Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:

Dr. Zachary Smith

Published Letters: 476
Editor's Choice: 11

Wednesday, April 1, 2009 02:49 PM

to my "satisfaction"

That being said, there are issues I have seen in the electronic version of Obama's birth certificate that have not been explained to my satisfaction.

And what would satisfy you? Nothing. Because nothing can satisfy your ilk. A black Democrat holds the White House--alert the militia!

Bottom line, there's no need to "explain" the certificate. It's been amply documented that BHO is the son of an American citizen, hence, no "illegitimacy" issue--indeed, no birth certificate needed.

This has nothing to do with bogus issues. It has everything to do with the fact that a black Democrat--oh, hell, after the 1990s--a Democrat holds the White House.

That can't be tolerated, right?

And my thanks to crunchyfrog (heap good! my favorite!) for catching the absent word--a true spring surprise!

Wednesday, April 1, 2009 02:52 PM

@ChillyDogg

Just what relevance does a book written by an 18th-century Switzer have to do with the laws of the US?

Whoa, you're way out there, dude.

What next? Mein Kamp and its relevance to the US banking situation?

Thursday, April 2, 2009 07:59 AM

Horseshit, Bullshit, Chickenshit

But that doesn't explain why the entries on the CITY, TOWN OR LOCATION OF BIRTH line don't line up, as they must if they were typed at the same time on the same typewriter.

First, anyone who can write this kind of stuff ain't no ally; they're an enemy pretending to be an ally. There's a lot of that stuff going around.

Second, I can only guess that you've never handled either a typewriter or a computer printer in your life. The fact is, there are lots of very good reasons for stuff "not to line up."

The paper can be distorted through storage or mishandling. The typewriter or printer may be malfunctioning. The original template on the computer may be off. The paper may be a pre-printed template with specific entries added later.

To focus on a supposed issue of "not lining up" not only reveals the pettiness of the concern, and the lack of real-world common sense of the writer, it's like saying that the Declaration must be wrong because Hancock's name is so big.

It's plain, garden-variety horseshit. It's time to identify horseshit as it appears. And this is horseshit.

Oh, and the name is a pseud. Geez.

Thursday, April 2, 2009 01:56 PM

Eat the Rich

What’s more, Tax Policy Center research found that only 5 of every 100,000 taxable estates consist primarily of small businesses and farms. It goes without saying, then, that Lincoln and Kyl's amendement will benefit a tiny portion of the country.

Well, of course your conclusion is true, and would be true even if 100% of all taxable estates were farms and businesses. Very little of the population have these huge estate values.

What you mean to say, I think, since the LK amendment doesn't seem to limit itself to farms and small businesses, is that the amendment is not truly designed to do what they're saying it will do; it's designed to benefit the rich as a whole rather than the designated sufferers.

I would have no objection on principle to an amendment which targeted farms and small businesses for exemptions, although we all know what would happen: the rich man's estate in the country would be designated a "sod farm" by clever accountants and would be exempt from taxes.

Given that IRA accounts that are passed down to middle class inheritants are taxable, I see no good reason to exempt the rich from inheritance taxes.

Thursday, April 2, 2009 02:12 PM

A Little Logic Is a Dangerous Thing

Drink deeply at the well or not at all.

The dead already paid taxes on their wealth.

Exactly what service is the government going to render them that makes taxing them appropriate?

This is pork for lawyers. the rich will always figure out how to avoid paying because that is how the system works so some poor folks without an estate lawyer become easy prey for a predatory government that really doesn't do its job and really doesn't deserve a second chance to steal from someone anyway.

Double taxing is more than double dipping.

Sigh. Nobody is taxing the dead. They're taxing the living, who are inheriting the wealth.

If the rich will always figure out to avoid it, what's the worry? How can "poor folks" be subject to a tax that hits $7 million estates? Your definition of "poor" is a little odd.

Our government doesn't "steal"; it taxes. If you don't like it, buy a liner with the other loons and start your own government out in the mid-Atlantic: the perfect libertarian state! Until somebody needed to pay for barnacle removal....

Most Active Letters Threads

530

Do Obama officials know what his Afghanistan plan is?

What explains the completely contradictory statements from key aides on a central plank of the war strategy?
128

Is my kids making me not smart?

Stay-at-home fatherhood dulls my intellect to a nub. Excuse me while I ponder the subtext of "Hippos Go Berserk"
126

Trig, the anti-abortion straw baby

Sarah Palin's son is being used to demonize pro-choicers
113

I survived Glenn Beck's Christmas spectacular

The preposterous showman brings his holiday book, and waterworks, to the stage and screen. Lights! Camera! Jesus!
90

I live in a van down by Duke University

How do I afford grad school without going into debt? A '94 Econoline, bulk food and creative civil disobedience

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon