Heinz-Kerry's 12.4% Tax rate.

[DKW 86 7,437]

link

Heinz Kerry Paid Lower Tax Rate Than Most Taxpayers

Mon Oct 18 2004 10:20:34 ET

The Kerry campaign finally released Teresa Heinz Kerry's 2003 tax return, or rather two pages of it, late last Friday, the WALL STREET JOURNAL details.

"We think she ought to release the rest of her return, since her wealth was crucial to salvaging her husband's struggling campaign during the Democratic primaries in 2003."

"But even this minimal disclosure deserves more attention in light of John Kerry's pledge to raise tax rates. In 2003, Mrs. Kerry -- or Teresa Heinz, as she declared herself on her IRS 1040 form -- earned $5.07 million, hardly a surprising income for someone estimated to be worth nearly $1 billion.

"The news is that $2.78 million of that income came in the form of tax- exempt interest from what the Kerry campaign's press release attributed to investments in 'state, municipal and public entity bonds.' What the campaign didn't say is that these are the kind of investments that rich people can afford to hire lawyers and accountants to steer their money into."

On her "remaining 'taxable' income of $2.29 million, Mrs. Kerry paid $627,150 in taxes, for an overall average federal tax rate of only 12.4% on her $5.07 million in total income." This "puts Mrs. Kerry's tax rate at well below that of other filers in her super-rich neighborhood. But it also means she is paying a lower average rate than nearly all middle- class taxpayers paid in 2001, the last year for which the IRS has published the data.

The top 50% of all federal filers contributed 96.1% of all federal income taxes in 2001, and they paid an average income-tax rate of 15.9%. That's 3.5-percentage points more than Mrs. Kerry paid in 2003." At the "very least, Mrs. Kerry's tax returns are a screaming illustration of the need for reform to make the tax code simpler and fairer. But they also show that Senator Kerry's proposed tax increases are much more about a revenue grab than they are about tax justice."

[BamaGrad03 0]

Kerry: "LETS TAKE CARE OF MIDDLE AMERICA!" (as long as it doesnt affect my bottom line)

What a two faced prick.

[BamaGrad03 0]

No one is touching this one huh?

very interesting.

[TrueBlue72 0]

Well, the Libs are a loathe to comment because there is no defense for this in light of Kerry's political stand. Those of us who think for ourselves find it hilarious that Kerry can use the old "do as I say and not as I do" and get the libs to believe him!!!!

[CShine 0]

Enough with this fudging the math crap.

Taxable income = $2.29 million

Federal taxes paid = $627,150

Tax rate = 27.4%

Of course, if you Republicans have a problem with tax-exempt bonds why don't you just come right out and say it? All your silly outrage is founded on the moronic notion that Democrats should not take advantage of the tax code that Republicans put into place.

Y'all really don't know how taxes work, do you? Republicans have really thrown a whopper out there saying that Democrats should be eager to pay more taxes than the law says. In case you missed it, if you overpay on your taxes the government does NOT get to spend that money. The IRS is required by law to hold it for you so you can get it back in the future. Heinz-Kerry could've paid every red cent she earned and it wouldn't change how much of it the government could use. Even if some rich Democrats DID intentionally pay more taxes than the law required the government couldn't spend any of it. The law prevents that from happening, so it would be a pointless thing to do because it wouldn't give the government any more money to spend.

But it makes for great hot-button political BS if you go around talking like Democrats should pay MORE taxes than Republicans do. Whadda frickin' joke! Are you really trying to sit there with a straight face and say that it's WRONG for someone to take advantage of a Republican tax code? Get a clue!

[TexasTiger 12,973]

Kerry: "LETS TAKE CARE OF MIDDLE AMERICA!" (as long as it doesnt affect my bottom line)

What a two faced prick.

112540[/snapback]

You hypocritical moronic prick. You support Bush's tax cuts for the rich and decry the results when you don't like the particular beneficiary. The Kerry's don't mind paying more. In fact, he 's running on a plan to raise his taxes. I can't decide if your more stupid or more hypocritical. How's that for a response? Happy now?

[DKW 86 7,437]

Tax Rates...

Percent of Revenues Paid...

Link

Let’s take a look at how the supposedly conservative Wall Street Journal spun the story. Here’s the lead of the Journal’s story on Friday covering the CBO report:

President Bush’s three tax-cut laws will reduce this year’s income taxes for the richest 1% of taxpayers by an average of $78,460, more than 70 times the average benefit for the middle 20% of taxpayers, congressional analysts found.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office today will release the government’s first multiyear projection of the Bush tax cuts by income class …

These paragraphs involve three major deceptions that not only reveal profound partisan bias, but downright misrepresentations of what the report even said.

To begin, the Journal gives the false impression that the statistics cited in the first paragraph are from the CBO report. They are not. They appear nowhere in that report. Instead, they are from a separate analysis of the CBO report by the Democratic members of the Joint Economic Committee of Congress, which includes Teddy Kennedy.

[BamaGrad03 0]

Kerry: "LETS TAKE CARE OF MIDDLE AMERICA!" (as long as it doesnt affect my bottom line)

What a two faced prick.

112540[/snapback]

You hypocritical moronic prick. You support Bush's tax cuts for the rich and decry the results when you don't like the particular beneficiary. The Kerry's don't mind paying more. In fact, he 's running on a plan to raise his taxes. I can't decide if your more stupid or more hypocritical. How's that for a response? Happy now?

112706[/snapback]

Bush's tax cuts dropped the percentage rate of those making over 200k a year. They did not include any support for a tax shelter.

My argument is that...kerry is going after bush for removing UNFAIR taxes such as double taxation of dividends (stupid stupid stupid tax), a 42% income tax on those making over 200k (again please explain to me how this is fair) and bush's push to reduce the marriage penalty.

Kerry isnt going after Bush for TAX SHELTERS because thats what he and edwards do with all of their money. So before you call me moronic prick, why dont you at least read up on your boy...because you are grossly undereducated on the facts.

All I hear from Kerry is how Bush is "hookin up his boys" who are all rich...because he dropped the tax bracket. Thats his MAIN sounding board for this entire debate/campaign.

And my ARGUMENT (incase it was too complicated for you) is that if Kerry IS infact a champion for the common man...as he loves to potray himself...why not AVOID taking advantage of these tax shelters? You telling me that if she doesnt 'invest' that 3 million bucks in a TAX SHELTER...the government wasn't gonna make her pay taxes on it? BULLLLL SMOKE. She found a loophole, and she took advantage of it.

I say there isnt much wrong with that...except when you are trying to jerk out our tears telling us sob stories about poor americans who dont have health insurance.

Let me ask you this...if EVERY american took advantage of pay essentially 12 percent of their income...how big of a hole would america be in? Again, its good for Kerry...but not good for everyone else.

[TexasTiger 12,973]

Kerry: "LETS TAKE CARE OF MIDDLE AMERICA!" (as long as it doesnt affect my bottom line)

What a two faced prick.

112540[/snapback]

You hypocritical moronic prick. You support Bush's tax cuts for the rich and decry the results when you don't like the particular beneficiary. The Kerry's don't mind paying more. In fact, he 's running on a plan to raise his taxes. I can't decide if your more stupid or more hypocritical. How's that for a response? Happy now?

112706[/snapback]

Bush's tax cuts dropped the percentage rate of those making over 200k a year. They did not include any support for a tax shelter.

My argument is that...kerry is going after bush for removing UNFAIR taxes such as double taxation of dividends (stupid stupid stupid tax), a 42% income tax on those making over 200k (again please explain to me how this is fair) and bush's push to reduce the marriage penalty.

Kerry isnt going after Bush for TAX SHELTERS because thats what he and edwards do with all of their money. So before you call me moronic prick, why dont you at least read up on your boy...because you are grossly undereducated on the facts.

All I hear from Kerry is how Bush is "hookin up his boys" who are all rich...because he dropped the tax bracket. Thats his MAIN sounding board for this entire debate/campaign.

And my ARGUMENT (incase it was too complicated for you) is that if Kerry IS infact a champion for the common man...as he loves to potray himself...why not AVOID taking advantage of these tax shelters? You telling me that if she doesnt 'invest' that 3 million bucks in a TAX SHELTER...the government wasn't gonna make her pay taxes on it? BULLLLL SMOKE. She found a loophole, and she took advantage of it.

I say there isnt much wrong with that...except when you are trying to jerk out our tears telling us sob stories about poor americans who dont have health insurance.

Let me ask you this...if EVERY american took advantage of pay essentially 12 percent of their income...how big of a hole would america be in? Again, its good for Kerry...but not good for everyone else.

112723[/snapback]

Read CShine upthread. He does the ciphering for you, Jethro.

My favorite tax break was Bush being a "small business" due to lumber interests he didn't realize he had.

Rich, independent women scare you sh#tless, don't they?

[BamaGrad03 0]

No...socialist do. Since socialism is unamerican.

