Oliver Stone comes through yet again on the side of the good guys. If anybody knows better than Ron Paul about what it feels like to be continuously ostracized by the media establishment, it’s him. Really looking forward to his Showtime documentary (and the ensuing reviews that will attempt to discredit it).
Oliver Stone: “There’s no way that we can continue this spending spree. In fact, I think in many ways the most interesting candidate – I’d even vote for him if he was running against Obama – is Ron Paul. Because he’s the only one of anybody who’s saying anything intelligent about the future of the world.”
Thomas posted the following statement on his Facebook page at 6 p.m. ET:
"I believe the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People.
This is being done at the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial level. This is in direct opposition to the Constitution and the Founding Fathers vision for the Federal government.
Because I believe this, today I exercised my right as a Free Citizen, and did not visit the White House [Bruins won the Stanley Cup and were scheduled to meet with Obama–my comments]. This was not about politics or party, as in my opinion both parties are responsible for the situation we are in as a country. This was about a choice I had to make as an INDIVIDUAL.
This is the only public statement I will be making on this topic. TT"
Richard Branson, owner of Virgin urges UK government to rethink drug policy. Says make drug policy a health issue and not a criminal one. 35 news articles on the topic from google news.
@Nielsio: The feeling I took away from that video is that being President is a lot like coaching a football team… but the football stadium just happens to be the entire country of America and the football team happens to be every resident.
This the lobotomized, third-grade level on which public policy is conducted today.
This is why a state’s collapse will result in more tyranny off the bat. Survival skills should be necessary.
I don’t agree with the “indigenous view” thing and I don’t agree that oil is the problem. For one thing he neglects to mention that big oil wouldn’t last a day in a truly free market and only survives b/c of the government. But other then that his views are legit.
F4M: As a Free State Project-supporter I must ask, can you please stop posting shit about Free State Project? I ask this again and will ask until you answer: Do you understand that because of you, people in this forum have started to hate FSP? Do you understand that you have hurted Free State Project very much and have not helped it at all?
Problem with the Buffet rule: Take, for example, the president’s renewed push for a so-called “Buffett rule,” based on the idea, in Obama’s oft-cited formulation, that investors such as Warren Buffett should not pay a lower effective tax rate than their secretaries. He even had Buffett’s secretary, Debbie Bosanek, sitting in the presidential box.
Buffett makes most of his money from investment income (capital gains and interest), and he pays a capital-gains tax rate on that money. That tax rate could theoretically be lower than the tax rate that Ms. Bosanek pays on her wage-based income, although only if Ms. Bosanek’s income is fairly high and she took few deductions. However, the president’s narrative ignores the fact that Buffett’s income had already been taxed at the corporate level. When the effect of both taxes is combined, the real effective tax rate is closer to 45 percent. That is quite a high rate on an inherently risky activity — investing — that our tax code should encourage.
And significantly, note that the president’s solution to this supposed problem is not to reduce taxes on Ms. Bosanek, but to raise them on Mr. Buffett.
That is because the president sees the Buffett rule and his complaints about other tax loopholes as simply a tactic, the camel’s nose under the tent, in his desire for more money for the federal government. That is why his actual tax proposals, hidden behind rhetoric about “millionaires and billionaires” and the “wealthiest 1 percent,” would actually raise taxes on people earning as little as $200,000 per year, as well as many small businesses. And many of his proposals will probably hit people with incomes even lower.
