It was recently proposed to me by a friend that the on-going interest in Obama’s citizenship, specifically doubts thereof, was a sign of racism. He told me that were Obama white, this would not be an issue. Furthermore, he said that many criticisms of Obama’s official performance and the questions surrounding his background (Columbia transcripts, college thesis, etc.) were also indicators of latent racism.

Well, of course it is.

No one could possibly have any questions about Obama without being motivated by discrimination based solely on race, right?

Now, I don’t believe that Obama was born in Kenya or Indonesia or anywhere other than Hawaii, but I don’t view those that question the issue as racist. Are some of those people racist? Probably. All or even most of them? No, I don’t think so. I also believe that the Donald of Trump is simply playing this card to gin up interest in his run for the Presidency, and unfortunately, he’s found traction with it. Numerous polls have shown evidence that wide swaths of the American public question or flat-out don’t believe that Obama was born in this country.

These polls (scroll to the bottom at the link) are interesting from a sociological point of view, but I believe the point to be moot. Obama is our president, and that is that.

What irks me is the automatic assumption that any disbelief regarding Obama’s legitimacy or criticisms of his job in the Oval Office are best (or only) explained by racism. In my mind this is at best a deflection to keep from answering hard questions concerning Obama’s performance, and at worst, is simply a means of dismissing whole arguments outright, while simultaneously painting half the country as bigoted ignoramuses with a very broad brush.

Saying that “were Obama white, this wouldn’t happen” is an empty statement as that is not the case, and any conjecture on those grounds is pure speculation. This is kinda-sorta similar to my favorite fallacy of logic that I call the Hypothetical Justification. If you can imagine the other guy doing something (i.e. Fox News broadcasting a story on Obama being a Muslim), then you can do the opposing equivalent (i.e. MSNBC broadcasting a story on BusHitler being a demonic alien from an alternate dimension). The assumption is made and accepted quite quickly that if Obama’s skin color were a few shades lighter, and he had a “normal American name”, then these issues and allegations would be non-existant because the Right is, you know, racist. They are making accusations based on hypothetical and wholly non-existant circumstances. They are calling us racist because they can imagine that we wouldn’t be so concerned about Obama’s place of birth, his college years, or his so-far stint in the White House if he were white.

That sure is convenient, isn’t it?

Of course, the only effective counter to this line of supposed reasoning is to point out the gaping flaw in it’s premise; namely the unrealistic idea that in an alternate universe, complete with a white Obama (whose name would be Barry Hugh O’Bannigan), the Right would be more accepting of the man and would never dream in a thousand years of questioning his record.

Good luck with that, by the way. I’m thinking that you’ll need it.

And let’s not forget the Tea Party. Racist bigots, the lot of them! Every one of those flag-waving imbeciles is a dyed-in-the-wool racist and they have simply traded in their white hoods for a broader color scheme that now includes blue and red.

“Where were they when BusHitler was running up huge deficits?”

The same place the Anti-War Left is now: Quietly grousing amongst themselves about their guy in office.

RACISM!

“Why do they insist on demanding policies that are against their own “best” interests?”

Depends on how you view “best interests”. Why do the Rich Leftists demand more taxation that is against their own “best” interests?

RACISM!

Of course none of this would be happening if we had Barry Hugh O’Bannigan in the Oval Office, because then these racist and politically marginalized goobers wouldn’t feel so threatened by Socialism were a blindingly white man selling it.

Right?

Yup.

Whatever you say, man…

Just another way to avoid discussing the fact that somewhere around half the country isn’t taking to Obama as much as they should.

Silly, stupid racists.

I’ve decided as the dreaded Tax Day looms to write a post on the current tax structure and how it breaks down into percentages by income.

A lot of political hay has been made in regards to who pays what and how much more (or less) they “should” be paying. I’ve heard claims that our tax burden “is built on the backs of the poor” or the Middle Class, and that the Rich are just coasting through without paying much (if anything) towards our country’s revenue.

Well, after examining the issue, I ‘ve come to the conclusion that this is mostly…

…crap.

According to The Tax Foundation and my own calculations based on their data drawn from 2008 IRS Tax Data, the truth is that the rich end up paying quite a bit of our taxes:

  • The Top 1% pays: 38.02%
  • The Top 5% pays: 58.72% (this includes the Top 1%)
  • The Top 6-50% pays 38.52%
  • The Bottom 50% pays: 2.70%

Oh, and the Top 50% of income earners in our country are paying 97.30% of our taxes.

Let’s assume that the bottom 50% is negligible (2.70%) and focus on the argument that the Rich aren’t paying their “fair share”.

The Top 5% is paying 58.72% of our Tax Revenue, while pretty much everyone else (the Top 6-50%) is paying 38.52%.

Wait a moment, I thought the Rich weren’t paying enough of our taxes! The Top 5% is paying more than pretty much everyone else? By 20.8%? They pay over 20% more than the Middle Class, and 56.02% more than the Poor? Did you notice as well that the Top 1% is paying roughly the same (okay, 1/2 less of a single percentage point; you got me!) as the group in the 6-50% range of wage earners which includes, but is not limited to the Middle Class?

