text:
The GOP's 1 Trillion Dollar Lie
How a right-wing whopper about the cost of welfare was born.By Joshua Holland, AlterNet
Reprinted with permission from AlterNet. There's a new economic myth that's now being amplified by the conservative media. It demonizes vital public services and suggests that the poor are doing just fine thanks to the largesse of the country's &ldquo [RETURN TO ARTICLE]
Reader Comments
I deal with many patients on Medicaid and various CHIPs programs.
All I can say is some of them drive up in Mercedes, The parents have phones with data plans-which I do not have-,and the kids often have late model hand held games. They are on WIC and collect food stamps.
It has been said by others that people on public assistance here live better than 70% of people throughout the world.
What is enough?
Posted by Lloyd on Dec 26, 2012 at 8:27 AM
The truth about welfare is that people benefit more from a hand up than a hand out. Welfare traps people in a cycle of poverty. We need to invest our finances to facilitate job creation and economic growth.
Posted by thesafesurfer on Dec 26, 2012 at 3:23 PM
only in a rag like this could you be fed such amazing tripe, all focused on some supposed "boogeyman", all full of fiction re the mathematics. the truth, and the reason that none other than the lord himself bill clinton revamped welfare completely, is that poverty programs have very little good effect, tend to create a permanent dependency class, and cost an astronomical fortune. and no amount of protestation, from an idiot like this dude or from any other source, can change those facts. take a look at great britain, the generational dependency of those on "the dole" (mostly white, btw), and it's easy to see the horrific effects of handout theology. of course, that truth doesn't make little joshua feel good, so he has to present propaganda to promote his "cause." it's all about liberals "feeling" good re their "effort", you know…. results, effectiveness, actual progress. they matter not…..
Posted by subframer on Dec 26, 2012 at 3:50 PM
"In the real world, we spend about $25 per day on the needy" So some of those who are "needy" are not in "poverty"? Maybe the "80 overlapping federal means-tested welfare programs" are, maybe, 75 or so too many?
Posted by Robert Ewalt on Dec 26, 2012 at 4:19 PM
Clinton vetoed the welfare reform act twice before he signed it, and in his re-election campaign he promised to "fix it."
Posted by Robert Ewalt on Dec 26, 2012 at 4:22 PM
Holland, go back to making wheat reapers. Your writing is WAY off base!
Posted by James Stagg on Dec 26, 2012 at 4:23 PM
I bet they are black too aren't they? "SO LET'S JUST END THE PROGRAM FOR EVERYBODY." Is this all you have? The same stupid, racist, inconsequential BS.
Posted by Larry Boston on Dec 26, 2012 at 4:35 PM
If we can't solve the problem of the wealth gap, then we might as well become a full fledged Socialist nation.
Posted by Larry Boston on Dec 26, 2012 at 4:39 PM
The article is crap. The real question is why is the federal government involved in welfare in the first place. It is not an enumerated power and the federal government was not created for that purpose.
Posted by esterc on Dec 26, 2012 at 4:43 PM
I didn't read this article… but I was never terribly bothered that we were spending too much on welfare. That is a drop in the bucket compared to where we are at and where we are going when it comes to Medicare and Social Security… and most of those who've taken welfare have been truly indigent. The real thieves in our society are the generational ones… ie., the "boomers." They shall ruin the economy for their children and their grandchildren. These programs were never intended to sustain nonproductive people over decades of their lives, and especially were never intended to pay bonuses to those who do not need thie assistence merely because they have come of age. It ia an absolute crime that we do not begin to raise the age of eligibility for these entitlements and to means test them. But because politicians of both parties are merely weather vanes and not leaders, they are too cowed to even mention this issue.
Posted by tedpeters on Dec 26, 2012 at 4:58 PM
Is some BS racist charge the best YOU have? This may surprise you to learn, no one gives a damn about that label being slung around anymore.
Posted by Bill Howerton on Dec 26, 2012 at 5:47 PM
There is nothing a liberal hates more than a person who works hard and becomes successful, i.e., "rich".
Posted by bitterclingerxxxx on Dec 26, 2012 at 5:50 PM
when liberals lose, they have to call it racist. Nevermind the fact this country has no money and more people keep getting on the dole. Most civilizations fail because there are more takers than makers, the dream can only last for so long!
Posted by Matthew Rice on Dec 26, 2012 at 5:58 PM
So its against your ideology for me to want to succeed in the world? You people must prevent me from doing this and give hand outs to those who don't want to work hard?
Posted by Matthew Rice on Dec 26, 2012 at 5:59 PM
Here's a plan (and one that might show that some number cookers are full of it): If we are spending $1 trillion on "welfare", and that amounts to some $60,000 per "welfare" household, why don't we just give all these "welfare" households, say $30,000 a year straight up. Save $500 billion a year and eliminate lots of deadbeat useless bureaucrats. And we will have, by definition, virtually eliminated poverty in America!!
Posted by MAX AVELLI on Dec 26, 2012 at 6:10 PM
Go ahead…make my day. I dare you to try it out for a couple weeks. Just so you can find out how good that life is.
Posted by max avelli on Dec 26, 2012 at 6:14 PM
According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, even when one uses a very expansive definition of "welfare," only "13 percent of the federal budget in 2011, or $466 billion, went to support programs that provide aid (other than health insurance or Social Security benefits) to individuals and families facing hardship."
This demonstrates how out of touch the author of this article is. The sum of $466 billion in one year is an astronomical figure. Medicare currently costs $560 billion. The author uses the term "only" when referencing the $466 billion since it is "only" 13% of federal spending. That only emphasizes how out of control federal spending has become. With the author's twisted logic, the more the government spends, the lower the percentage of welfare will be, therefore justifying more of it.
This $466 billion is money taken from those who earned it and given to others who did not. They receive it for free and never have to repay it. That money is better spent, saved or invested by those who utilize it more effectively instead of those who only take, consume and expect continued replenishment.Those who earn their own money and purchase things with their own money do so more prudently than those who have it provided to them. This punishes success in order to reward and bail out failure.
With the Unaffordable Care Act, federal spending will quickly surpass $4 trillion annually. The higher this number becomes, the lower the percentage will become and in turn the more Joshua Holland can tell us how welfare spending is "only" [fill in the blank] percent, so what's the big deal right?
Posted by AnyGivenSaturday on Dec 26, 2012 at 6:15 PM
this one is interesting. power is going to lie to accrue more power. how does this happen? and the republicans are going to screw over the poor. and the fireman will save a kitty from the tree. let's at least have the accurate facts. let's have a great conversation that will lead to a grand bargain. what kind of society do we want? that's the question to ask. No one's asking that right now. More fair, less extreme. Reagan era is over. On to the next one
Posted by shless on Dec 26, 2012 at 6:20 PM
If people were paid well for their work, they wouldn't need welfare. If people were paid well enough to save anything, maybe they could afford health insurance. Maybe people wouldn't have to rely so much on Social Security or Medicare. Maybe the boss should pay the wages, or pay the taxes to pay for the government assistance that more and more people have to turn to. Wal-Mart actually gives it's employees the forms for food stamps and Medicaid. Imagine if they just paid the workers. Imagine if the "47%" were actually paid enough to owe taxes…It's funny to hear business freaking out about Obamacare, taxes, etc. Thinking of all the ways they can try to wiggle their way out. If you're tired of all the taxes and regulations, just keep your staff as small as possible. Go push a tamale cart, big shot.
Posted by Ken Tucky on Dec 26, 2012 at 6:29 PM
There is no "Wealth gap problem". If people make poor personal choices, and as a result don't make much money in life, it is not problematic that others made better choices. It's called personal responsibility
Posted by Bill Howerton on Dec 26, 2012 at 6:51 PM
People who bust their asses when they're young, and sacrifice their immediate gratification for future benefit DO make enough to pay taxes. It's all about the personal choices we make in life.
Posted by Bill Howerton on Dec 26, 2012 at 6:54 PM
Having children "inside" of marriage instead of "outside" is the #1 way to reduce poverty, improve educational outcomes and create productive citizens.
You can not have 73% of Black children, 52% of Hispanic children and 26% of White children being born out of wedlock and expect the poverty rates to change.
If the family is not promoted as the glue to any highly functioning society, debates on how much welfare cost are mute. Generational welfare is not compassion - it's a form of slavery where the recipient is an indentured servant begging for every bit of their dignity from the government.
Our goal should be helping every citizen gain maximum freedom. Waiting to have children inside of marriage is the largest most helpful step our society can take to uplift the poor.
Posted by carkrueger on Dec 26, 2012 at 7:02 PM
Yes, there are distortions all around. The left is equally fact- and reality-free in many of their idioms.
But this paragragh takes the cake ...A great deal of conservative economic views are shaped by myths. Think about the fact-free narrative that slashing tax rates for the wealthy will result in more revenues coming into the government's coffers, the common claim that half of the country pays no taxes, or the idea that increasing domestic oil production can lower global oil prices enough to bring down the price of a gallon of gas here at home.
Are you arguing against Supply & Demand?, Denying what the IRS reports (47% pay NO income taxes)?, and denying the FACT that econ growth led to rising tax revenue following each instance of tax-cuts (1921, Kennedy, Reagan, Bush)?, .... all the while stating the right clings to myths. WOW, that is rich!!
Perhaps in your next article you can explain how the "Bush tax-cuts only benefitted the rich and did nothing for the economy" (a common left-wing meme), while their imminent expiration is going to whack the middle class and throw the economy into recession (the new post-election meme). Can you twist yourself so far into a (il)logical pretzel to pull that off? It'd be fun to see.
Posted by crazyeconprof on Dec 26, 2012 at 7:16 PM
I was going to quote this story until I realized the author made it all up. That's right folks, this entire article is made up on unsubstantiated information… which is why you don't see any references.
I would grade the article an F.
Dr. Wilcutt
Posted by Bryan Wilcutt on Dec 26, 2012 at 7:21 PM
Bush tax cuts and massive spending proved that stimulus spending is the way to go, no matter what side you're on. I think you're supposed to wait until the economy is terrible though, instead of just pissing it all away for no real good reason. But, I guess he was just a compassionate conservative.
Posted by Ken Tucky on Dec 26, 2012 at 7:29 PM
"In the real world, we spend about $25 per day on the needy."
$25 dollars too much…...
Posted by William Starr on Dec 26, 2012 at 7:33 PM
There is a vicious cycle that is going on today. People are feeling entitled to be racist because sometimes they are called racist when they may not be. When someone doesn't give a damn about about being a racist, it does surprise me. I am admitting I have seen somethings called racism when they were not. I also frequently see very obvious hateful racism and when a person is called on it they simply claim that liberals just like to call racism. Be careful with this because I've noticed this pattern too often recently. We have have made a lot of progress in race relations in the US but we can very easily fall back into acceptable prejudice.
Posted by oaktown49er on Dec 26, 2012 at 8:15 PM
It amazes me how naive you conservatives are when it comes to wealth. The vast majority of wealth people were BORN wealthy. They had far more opportunities and connections than your average middle-class individual. This notion that the wealthy just worked harder than everyone else is right-wing nonsense. My grandmother was born in Lithuania and worked in a factory in Gary, Indiana her entire life. She was the hardest worker I ever knew and she never made more than minimum wage. Now check the bios of the movers and shakers on Wall Street. How many of them came from poor families and moved their way to the top? Look at the bios of George W. Bush and Mitt Romney. You have to have money to make serious money, that's the golden rule of the free-market system. Sorry, liberals are just more realistic about life. We refuse to be puppets in the hands of the rich. Anybody who makes less than $250,000 a year and votes Republican is a sucker.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 26, 2012 at 8:29 PM
Spoken like someone who has no clue of life lived in the poorest neighborhoods in this country. Your formula of "busting your ass" might work for upper-middle class white folk, but I come from Chicago where this idea of "busting your ass" to succeed is nonsense to the kids living on the South and Westside of the city who's main concern is dodging the drug dealers and gangbangers on their way to school. Their main objective in life is survival, not moving up the corporate ladder. I've come to know these kids, most are great kids and are hard-workers, and they do okay in life, but most never get beyond the lower-middle class. They just never had the connections and opportunities and safety nets that upper-middle class individuals have. It sounds good to say "bust your ass and you'll succeed", but in this harsh world, hard work is simply not enough. You can work as hard as you want but you cannot compete with the people who were born rich, who attended the best schools, who had the support of their families no matter how many times they messed up in life, and who had the connections that wealth offers.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 26, 2012 at 8:48 PM
"The vast majority of wealth people were BORN wealthy. "
What makes you so sure? I don't think that's true. And even if it was true, so what? If I work hard all my life to be successful, and I have, should I not be able to give my money to my children to provide some financial security for them? Who do you think you are, saying I should not? All my life I have known jealous losers who have spent every penny they made, never thinking about the future, while I slaved away and did all the difficult things, and never bought new cars or fancy clothes or wasted my money in a hundred other ways that other people did. And now I'm supposed to feel guilty that I am sucessful? Screw you, buddy.
Posted by bitterclingerxxxx on Dec 26, 2012 at 9:07 PM
Total baloney. It was our own government, in a study requested by Congress to illuminate where government spending was going, that itemized all the money paid out in means tested welfare. That does not include Social Security and Medicare. It does include the government mandates upon the states to pay the bill for some of the federal programs. The total came to $1.03 trillion dollars in 2011.
That number was picked up by many groups, Heritage among them, but Heritage was not the source.
Posted by rick on Dec 26, 2012 at 9:09 PM
Oh, and another thing. I hate to break it to you, but if a person is born wealthy, income taxes don't mean diddly to them. If you had any money to manage you would know that income taxes don't affect wealthy people because they have a million ways to shield their wealth from taxes. In other words, there is no "wealth tax", you don't pay taxes on the million buck you inherited. That's why idle rich like John Kerry and Nancy Pelosi and a million other limousine liberals are always pushing high income taxes - because they don't pay them. It's only hard working, successful people bringing in big incomes that pay the high tax rates. And many, if not most of them are NOT wealthy - yet.
Posted by bitterclingerxxxx on Dec 26, 2012 at 9:13 PM
"Reducing the wealth gap" means money should be taken from successful, hard working people to pay a population of lazy, welfare dependent bums not to work. Because they don't have any money, and other people do.
Posted by bitterclingerxxxx on Dec 26, 2012 at 9:15 PM
The author wants us to believe that only taxpayer money passing through the federal government qualifies as taxpayer-funded welfare. That same taxpayer also pays money to his state in compliance with federal mandates, which money also qualifies as taxpayer-funded welfare. It is an all-too-common political dodge to hide taxes and spending by splitting it up into dozens of smaller taxes and smaller spending programs. What counts to the taxpayer is the total amount taken from his/her family's pocket, which is $1.03 trillion dollars for means tested welfare.
Posted by rick on Dec 26, 2012 at 9:16 PM
Punish Success, especially anyone who dares create a job. That's the government's role.
Posted by Dan045 on Dec 26, 2012 at 9:31 PM
So? Your argument is that because the vast majority of people receiving welfare entitlements from the government are not technically below the poverty line that we are not really spending that money? That somehow, because they are not poor that the entitlements we give them cannot be counted as our "anti-poverty program" and that is something a good and honorable thing?
Please explain to me again how the fact that we are giving away money to people who don't really need it means the Republicans are wrong about how these programs are mismanaged and a needless drain on our horrific budget?
Only in the mind of a progressive could atrocious government waste be ignored solely because the entitlement recipients (I'll use the shorter phrase; "welfare cheats" have not been correctly classified in the accounting process.
Posted by paulmotter on Dec 26, 2012 at 9:39 PM
First of all - what difference does it make? Someone at some point earned that money. Leaving it to your chioldren is your right and what any clear-headed person would do. The great liberal lie is that no rich people deserve to have more money than anyone else for any reason.
Posted by paulmotter on Dec 26, 2012 at 9:42 PM
Food stamps, free Internet access, free cell phones, free health care, housing subsidies, unemployment insurance.
It just doesn't pay to work anymore - why waste your time when government is more than happy to provide you with everything you could possibly need?
Posted by paulmotter on Dec 26, 2012 at 9:44 PM
Who are you going to believe…me or your lying eyes??
Welfare programs are a cottage industry in both the black and Latino populations and all you have to do is look closely at their subculture and their neighborhoods to discern that truth; I would love to do some random testing using protocols intended to determine the true numbers. But in reply to all of this articles parsing I'll just point out some simple facts that are easily extracted from the register and elsewhere on Federal sites.
Blacks make up 13% of the population and receive 38% of the dollars from 89 programs totaling over $1T. The population of California is 8% of the US population and receives 30% of the welfare pie with a huge portion going to illegal aliens which number about 6-8 million in the state (and this is not counting state programs). Blacks, again at 13% receive 39% of SSDisability even though they contribute to the fund at rates much lower than whites over their lifetimes.
Until the author can reconcile these numbers he will have to admit that he, like most Gramsci "progressives" have a vested interest in flooding the system as Cloward and Piven suggested to bring it all down
If you want to find out who is really right end the programs overnight and watch were the trouble starts. This article is "progressive" garbage at its very best.
Posted by ReluctorDominatus on Dec 26, 2012 at 9:54 PM
Outright lies and the sad thing is people will read this absolutely ficticious nonsense and believe it because it fits in the with sterotypical bs they keep getting fed by the right wing. I'd bet you could spend forever and a day in the parking lot and never even see a Mercedes. And you damn sure don't even know any poor people if you think they're living high off the hog.
Posted by sandrajeanford on Dec 26, 2012 at 9:59 PM
The vast majority of people are welfare for a very brief time. If there is a cycle of poverty…it's certainly not being caused by welfare. Let's talk about education, jobs, and opportunities. That would do a lot more than blamng welfare.
Posted by sandrajeanford on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:01 PM
Bush is a Rockefeller Republican, aka, a "moderate" who like his father was willing to compromise with socialism. But to label leaving more money in the hands of producers a "stimulus" is another "progressive" meme…which is in direct contradiction with not only their Keynesian model (government stimulus) but also their actions; the over $800B in Obama's "stimulus' went to the infrastructure of the "progressive" left. A mere 6% went to construction and most of those were make work. How many bridges could we have replaced or repaired for that same money?
Posted by ReluctorDominatus on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:02 PM
It means paying people living wages instead of CEOs making $475/$1. If people were actually paid wages that were enough for them to live on instead of work full-time and still qualifying for food stamps and other low-income benefits. That's what reducing the wealth gap is.
Posted by sandrajeanford on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:04 PM
As bitter as you are, as least you got the right screen name.
Posted by sandrajeanford on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:05 PM
The studies I've seen completely contradict your claim of brief stays on the welfare rolls. Quite to the contrary the studies I've seen mention a poverty trap where individuals become dependent on a combination of government-fare programs because they all penalize recipients from working and making money.
Posted by thesafesurfer on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:05 PM
I study economics and this article is true for example the money New Jersey is receiving for Sandy will count as a welfare program even though the low income residents are not directly receiving money,and the money will go to rebuild middle and upper income houses as well.. Republicans count this as welfare but it is not really. In inflation adjusted dollars we actually spend less money on poor people then we did in 1965,and back then we had easily attainable factory jobs..
republicans dont believe in numbers though which is why they thought Mitt Romney was going to win in a landslide,and the polls were rigged. The reason why people get free cell phones from the government is because Ronald Regan started a program called lifeline for free land line service to poor people and G.W bush expanded to cell phone.so blame yourselves.
Posted by super democrat. on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:08 PM
And the only way to guarantee a worker gets "paid well for their work" outside of the market system is if government owns the means of production. Ask the millions of people who threw off the chains of socialist tyranny in the last 25 years how that works out.
If you want to see real growth you need only open federal lands to development. If the socialist take over those lands will open, there will be no complaints, and get ready to work when and where and for what the government tells you. No unions or NLRB anymore.
Posted by ReluctorDominatus on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:09 PM
Absolute garbage, Those same communities, and a thousand just like them, are kept just the way they are by Gramsci "progressives" who pump in just enough to maintain the status quo which in turn benefits the "progressives".
Those people could take back their streets overnight if they were not entirely compromised and invested in the corruption.
Posted by ReluctorDominatus on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:13 PM
The lines are being drawn ever more clearly every day between the constitution and socialism.
PS Life is not fair.
Posted by ReluctorDominatus on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:15 PM
Just wait until the SEIU and AFSCME unionize the medical personnel providing ObamaCare services….20 million strong.
Posted by ReluctorDominatus on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:19 PM
The question should not be about how much money we spend on welfare; it should concentrate on the effectiveness of our spending. As a social worker who has worked with the poor for three decades, I would say that many of our efforts, both public and private, can be counterproductive. Much of what our government offers is a recipe for keeping people poor. We need to reevaluate our efforts to build a society where people have true opportunities to overcome poverty. Most Americans, bar the crazy right wingers, would pay more money into antipoverty programs if they were effective. The problem is that the Democrats, who are the crazy left when it comes to the poor, keep perpetuating programs that perpetuate poverty.
Posted by PeterVan on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:25 PM
"It amazes me how naive you conservatives are when it comes to wealth."
Absolutely stunning counter-intuitive premise. And as usual for "progressives" the only dynamic understandable to them given the linear propensity to take rather than crate.
Posted by ReluctorDominatus on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:30 PM
I offered an $15 per hour team member a position worth 55 k with health insurance (with contribution) and she said no. Why? Because she works 22 hours to stay within the income guidelines for her section 8, medicaid and how many other programs. She is so smart and on paper showed me that she would not be able to maintan her current lifestyle with my salaried position of 55k.
Now you all tell me if this is what government assistance is. I am conservative and have worked my entire life to achieve my position and last year even at 140 k, my net, my actual take home pay from my salary I have worked so hard to achieve did not break 100 k.
Does that make sense when it is being used to finance someone who can make clear more than a person who works for a private company at a 55k salary WITH benefits.
Think about it.
Posted by rdknyc596 on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:36 PM
As a Constitutional conservative I am repulsed by the programs to the extent it has become the primary vehicle of retirement…which it was never intended to be. I am a firm believer in actuarial based payments bases upon what the money put in would earn at a median interest which would result in…compulsory government insured retirement savings and investment; you get only what you put in and what it earned.
Posted by ReluctorDominatus on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:36 PM
Socialism and our Constitution are incompatible. My guess is that fact will become a scary reality very soon…
Posted by ReluctorDominatus on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:40 PM
Because an issue has a racial component that does not make it racist to talk about it honestly as Eric Holder says we are too cowardly to do. No, "progressives" are the cowards and insist on making the rules before the conversation starts.
Posted by ReluctorDominatus on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:47 PM
Leaving more money in the hands of the "producers" leaves more money in the hands of the "producers". The people doing the production work that generates this money could use a little more of it. We like looking at your fancy boat and all, but you only take it out once a year anyways, while we live paycheck to paycheck, not even wanting the stupid boat, but just to live like human beings. And you'll never even understand…
Posted by Ken Tucky on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:49 PM
Why would you assume to answer a question for Larry Boston? Do you use two ID's on this board?
Posted by thesafesurfer on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:51 PM
No…you will never understand because you refuse to think for yourself. The vast majority of the revenue the government collects does not come from "rich" people per se although the higher income earners do pay by far the greatest proportion as a representative percentage. And it is definitely not a function of blue states vs red states…it is a specific demographic and that is white males.
Posted by ReluctorDominatus on Dec 26, 2012 at 11:11 PM
Seeing that the vast majority of people in the US are white(and women get paid less than the men), it doesn't quite totally blow my mind that white males pay the most in taxes. And if I refused to think for myself, I'd probably just go along with whatever you say. But.
Posted by Ken Tucky on Dec 26, 2012 at 11:32 PM
No, what liberals hate are people who appear to get rich without providing an obvious benefit to society, for example: hedge fund managers and arbitrageurs.
The majority of working class urban professionals (in other words, people who work hard and get rich) are democrats. With their votes, they show that they believe in giving back to their communities.
Posted by torqle on Dec 26, 2012 at 11:35 PM
You don't tell us if your grandmother became wealthy or stayed poor.
George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush were born wealthy, just like John Kennedy, Edward Kennedy, and David Rockefeller. I have several cousins who became "wealthy" by any fair measure and I know for a fact that we were all born poor. What's wrong with your family? Haven't you got any gumption?
