Tyrannical Congress

[joeydb]

Congress is setting a dangerous precedent, which flies in the face of the Constitution itself, that a corporation -- or an individual for that matter -- can be targeted for extreme taxation upwards of 90%. That is a control tactic, and one that previously was unthinkable. The government can arrest people for criminal infractions, can sue civilly in court: "United States of America vs. John Q. Public" at the Federal level, etc. All this is done through use of the judicial branch, possibly extending from the executive branch with the involvement of the Justice Department. But the legislative branch never does this. Congress does set tax policy, but such policy is formulated to affect all citizens. We are not naïve; we know exceptions are made for groups having the favor of Congress, but they can't write the tax code favoring or punishing parties by name, "General Electric's tax rate is 90%, but Westinghouse only has to pay 10%."

This kind of singling out for punishment is called a "bill of attainder" and is explicitly prohibited by the Constitution, as is "ex post facto" laws which I'm sure you guys already know about. Article I, section 9 states, without ambiguity: "No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed." Period.

The AIG matter should have been handled properly in the construction of the legislation itself, not by trying a heavy handed and unconstitutional move after the fact.

[Danzig]

a very good post. angry as we are about the bonus payment-does anyone really want congress, when it's all said and done, to be able to set a policy about anyone's pay? to decide you're getting 'too much' and that it's unfair? a slippery slope indeed.

[Smooth Operator]

They should levy a 98% rate on ALL of high-pitch Hannity's income ... for good measure.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Smooth Operator

They should levy a 98% rate on ALL of high-pitch Hannity's income ... for good measure.

Glad to see Hannity's not getting to you...

How about the precedence and the long term effect on freedom, rather than the petty and transient political impact?

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Glad to see Hannity's not getting to you...

How about the precedence and the long term effect on freedom, rather than the petty and transient political impact?

don't be too harsh on him...he has Bush Derangement Syndrome!
btw....this thing will never fly,period.

[Smooth Operator]

Hope Congress takes 100% of the money timm makes washing dishes at Denny's. lol




By the way, joey, if it was my call, these overrated, overpaid, greedy, incompetent pukes who ran AIG into the ground (hell, jeopardized the entire economy) would already be in Leavenworth...

Originally Posted by joeydb

Congress is setting a dangerous precedent, which flies in the face of the Constitution itself, that a corporation -- or an individual for that matter -- can be targeted for extreme taxation upwards of 90%. That is a control tactic, and one that previously was unthinkable. The government can arrest people for criminal infractions, can sue civilly in court: "United States of America vs. John Q. Public" at the Federal level, etc. All this is done through use of the judicial branch, possibly extending from the executive branch with the involvement of the Justice Department. But the legislative branch never does this. Congress does set tax policy, but such policy is formulated to affect all citizens. We are not naïve; we know exceptions are made for groups having the favor of Congress, but they can't write the tax code favoring or punishing parties by name, "General Electric's tax rate is 90%, but Westinghouse only has to pay 10%."

This kind of singling out for punishment is called a "bill of attainder" and is explicitly prohibited by the Constitution, as is "ex post facto" laws which I'm sure you guys already know about. Article I, section 9 states, without ambiguity: "No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed." Period.

The AIG matter should have been handled properly in the construction of the legislation itself, not by trying a heavy handed and unconstitutional move after the fact.

Defintely the wrong way to go about this problem.
The anger should release itself as a determined fair
effort, not some lynch mob mentality carried out
in 2 weeks. Something as convoluted as this mess
needs time to sort out properly.

Some of these AIG people that had nothing to do
with the real problem are hiring body guards
and such. This is not the French Revolution.

Charles Schumer and Barney Frank
grandstanding and just making people more
irate to the point of physical violence is
disgusting. Schumer reminds me of Allen
Dershowitz. Yes the same Allen D. that defended
Spitzer after his outrageous contradiction of
character. If my protege makes a mistake,
there must be a mistake.

Obama would do right to come on and settle
people down. He is Mr. Calm and Reason. Its
time to say something. Not everyone associated
with AIG is a criminal.

Vigilante liberals gone wild.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Some of these AIG people that had nothing to do
with the real problem are hiring body guards
and such. This is not the French Revolution.

Except Bachmann from Michigan thinks it is, calling for her constituents to be "armed and dangerous" against Obama's tax plan.

Have people truely lost their minds?

Originally Posted by Riot

Except Bachmann from Michigan thinks it is, calling for her constituents to be "armed and dangerous" against Obama's tax plan.

Have people truely lost their minds?

Happens on both sides.
Slogans to encite bottom dwellers.
Ridiculous.

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Happens on both sides.
Slogans to encite bottom dwellers.
Ridiculous.

did you mean "obama youth"?

i don't think it's fair to suggest there's any equality between the paranoia on the right and...well...everyone else.

you can go through the posts on this forum and see how the self-reinforcing chatter amongst themselves leaves them blissfully unaware of how far off point they've wandered.

the "moderates" just chant the ridiculous socialist slogan. as if everyone alive in the country hasn't lived in mixed economy all their lives. "hey! let's all go back to the unfettered capitalism of the 1890's!"

and those are the more sensible ones.

the right is intellectually bankrupt so that field is open to the know nothing rabble. a guy like glen beck gets taken seriously.

someone on the right better come up with a real idea soon. we need you back.

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

did you mean "obama youth"?

i don't think it's fair to suggest there's any equality between the paranoia on the right and...well...everyone else.

you can go through the posts on this forum and see how the self-reinforcing chatter amongst themselves leaves them blissfully unaware of how far off point they've wandered.

the "moderates" just chant the ridiculous socialist slogan. as if everyone alive in the country hasn't lived in mixed economy all their lives. "hey! let's all go back to the unfettered capitalism of the 1890's!"

and those are the more sensible ones.

the right is intellectually bankrupt so that field is open to the know nothing rabble. a guy like glen beck gets taken seriously.

someone on the right better come up with a real idea soon. we need you back.

Schumer and Frank were acting like
some sort of hysterical revolutionary leaders
trying to incite the masses.

I watched them question the AIG brass on C-span.
It was ridiculous grandstanding. Obama has already
sort of washed his hands of these two by declaring
that the tax to "get the money back" is clearly
unconstitutional.

There really is no paranoia on the left.
Its more like a lynch-mob mentality.