Hey, i dont mind if you can find a loophole to skirt some of your taxable income. But dont come crying to me about the poor or uninsured when I pay more than TWICE the percentage (effective) on my income as someone who makes 6 million dollars...im 24 years old!

He wants to increase the taxes on the rich? He should pay his taxes. Easy as that. Answer my question...if everyone took advantage of the SAME tax loopholes...and effectively paid 12% of all they earned...where would we be? What would the budget look like?

He wants to push policy based on the ASSUMPTION that people wont take advantage of the system like he has. Again, do as i say...not as i do.

My favorite comment from that idiot edwards was how he was painting the picture of the person who benefits from Bush's tax cut...he said...this is how these rich people sitting by their swimming pool earn most of their money...from dividend payments.

I was laughing, because I was reviewing my portfolio while he was saying that...i looked outside, saw no swimming pool.

How condescending is it to americans who own stock/receive dividend payments...who arent filthy rich?

[BamaGrad03 0]

Here's another question...when Kerry says he wants to raise the tax bracket of the top two percent up to 42%...to pay for his programs...why does he not show how much money that will generate based on an assumed ACTUAL 12% effective income tax payment?

I mean...thats what everyone should be doing right? We dont have enough money because rich people dont pay enough taxes...thats what kerry keeps telling us...

[TexasTiger 12,973]

Here's another question...when Kerry says he wants to raise the tax bracket of the top two percent up to 42%...to pay for his programs...why does he not show how much money that will generate based on an assumed ACTUAL 12% effective income tax payment?

I mean...thats what everyone should be doing right? We dont have enough money because rich people dont pay enough taxes...thats what kerry keeps telling us...

112738[/snapback]

Got a link to that 42% figure?

[TrueBlue72 0]

This whole thread shows why we need to scrap the income tax in favor of a VAT or sales tax on everything! Get rid of the millions of pages of code, obscure rules, shelters and loopholes.

It will never happen, because the demoncrats would lose one of their biggest stumping points...... couldn't promise more negative taxes to the low income or try and engage in class warfare as a scheme to collect votes. The framers of the constitution knew what they were doing when they forbade taxes such as an income tax.

The passage of the constitutional amendment allowing an income tax in the early part of the last century was the first step toward socialism in the US. It was well disguised, but the last 80 years have shown just how socialistic it was really intended to be. We, as a nation, need to step away from the socialist policies that have failed around the world and move back toward the true free enterprise system that made this country great.

[Tigermike 3,044]

Kerry: "LETS TAKE CARE OF MIDDLE AMERICA!" (as long as it doesnt affect my bottom line)

What a two faced prick.

112540[/snapback]

You hypocritical moronic prick. You support Bush's tax cuts for the rich and decry the results when you don't like the particular beneficiary. The Kerry's don't mind paying more. In fact, he 's running on a plan to raise his taxes. I can't decide if your more stupid or more hypocritical. How's that for a response? Happy now?

112706[/snapback]

You hypocritical moronic prick. The great state of Massachusetts has a provision where citizens can pay more if they wish. Guess who has never chosen to do so? “The Kerry's don't mind paying more.” Total BS! I can't decide if you’re more stupid or more hypocritical. How's that for a response? Happy now?

[BamaGrad03 0]

Well Texas (in an attempt to return this to a more civil debate ) , Before bush took office the bracket was 39.6. I can't find a link for the 42 percent, Ive read it multiple times...but since I can't find it...lets work from the assumed WORKING model that Kerry wants it to be 39.6 (what he said in the debates)....

So now I would still be interested in your answer...same question, just 40 percent instead of 42.

[TexasTiger 12,973]

Well Texas (in an attempt to return this to a more civil debate ) , Before bush took office the bracket was 39.6. I can't find a link for the 42 percent, Ive read it multiple times...but since I can't find it...lets work from the assumed WORKING model that Kerry wants it to be 39.6 (what he said in the debates)....

So now I would still be interested in your answer...same question, just 40 percent instead of 42.

112886[/snapback]

I believe the rate under Clinton for folks with a taxable income of 200K was 36%. 39.6% was only on millionaires. But anyway, do you remember a few months ago we kicked around some tax rates and their impact? I actually broke out my calculator and tax tables and showed how incredibly far off the Gomer was you were citing. You may remember because you kept asking me to point out why the guy was wrong and when I took the time to actually calculate it, you wouldn't respond. Your taxable rate is not the same as the percentage of your income which is taxed. If you look back at that detailed example it will point out how that works.