Posted by Jerome Barry on Dec 26, 2012 at 11:40 PM
If your grandmother worked her whole life for minimum wage, she was ether dumb, lazy or decided not to learn the language. No one worth a damn works for the minimum wage for long. They work their way up.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 27, 2012 at 12:49 AM
They hate to see others do well because that makes them own their failures in life. Its much easier on the mind to blame others for your misery.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 27, 2012 at 12:51 AM
Thats also why you never hear Warren Buffet ask to have his wealth taxed. He is fine with taxing his business because he will just pass that tax on to the consumer. He is fine if you tax his income because he has so much wealth that its just a drop in the bucket. Go after his wealth and he will scream bloody murder.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 27, 2012 at 12:53 AM
That whole "Giving Back" line is just bogus. I will never give to any charity who ask me to give back. I never took anything that I did not already pay for. We should be asking all of these deadbeats who never contribute anything to give back.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 27, 2012 at 12:56 AM
Larry - They may be black. But they might be white or they might be tan. Who gives a damn? They are all parasites.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 27, 2012 at 12:59 AM
And the people who want to keep the money they earned are greedy. The parasites that claim a right to your money are noble. The world has gone mad.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 27, 2012 at 1:01 AM
Maybe you should try working hard to build a business and then have a bunch of parasites lay claim to your efforts. They do not even ask for help they just call you greedy and demand their free Obama phone. That will make anyone bitter pretty quick.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 27, 2012 at 1:03 AM
Tell the illegal Mexicans to go home. Their anchor babies account for billions of welfare costs.
Posted by Steve Lewis on Dec 27, 2012 at 1:07 AM
Liberals don't hate wealthy people. Many are rich themselves, believe me.
They merely want the rich to pay their fair share!
Look at the current Top Tax Rate Chart….http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t1…
The wealthy are playing the lowest rate in over 60 years! Check out the years when we could easily afford New Roads, New Bridges and New Schools.
And while you're looking at that Chart…Take Note:
Romney and his buddies are now only paying only 15% Tax Rate!
Something is seriously off-kilter…wake up Republican voters…..
Our Middle Class is being forced to pull Our American Wagon!
Posted by Suga Pea on Dec 27, 2012 at 2:29 AM
You are obviously a Socialist Hater who feels compelled to demonize, spew hateful language, and use Racism and Sexism as your last bastion of defense. You clowns have thrown out the race card so often NO ONE cares anymore about racism. Put your big boy pants on and try getting a job like honest hard working American's. You want a hand-out not a hand-up. It is too easy for Socialist like you to live on the dole. Many of us are tired or carrying the dead wood in this country. And for those Socialist who think the Social Safety Net in this country is so inferior to other countries, I would suggest you move to one of those other countries. They are just waiting to embrace you can take care of you from cradle to grave. Goodbye!
Posted by Ron on Dec 27, 2012 at 5:41 AM
If you pay Federal Income Taxes you are a "Maker".
If you are in the 47% who don't then you are a "Taker".
Simple to understand.
Another clue - if you have an Obama-phone, food stamps, aid to dependent kids, and hundreds of other welfare items you are a "Taker".
You are a bottom-feeder….............
Posted by WhatMightBe on Dec 27, 2012 at 7:16 AM
I pay 15% on my profitable long-term investments.
But ALL that money was already taxed at 35%.
It's a double tax on my money…...............and I don't get to vote twice…...
Posted by WhatMightBe on Dec 27, 2012 at 7:18 AM
Give every adult an allowance of $100 a week , in or out of work , rich or poor , to be paid for by eliminating the personal tax allowance.
That way there would no reason for anyone to pick a menial job unless they wanted it and others could train for higher paid ones. There would be no incentive to stay at home as each dollar extra earnt would mean the recipient keeping 70 cents. As the economy grows the allowance would increase giving all citizens an incentive to be more productive.
Also $50 for each child limited to the first three as large family size is the biggest reason for self inflicted poverty.
Posted by arun1 on Dec 27, 2012 at 7:37 AM
Why not give every adult $100,000? and $50,000 for each kid a year?
What - do we now live in Disneyland?????
Posted by WhatMightBe on Dec 27, 2012 at 7:59 AM
I agree with 'carkrueger'. Generational welfare is not compassion - it's a form of slavery where the recipient is an indentured servant begging for every bit of their dignity from the government.
Posted by russian _girls on Dec 27, 2012 at 12:14 PM
Those kids who risk their lives going to school, those kids who risk their lives going to the grocery store or riding bikes with friends, those kids who live in fear every day, they are "entirely compromised and invested in the corruption."
Those kids are a part of the corruption? Do you know how stupid and cold-hearted you sound? There is a reason why the Conservative movement is dying in this country. You people continue to show breathtakingly callous and hateful hearts.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 27, 2012 at 6:30 PM
And if you're a millionaire who pays less in taxes every year than a guy making $75,000 a year, you are a "Republican". Simple to understand.
Another clue-If you live in Alabama, drive a pickup truck with a Confederate flag bumper sticker, own more than five guns, go to church every Sunday while you make racist jokes with your friends when no one is around, you are a "Republican", you are the white trash scum of the earth and a major pillar of the Republican base.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 27, 2012 at 6:40 PM
Very artful deflection….not.
I am referring to the adults who populate those communities and if THEY cared one wit about THEIR kids things would change overnight.
Do YOU realize how typically "progressive" you sound?
Posted by ReluctorDominatus on Dec 27, 2012 at 9:16 PM
No, screw you buddy. How greedy can you get? If you make $250,000 a year or more you shouldn't pay more in taxes. Let me tell you something moron, over 60 percent of the American population favors taxes on those making $250,000 a year or more. You Conservatives better pay attention to what the people want, what is fair and just, and stop coddling the rich, or you will lose every presidential election in your lifetime.