Egads!

Perfidious, unscrupulous lies! Mindless, wretched drivel and poppycockery!

This would mean that since the Poor are very much so the bottom 50%, it is safe to say that according to the IRS data, the notion of the “Tax Burden being laid on the backs of the Poor” is completely false and an outright lie. It also looks like the Middle Class isn’t shouldering the burden as much as the Rich are either, and yet we continue to hear the Left in this country cry foul about the Evil BusHitler Tax Breaks for the Rich™ (which incidentally brought us to this current ratio).

Here’s a great video that shows in a simple form how our tax structure works as applied to a group of people paying their bar tab:

Remember these facts from the IRS when next you hear your favorite Liberal espouse the nonsense that the Rich aren’t paying any taxes or that the Middle Class and/or the Poor (!) is being weighed down with our country’s Tax Burden.

Oh! This is dated now as I made it on December 8, 2009, and it dealt with the renewal of the Bush Tax Cuts, but I believe that it still applies, considering the suggestion I make in it about the IRS 8888 Form

Enjoy!

Anyone else get the feeling that we’ve been had?

On March 12, the Arab League gave it’s approval for a No-Fly-Zone over Libya in support of the rebels who were languishing under (among other things) airstrikes from air forces loyal to Moammar Qadaffi.

So we go in and set up the above mentioned NFZ by first bombing Qadaffi’s Anti-Air Capabilities, which is a necessary step to control the skies unless you like getting our planes shot down, and immediately we hear the Arab League raise their voices in alarm,

“We never meant for this to get violent! You…you MONSTERS!”

Now we have a possible story (from unnamed sources) that says the Obama administration struck a deal with the Arab League to garner their support in exchange for a blind eye on the Saudi intervention (suppression of dissenters) in Bahrain’s bloody protests. Via Asia Times:

You invade Bahrain. We take out Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. This, in short, is the essence of a deal struck between the Barack Obama administration and the House of Saud. Two diplomatic sources at the United Nations independently confirmed that Washington, via Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, gave the go-ahead for Saudi Arabia to invade Bahrain and crush the pro-democracy movement in their neighbor in exchange for a “yes” vote by the Arab League for a no-fly zone over Libya…

That sure makes this look kinda…nasty. We sure got our money’s worth from that deal, huh? In essence, the vaunted Arab League gave us their “thumbs up” for exactly the precise amount of nanoseconds required to get us involved and then cut out as soon as we committed fully with combat operations (yes, Virginia, bombing another country qualifies as combat and even war. What else would you call it were a coalition of countries to do the same to us, hmm?).

Well played, Arab League. Did we dance well enough for your tastes?

In addition to this, it appears that we’ve had CIA operations going for several weeks in Libya, although the unofficial leak was only recently divulged:

The President has signed a secret order authorizing covert U.S. government support for rebel forces seeking to oust Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

The revelation comes as Obama and allies talked openly of arming the rebels who, despite the UN-backed no-fly zone, are on the verge of being overrun by Gaddafi’s superior military force.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1371614/Obama-signs-secret-order-giving-CIA-green-light-Libyan-rebel-support.html#ixzz1IWhAfuH5

The CIA does not simply subsist of shady men in trenchcoats lurking in shadows, it also means that Special Operations Command (SOCOM) could be involved as is supported by this video which reports that both US and Egyptian Special Forces are on the scene training small groups of Libyan Rebels to fight Qadaffi and his forces. From Al Jazeera:

So, there’s your “No boots on the ground”.

Then we get into whether or not this whole thing is even legal. Many people have pointed out that the actions taken so far by the Obama administration are not in accordance with the War Powers Act of 1973, the important part being:

TITLE 50 > CHAPTER 33 > § 1541
Prev | Next

§ 1541. Purpose and policy

(c) Presidential executive power as Commander-in-Chief; limitation

The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

Now, some folks have said that option number 2 there would allow such actions as we have taken due to the UN’s resolution to provide the NFZ, however the president has 60 days to “consult with Congress”. Problem is, no one in the White House has any plans to do such a thing:

Challenged on whether Obama overstepped his constitutional authority in attacking Libya without congressional approval, Clinton told lawmakers that White House lawyers were OK with it and that Obama has no plans to seek an endorsement from Congress, attendees told POLITICO.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/52264.html#ixzz1IWsP1JRq

So, there’s that…

My personal favorite aspect of this is the developing story that tells us that the answer to two different questions…

1. How many Libyan Rebels are there?

and

2. How many of those Rebels are Jihadists?

…is the same. About 1000.

Maybe we should stick our pride somewhere and just get out like Germany and the Arab League. We DO have other problems to attend to these days

Evil Monk comes to WordPress

Posted: April 4, 2011 in Uncategorized

So I decided to upgrade the site and come to a publisher that had a decent means of posting on the internet. WordPress always came well recommended, and so here I am.

I’ll soon be writing yet another opinion post on our lovely political situation, so just sit tight and soon I’ve have another entry for you to point and laugh at, e-mail to friends for derision, and denigrate as a prime example of the downward spiral of American Culture.

Thank you for your patience and mind your step…