I don't know the details of Theresa's cash flow, but Republicans don't think dividends and capital gains should be taxed as much as the salary one actually works for. Rich people often benefit from this, meaning their actual rate is even less. I don't think Theresa earns a salary. Her money come from the money doing the work. Republicans don't like taxing working money, they like taxing working people.

Here's what we know. Bush says tax cuts spurs wild out of control economic growth and tax increases slows the economy. Repugs said Clinton's tax increase (Biggest in history!) would kill the economy. Uh, it didn't. The economy chugged along fine and the rich even got richer. We also balanced the budget for the first time in over thirty years. All the simplistic Repug notions didn't work. Just like trickle down didn't work.

[TexasTiger 12,973]

Kerry: "LETS TAKE CARE OF MIDDLE AMERICA!" (as long as it doesnt affect my bottom line)

What a two faced prick.

112540[/snapback]

You hypocritical moronic prick. You support Bush's tax cuts for the rich and decry the results when you don't like the particular beneficiary. The Kerry's don't mind paying more. In fact, he 's running on a plan to raise his taxes. I can't decide if your more stupid or more hypocritical. How's that for a response? Happy now?

112706[/snapback]

You hypocritical moronic prick. The great state of Massachusetts has a provision where citizens can pay more if they wish. Guess who has never chosen to do so? “The Kerry's don't mind paying more.” Total BS! I can't decide if you’re more stupid or more hypocritical. How's that for a response? Happy now?

112859[/snapback]

You geographically challenged prick. Massachusetts is a commonwealth, not a state, and THK doesn't live there. Besides, aren't we talking about federal taxes, genius?

XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXO

SMOOCH!

[BamaGrad03 0]

Im not saying there is anything wrong with using tax loopholes. Im saying you shouldnt be crying about how LITTLE the rich pay in taxes and how you need to raise them...when you are not paying what YOU keep telling americans people in YOUR tax bracket should pay.

How powerful a statement would it have been...in the debates espeically...for Kerry to show america how serious he is about helping others...by saying, I could have used LEGAL loopholes (or whatever terminology) but instead I payed the full 36 percent (the rate now...not when clinton was in) to help middle america.

[TexasTiger 12,973]

Im not saying there is anything wrong with using tax loopholes. Im saying you shouldnt be crying about how LITTLE the rich pay in taxes and how you need to raise them...when you are not paying what YOU keep telling americans people in YOUR tax bracket should pay.

How powerful a statement would it have been...in the debates espeically...for Kerry to show america how serious he is about helping others...by saying, I could have used LEGAL loopholes (or whatever terminology) but instead I payed the full 36 percent (the rate now...not when clinton was in) to help middle america.

113051[/snapback]

First of all, it ain't his money. I have a friend from Pittsburgh who says people there call THK "Saint Theresa" for all the philanthropic she has overseen in the area. You don't see her campaigning for Bush because Hubby II is going to raise her taxes.

By the way, why do you think government entities create tax exempt bonds? And what if folks like THK refused to buy them?

'state, municipal and public entity bonds.'-- for shame!

[Tigermike 3,044]

Kerry: "LETS TAKE CARE OF MIDDLE AMERICA!" (as long as it doesnt affect my bottom line)

What a two faced prick.

112540[/snapback]

You hypocritical moronic prick. You support Bush's tax cuts for the rich and decry the results when you don't like the particular beneficiary. The Kerry's don't mind paying more. In fact, he 's running on a plan to raise his taxes. I can't decide if your more stupid or more hypocritical. How's that for a response? Happy now?

112706[/snapback]

You hypocritical moronic prick. The great state of Massachusetts has a provision where citizens can pay more if they wish. Guess who has never chosen to do so? “The Kerry's don't mind paying more.” Total BS! I can't decide if you’re more stupid or more hypocritical. How's that for a response? Happy now?

112859[/snapback]

You geographically challenged prick. Massachusetts is a commonwealth, not a state, and THK doesn't live there. Besides, aren't we talking about federal taxes, genius?

XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXO

SMOOCH!

113035[/snapback]

No THK lives all over the globe in her many mansions. But her gigolo husband Senator John Never Show Up For Work Kerry does live there. John Kerry the hypocrite does live in the State of Massachusetts. It may be a commonwealth, but as you can see from their own website they do list themselves a State. So for the big hypocrite living in Texas it does not matter if it is federal or state taxes you were talking about. You made the statement "The Kerry's don't mind paying more. " Which begs to be questioned, if they don't mind paying more why don't they? The answer is easy, they are lying hypocrites! Oh and you the genius buy into their BS rhetoric hook line and sinker!

XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXO

SMOOCH!

Is that the sound Edwards & Kerry make while rubbing all over each other? Or the sound you make sucking up their BS?

http://www.mass.gov/portal/index.jsp?pageI...me&sid=massgov2

[TexasTiger 12,973]

Kerry: "LETS TAKE CARE OF MIDDLE AMERICA!" (as long as it doesnt affect my bottom line)

What a two faced prick.

112540[/snapback]

You hypocritical moronic prick. You support Bush's tax cuts for the rich and decry the results when you don't like the particular beneficiary. The Kerry's don't mind paying more. In fact, he 's running on a plan to raise his taxes. I can't decide if your more stupid or more hypocritical. How's that for a response? Happy now?

112706[/snapback]

You hypocritical moronic prick. The great state of Massachusetts has a provision where citizens can pay more if they wish. Guess who has never chosen to do so? “The Kerry's don't mind paying more.” Total BS! I can't decide if you’re more stupid or more hypocritical. How's that for a response? Happy now?

112859[/snapback]

You geographically challenged prick. Massachusetts is a commonwealth, not a state, and THK doesn't live there. Besides, aren't we talking about federal taxes, genius?

XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXO

SMOOCH!

113035[/snapback]

No THK lives all over the globe in her many mansions. But her gigolo husband Senator John Never Show Up For Work Kerry does live there. John Kerry the hypocrite does live in the State of Massachusetts. It may be a commonwealth, but as you can see from their own website they do list themselves a State. So for the big hypocrite living in Texas it does not matter if it is federal or state taxes you were talking about. You made the statement "The Kerry's don't mind paying more. " Which begs to be questioned, if they don't mind paying more why don't they? The answer is easy, they are lying hypocrites! Oh and you the genius buy into their BS rhetoric hook line and sinker!

XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXO

SMOOCH!

Is that the sound Edwards & Kerry make while rubbing all over each other? Or the sound you make sucking up their BS?

http://www.mass.gov/portal/index.jsp?pageI...me&sid=massgov2

113087[/snapback]

stand back for a moment, if you're able, and consider how utterly pathetic you sound. Your criticism is that John Kerry does not pay more state taxes in MA than he owes because his wife, who files separately and officially resides in PA makes alot of money. Two weeks out of the election this is what your scrounging through to attack the man. If this is your attack, he must be on hell of a guy. Does this article even address how much he owes or pays in MA? Do you honestly know with looking for it?

She paid the going rate on what she made. The big evil "loophole" you guys have your panties up your ass about is tax-free bonds! OMIGOD, how'd they find that dirty little trick! States and municipalities rely on tax-free bonds to build schools, etc. The return rate typically is not great, but the incentive is that they are offered tax free. By paying a lower rate, it makes it more affordable for all who live in the state or municipality to build schools, bridges, community hospitals, etc., without having to pay even more taxes to do it.

I don't mind paying more, although I prefer paying less. Bush cut my taxes. I didn't send in extra to make up for the deficit created by the even bigger tax cut he gave himself and Cheney, but I sure wouldn't mind paying the rates under Clinton and Bush I if we could turn the clock back on the disaster that this moron has shackled this country with. You guys are the uber hypocrites on this one and if you can't see it you are either in deep denial, darned dumb, or both.

[BamaGrad03 0]

Man you dems just dont get it do you?

Please explain to me in simple terms what policies Clinton put in place to help the job market/economy.

On the flip side, explain to me what BUSH did to hurt it.

[Tigermike 3,044]

Kerry: "LETS TAKE CARE OF MIDDLE AMERICA!" (as long as it doesnt affect my bottom line)

What a two faced prick.

112540[/snapback]

You hypocritical moronic prick. You support Bush's tax cuts for the rich and decry the results when you don't like the particular beneficiary. The Kerry's don't mind paying more. In fact, he 's running on a plan to raise his taxes. I can't decide if your more stupid or more hypocritical. How's that for a response? Happy now?

112706[/snapback]

You hypocritical moronic prick. The great state of Massachusetts has a provision where citizens can pay more if they wish. Guess who has never chosen to do so? “The Kerry's don't mind paying more.” Total BS! I can't decide if you’re more stupid or more hypocritical. How's that for a response? Happy now?

112859[/snapback]

You geographically challenged prick. Massachusetts is a commonwealth, not a state, and THK doesn't live there. Besides, aren't we talking about federal taxes, genius?

XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXO

SMOOCH!

113035[/snapback]

No THK lives all over the globe in her many mansions. But her gigolo husband Senator John Never Show Up For Work Kerry does live there. John Kerry the hypocrite does live in the State of Massachusetts. It may be a commonwealth, but as you can see from their own website they do list themselves a State. So for the big hypocrite living in Texas it does not matter if it is federal or state taxes you were talking about. You made the statement "The Kerry's don't mind paying more. " Which begs to be questioned, if they don't mind paying more why don't they? The answer is easy, they are lying hypocrites! Oh and you the genius buy into their BS rhetoric hook line and sinker!

XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXO

SMOOCH!

Is that the sound Edwards & Kerry make while rubbing all over each other? Or the sound you make sucking up their BS?

http://www.mass.gov/portal/index.jsp?pageI...me&sid=massgov2

113087[/snapback]

stand back for a moment, if you're able, and consider how utterly pathetic you sound. Your criticism is that John Kerry does not pay more state taxes in MA than he owes because his wife, who files separately and officially resides in PA makes alot of money. Two weeks out of the election this is what your scrounging through to attack the man. If this is your attack, he must be on hell of a guy. Does this article even address how much he owes or pays in MA? Do you honestly know with looking for it?

She paid the going rate on what she made. The big evil "loophole" you guys have your panties up your ass about is tax-free bonds! OMIGOD, how'd they find that dirty little trick! States and municipalities rely on tax-free bonds to build schools, etc. The return rate typically is not great, but the incentive is that they are offered tax free. By paying a lower rate, it makes it more affordable for all who live in the state or municipality to build schools, bridges, community hospitals, etc., without having to pay even more taxes to do it.

I don't mind paying more, although I prefer paying less. Bush cut my taxes. I didn't send in extra to make up for the deficit created by the even bigger tax cut he gave himself and Cheney, but I sure wouldn't mind paying the rates under Clinton and Bush I if we could turn the clock back on the disaster that this moron has shackled this country with. You guys are the uber hypocrites on this one and if you can't see it you are either in deep denial, darned dumb, or both.

113089[/snapback]

For someone with a superiority complex, I’m sure it hurts to remember riding the short bus to school doesn’t it. Go back and read the post real slow. You made the statement that the Kerry’s wanted to pay more. “The Kerry's don't mind paying more.” Remember saying that? I could care less where she lives, pays taxes or anything else about her. The point of the matter is the Kerry’s have not paid more, not in Pennsylvania or Massachusetts. So either you are a liar by making the statement above or Kerry is, which is it? Who told that lie you or them?

You say the Kerry’s want to pay more but he has had the opportunity for years in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, but he has not chose to do so.

Oh and BTW stand back for a moment, if you're able, and consider how utterly pathetic you sound defending a lying hypocrite like John Kerry.

[CCTAU 3,336]

Here's what we know.  Bush says tax cuts spurs wild out of control economic growth and tax increases slows the economy.  Repugs said Clinton's tax increase (Biggest in history!) would kill the economy.  Uh, it didn't.  The economy chugged along fine and the rich even got richer.  We also balanced the budget for the first time in over thirty years.  All the simplistic Repug notions didn't work.  Just like trickle down didn't work.

Yes, everything was wonderful......

Until that nasty little recession CREATED by Clintax hit. You moron. You are still not seeing that Clintax's prosperity was falsely based. You are even idiot enough to attribute it to something HE did. Not so. Mostly he rode the wave and luckily for him, as it got closer to crashing on the shore, he got off and let the next pres. hit the beach. You and yours always let others (gubment) do your work for you.

Bush brought us out of recession, back from the ashes (9/11) and he still isn't claiming to make people "rise up and walk." You go ahead and waste your vote on John "Jesus" sKerry.

More and more are seeing the truth. sKerry is a gigolo who wants the title of pres. , but not really the responsibility. He and his wife live on Mt. Olympus and want to save us. But they are not one of us. Hence the discussion on the lack of income tax % paid.

[DKW 86 7,437]

THE HOR was the single reason we "balanced the budget." Clinton swore during the 1996 Election that the budget could not be balanced by 2003. He dismissed it a hundred times in 1996. The video during the 1996 Reublican Convention was Clinton saying that it could not be balanced in 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 years. It was a scream.

Clinton likely has no clue how the budget balanced. He only now admits it was even possible. The Reps came in and stopped spending cash on every stoopid program coming down the pike and balanced the budget in 1998, a full 5 years before Clinton even admitted it was possible.