I don't give a damn how hard you work, EVERYONE works hard. It's simple, you make $250,000 or more, you will pay more in taxes. Don't like it? Join a Texas militia or sign a letter of secession prick.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 27, 2012 at 10:07 PM
The difference between the Bush's and Kennedy's is that the Kennedy's believed that because they were fortunate enough to be wealthy, they would do what they could to help those who were less fortunate. The Bush's cared about helping those who were just as rich as they were, their base, the conservative base. Big difference there. There are the rich who use their wealth and power to help those less fortunate and there are the rich who use their power to make themselves and their rich friends richer. Understand the difference? I know it takes a while for you Conservatives to understand things, but do you see the difference?
Also, my family is fine. We were never rich, but we were happy. It's amazing how happy you can be when you're not greedy, when money doesn't become the be-all end-all of your existence, like it is for so many Conservatives. I hope Obama taxes the crap out of your a$$.
By the way, are you done crying over Romney? Are you ready to move on or do you need more time?
Four more years, D-Bag, four more years!!
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 27, 2012 at 10:18 PM
Uncle Harvey,
White privilege is blinding. There are countless poor people who work minimum wage their entire lives. Take the silver spoon out of your mouth. Why do you Conservatives hate the poor so much, why do you hate them and love the rich? Don't you see that the hatred displayed by your party has made you a party of losers, a party that will not win another presidential election in your lifetime? If you showed half as much compassion for the poor as you do the rich, you wouldn't lose back to back electoral college landslide elections.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 27, 2012 at 10:28 PM
Do me a favor. I know you're still crying about Romney losing. Cry in a cup for me. I want to drink your Conservative tears. I'll raise a toast to you and your spoiled, brat children. I'll raise a toast to Obama making you pay your fair share of taxes after eight years on the gravy train with W. Bush.
I love how you Conservatives brag about how hard you work, as if nobody else works hard.
I want to drink your tears. I don't give a darn how hard you work, YOU WILL PAY YOUR FAIR SHARE OF TAXES.
I'll drink a toast to it.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 27, 2012 at 10:38 PM
If someone is born rich, good for them. But don't think that me and 60 percent of the American population will cry one tear when they're asked to pay a little more in taxes. You Conservatives miss the point completely. If you continue to be the party of the rich and for the rich, you will go the way of the Whigs.
60 percent of the American population want the rich to pay more in taxes. Obama won. To the victors go the spoils. Now shut up, suck it up, and pay your fair share. You don't like it? Sign one of those secession letters.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 27, 2012 at 11:59 PM
Oh and another thing,
If income taxes don't mean diddly to the wealthy, why are they fighting like hell to prevent an increase in income taxes?
You contradict yourself, Clinger. You go on and on in other posts about how it's wrong to tax the rich then you say taxing the rich doesn't mean diddly to them.
Which is it?
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 28, 2012 at 12:30 AM
Uncle Harvey,
Judging by your posts and the other right-wingers here, you guys are the ones blaming others for your misery. You have to understand that Conservative ideology is dying in this country. The demographics of this country are changing and we are moving to the left. Accept it Harvey, learn to accept it. You right-wingers need to stop hating, you have four more years of Obama and then most likely eight years of Hillary. You better get used it. Miserable is no way to go through life Harv.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 28, 2012 at 12:42 AM
No, dumbass, everyone does NOT work hard. There are 100 million people in America on welfare, and they do NOT work hard. And the fact that there are more losers like you than actual people who work makes no difference to me.
Posted by bitterclingerxxxx on Dec 28, 2012 at 10:13 AM
The people who are fighting to keep what they earn are those who earn over $250,000. per year. Many if not most of them are NOT rich - in places like New York State or California that is middle class income only. They are hard working people who don't see why they should have to subsidize people who don't work hard or to pay for votes for Democratic politicians and naive boobs/thieves like yourself.
Rich limousine liberals like Pelosi and Kerry don't care about income taxes because they can avoid them.
Posted by bitterclingerxxxx on Dec 28, 2012 at 10:25 AM
Chris, you are the biggest loser I have ever seen on these board. If i ever meet you face to face, I will beat the living crap out of you.
Posted by bitterclingerxxxx on Dec 28, 2012 at 10:27 AM
You're name says it all, just a bitter loser, like all Conservatives after Nov. 6. First of all, you can't argue with facts so you say "I will beat the living crap out of you." Typical hateful, violent behavior from a dying Conservative movement.
Second, I'm 6'5, 250. You wouldn't last five seconds with me. I come from Chicago. If you came after me, they'd find you floating in Lake Michigan. My email address is email@example.com. My phone number is 630-930-7944. Make your move you cowardly, right-wing, greedy, fascist, pig. I'd love a shot at you..
Screw you and your spoiled punk kids. I can just picture those little suburban brats. I'm sure they're really hard workers. They're the privileged, greedy pricks who make up the future of the Republican Party.
Finally, the vast majority of people on Welfare are white children. Are they lazy takers too? Kind of breaks your racist stereotype of the black woman on welfare taking your "hard earned" money, doesn't it, you greedy pig.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 28, 2012 at 1:31 PM
Do you think the rich care as much about you as you do about them?
