PINAR DEL RIO


support babalú


Your donations help fund
our continued operation

do you babalú?

what they’re saying


bestlatinosmall.jpg

quotes.gif

activism


ozt_bilingual


buclbanner

recommended reading





babalú features





recent comments


  • Honey: Antonio2009, thank you for that article. How important to see that it was Eric Holder who played a big part in that terrible...

  • Gallardo: Asombra, this is what Clinton was occupied with (among other things) while 9/11 was being cooked under his nose. It was...

  • antonio2009: Here is what I wrote about the case in an encyclopedia http://www.latinamericanstudie s.org/academic/Elian-Gonzalez. pdf and...

  • asombra: With every anniversary of this outrage, my contempt deepens for those who actively supported it and the subsequent infamy of...

  • Humberto Fontova: Another valuable Babalu exclusive (in English.)

search babalu

babalú archives

frequent topics


elsewhere on the net



realclearworld

This Administration’s Inability To Speak The Truth … Updated

Hell, they can't even answer a direct question.

These people make Bill Clinton's answer, "It depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is" look like quantum physics.

Question: What is the capital of Israel?

"If" your position hasn't changed, then just say it...

Question: "You flatly said that no one in the White House was involved in leaks, can you today say that no one in the White House was involved?"


Question: Why are you calling a tax cut a "giveaway"?

TAPPER: You used the word “giveaway,” and President Obama, in his statement yesterday, used the word “giveaway,” referring to the extension of the Bush — lower — the lower Bush tax cut rates for the — I guess, the top 1 or 2 percent of the country, people making over $200,000 a year or couples making 250. What do you say to a small-business owner who says, that’s not a giveaway; that’s my money, and by the way, I’m going to need some of that money in order to help pay for health care of individuals that I’m now mandated to do; it’s not giving anything away; it’s allowing me to keep my money?

CARNEY: Well, the phrasing of the question leaves out a few things, which is, one, this tax cut that the Senate passed and that the president supports would go to 97 percent of small businesses in America, 97 percent. Further, this president has cut the taxes of small businesses in America 18 times, independent of this. So he’s — his focus on assisting small businesses, which he considers the engine of economic growth in this country, the engine of job creation in this country, has been intense and will continue to be.

TAPPER: Yes, I left out people I wasn’t talking about.

CARNEY: Well, no, but I mean, your — but your question framed it around the — so you’re talking about the 3 percent here. And as we’ve noted, under the definition of small businesses that Republicans trot out when they’re insisting on these tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires means that –

TAPPER: I wasn’t talking about millionaires and billionaires.

CARNEY: No, but it means –

TAPPER: I was talking about somebody making over $200,000 a year.

CARNEY: Sure. But I mean, again, that’s 97 percent of people who file — small businesses that file taxes under the individual tax code will receive this tax cut. [...]

TAPPER: I’m not — the question is this: Why is it a “giveaway”? Why are you guys using — you and President Obama — using the term “giveaway” when even if you support the Senate Democrats’ bill, it’s not technically a giveaway; it is allowing people to keep the tax cut that they got in 2001 and 2002?

CARNEY: Right, but these are tax cuts that we cannot afford, that do not, by — as — by the estimates of credible, independent economists do not measurably help the economy and do not — in the way that tax cuts to working and middle-class Americans help the economy.

And you know, we have to make choices. And it is a — it is a tax cut for the wealthiest Americans that we simply can’t afford.

[...]

"these are tax cuts that we cannot afford"

Really, Jay? We cannot afford this administration's and this Congress's spending binges anymore.

Question: Exactly how are the allegations that Mohamed Elibiary accessed classified information after the DHS provided him a secret security clearance "inaccurate", Sec. Napolitano?

And don't get me started on "Fast and Furious" and "executive privilage" ... Or 'tax' vs 'mandate' vs 'penalty'. This administration really believes it is not accountable to anyone.

documents

UPDATE:

Question: Will you tell us that this administration's DOJ will never criminalize speech that is critical of any religion?

Comments are closed.