the idea that his proposed tax hike would hit small businesses that report their income under the individual tax rates such as sole proprietors and subchapter S corporations, saying that only 3 percent of small business owners would be affected. But the top 3 percent hire the most workers. The Joint Tax Committee estimates that roughly 940,000 taxpayers would get hit -- a large number of potential employers when the economy is only adding 80,000 jobs a month.
Between 1993 and 2009, nearly two-thirds of net new jobs were created by small businesses. Obama's tax increase would ensnare 53 percent of net business income. Americans for Tax Reform estimates that a majority of small business profits and more than a third of sole proprietor profits would face higher taxes.
Moreover, the original Clinton tax increases were enacted while the economy was already growing. The recession that ended George Bush's presidency had been over since March 1991. Initially, they probably slowed the growth somewhat. By one estimate, the "Clinton crunch" resulted in 1.2 million fewer jobs being created than if tax rates had remained the same.
This tax increase would come during a weak economic recovery, with GDP growing at just a 2 percent rate. Unemployment has been over 8 percent for 41 consecutive months, something the country hadn't seen in over ten years when the original Clinton tax increase became law. This economy, barely out of the Great Recession, is not as capable of withstanding tax hikes.
Clinton agreed to cut capital gains taxes, reducing them to 20 percent before they were knocked down to 15 percent in 2003. Obama seeks to raise them. Under his proposal, the capital gains tax rate would climb to nearly 24 percent and dividends would be taxed at 45 percent.
So no, Obama isn't exactly bringing back the Clinton-era tax rates. His tax increases aren't going to bring back that era's growth either.


Posted By Woody Pendleton



Posted By Woody Pendleton


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...