Maybe Charlie Rangel can come up with a HOW-TO guide for the rest of us.

http://rawstory.com/…

Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) yet again went against the grain in Congress when he
stood up in the House and argued against a proposal that would tax 90
percent of AIG executive bonuses, saying that it was a “disgrace,” a
“distraction” and an “outrage” that undermined the Constitution.

Despite the protestations of Paul and a few others, the House voted
overwhelmingly to pass the bonus tax legislation Thursday afternoon.

Roll Call reports the vote was 328-93 to impose a 90 percent tax on
employee bonuses at companies that received federal bailout funds.

“While the vote was bipartisan, the GOP was split on the bill, with
Minority Leader John Boehner (Ohio) voting against it and Minority Whip
Eric Cantor (Va.) voting in favor of it,” reported Roll Call.

CNN notes that the measure, which now heads to the Senate for
consideration, would tax individuals on any bonuses received in 2009 from
companies getting $5 billion or more in money from the Troubled Asset
Relief Program. Those with incomes more than $250,000 would see their
bonuses taxed at the 90 percent rate.

“We can’t have any concept of we’re getting even, but we must have a
concept that we’re trying to show that Congress … cannot tolerate that,”
said Charlie Rangel (D-NY), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee
on Wednesday.

Said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, “We must also protect the American
taxpayer from executives who would use their companies’ second chances as
opportunities for private gain. Because they could not use sound judgment
in the use of taxpayer funds, these AIG executives will pay the Treasury
in the form of this tax.”

It’s just sad. As Paul said it’s just a distraction. They are worrying about a minute amount of money which was unconstitutionally allocated and not earmarked. Then they go and pass this unconstitutional bill of attainer while they sit back and watch as the Federal Reserve System tosses billions of dollars around, debases the currency and further destroys the economy.

It looks like this account was just created. The videos have been available for some time but in case you’ve not seen them, enjoy:

• Pete Stark Blows Up Over National Debt
• Is it Wrong to Start Violence? Stealing the Tape
• Woolsey Evades Questions by Insulting Jan
• CIA Director James Woolsey Runs Away
• Bill Richardson on Goverment and Rights
• Piercing Questions to Charlie Rangel on Healthcare
• Is Taxation Voluntary?

http://www.humanevents.com/…

If you forgot to get a Christmas present for Charlie Rangel, don’t worry. The congressman picked one out for himself, and he’s sending you the bill: $2 million for a shiny new Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at City College.

The New York Democrat’s Monument to Me was one of about 9,000 earmarks in the omnibus spending bill Congress approved before going on vacation. Most represented a more subtle form of self-aggrandizement, aimed at maintaining power and prestige by currying favor with voters.

According to Citizens Against Government Waste, the total cost of the 11,000 or so earmarks in the omnibus bill and an earlier defense bill is about $14 billion, which is not much in the context of a $2.8 trillion federal budget. But the same tendency that explains the persistence of earmarks — the habit of staying popular by pretending your constituents can get something for nothing — also explains the failure to address the federal government’s increasingly dire fiscal predicament.

The root of that predicament is not earmarks, which represent less than 1 percent of federal spending. Nor is it the war in Iraq, which at $100 billion or so a year accounts for less than 4 percent.

So-called entitlement programs are the reason “America faces escalating deficit levels and debt burdens that could swamp our ship of state,” as Comptroller General David Walker put it in a recent speech. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid account for 40 percent of federal spending and are expected to consume 51 percent in a decade.

I wasn’t going to post this story originally. While I believe his $100 billion Iraq figure is disingenuous given that there is also other military discretionary and non-discretionary spending. Totaling just shy of $700 billion for 2007. Regardless he makes very important points but they are fairly well known. The reason I had to post this is because of one of the comments. Comment #2 from Charles in Ohio:

We need to raise taxes, bust up corporations, mandate living wages for workers, and cap salaries for executives. We need a one child policy to prevent overpopulation, send more money to public schools, and oversee a total dismantling of the military.

What Democrat will do that? Any?

It’s time this country realized that the way to pay for all these illegal wars by an unelected president is to tax at 100% levels any rich person, that is, anyone making over $100,000 per year. Then we end the wars, tax corporations at historically high levels to erase the deficit, nationalize health care and ban all private medical practice forever.

The government is the solution and must provide basic needs to all Americans. That is FAIR! Watching retired generals and former defense contractors show up in welfare lines is FAIR because of all they stole from the poor.

Which Democrat will do that? Any?

Will any Democrat dare do what is FAIR and start taxing by race and gender? Blacks, Latinos, women, and gays should be given tax breaks and rich white men’s taxes should be raised to pay for those breaks and that is FAIR!

Will any Democrat do this?

At first I thought it was your average egalitarian socialist but Charles goes a whole lot further. I wish he would have told us who will do what he proposes.