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 28, 2012 at 3:49 PM
Do you think the rich care as much about you as you do about them?
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 28, 2012 at 3:50 PM
No dumbass, the majority of people on Welfare do work. They have to either show they are working or looking for work in order to receive TEMPORARY assistance. Look at the stats from the U.S. Census Bureau. Actually read stats before you post your right-wing gibberish.
The majority of people do not want to be on Welfare, despite what your misinformed, racist talking heads tell you. They would rather work and make a livable wage like everyone else. How dare you judge these people, you self-righteous elitist bastard.
You Conservatives attack the poor and protect the rich. We'll see how that strategy pays off in 2016.
And I have one last question for you naive right-wingers. Do you think the rich care about you as much as you care about them?
You guys remind of the high school nerd who worships the beautiful cheerleader but she doesn't even know he exists.
Pathetic losers.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 28, 2012 at 5:43 PM
Care about "the rich"? I see nobody out there who has the same ability to create wealth as the so called "Robber Barons" did between 1865 and 1910; the greatest creation of wealth the world has ever seen and the foundations of the modern world. I personally would support legislation that would limit CEO pay to 30X what the average worker in the company made; CEO's could not take from the company and the average would insure a decent wage given the x30 limitation. Then break up the big banks which create nothing but :earn" billions just moving money around.
I am no friend of the rich because those are just two ideas I think are justified.
Posted by ReluctorDominatus on Dec 28, 2012 at 6:30 PM
You mention 1865 through 1910. In the past, for whatever reason, a lot of the wealthiest men in this country felt a moral obligation to use their wealth and power to help build a fledgling nation. They built libraries and railroads. They helped build towns and helped create jobs. This is especially true of the Northern elite of that time period. Many Southern writers have discussed how the Southern elite maintained the "aristocratic mindset", making as much money as they could without giving back to Southern society, without helping to build the South.
I'm afraid more and more of today's wealthiest Americans have embraced the aristocratic mindset. It's all about, "as long as I get mine." I wish more of this country's wealthy would share the beliefs of the East Coat elite of the mid-19th century and early 20th century.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 28, 2012 at 8:52 PM
I am pleased that you have taken the high road and engaged outside the realm of the token agitator by delving into positions that can be argued both ways but concluded only in one.
The "northern elite" you speak of existed in the years before the civil war as exemplified by Cornelius Vanderbilt but the titans came to the fore after the civil war with men such as Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller but only a few, such as Mellon and Carnegie, assumed the mantle of philanthropist well… the rest were pure business. i commend those who did build selfless monuments for the people but I'm disinclined to use the term moral when a change of heart is precipitated by impending mortality.
As far as the "southern aristocrats" the south was destroyed and the landed gentry was no more…the reality was a faded apparition of the true aristocrats of pre-civil war days.
I think we might agree that there is a profound need for this country to change. But one thing I do know for sure is that socialism is the quintessential reactionary heir of Hobbs "Leviathan" and your heart seems to be fond of some true American heroes.
Posted by ReluctorDominatus on Dec 28, 2012 at 10:48 PM
Chris you better hope you are wrong. There are not enough producers to support all of you dead beats.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 30, 2012 at 5:18 PM
Chris- This had nothing to do with race until you showed your racism towards white people. I am for opportunity for everyone regardless of race. I own a business and employ 5 people. One is from Vietnam, One is from the Philippines. One is from Cambodia. Each one of these people does a great job and they all immigrated here from countries who have tried it your way with big powerful governments. Their families moved here with nothing except the desire to do better for themselves and an opportunity to be the best that they could. They have all done just that. They are not working for minimum wage. They are engineers who are payed very well.
If you are anyone you know lives in the USA and works their whole life for minimum wage they are ether very bad at their job are very dumb. Its just that simple. This is the land of opportunity. You can start at the bottom and move to the top with hard work. Get that envy out of your head and you might make something of yourself.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 30, 2012 at 5:32 PM
"I never took anything that I did not already pay for."
So, you're saying that when you were a child, you already contributed to society to pay for the schools you attended, the roads you drove on, the police and military and firefighters that protected you, the health inspectors that kept your food safe and the building inspectors that kept your housing safe and OSHA inspectors that kept your parents' workplace safe, the government-funded research that extended your life and the lives of your parents, the government-owned parks you played in, the government unemployment insurance that protected your parents, etc. etc.
Your statement can't be true.
Posted by torqle on Dec 30, 2012 at 10:29 PM
Where did I show racism towards whites? Please show me where, please uses facts before you make ridiculous posts. Show me where I demonstrated racism towards whites.
You calling people working on minimum wage "dumb" and "stupid", especially since the majority of people who work minimum wage jobs are either immigrants or minorities, shows racism on your part. If you're not wealthy, white, and White Anglo Saxon or German, you're "dumb". Harv, who's displaying racism?
Also, how is asking those making $250,000 a year or more to pay 39 percent of taxes instead of 36 percent, class envy? Back in the fifties, sixties, and seventies, the wealthy paid around 50 percent of their income on taxes, we're just asking for a three percent increase. How is that class envy? 60 percent of the American population want tax increases on the wealthy, they voted for Obama and he won, time to give the people what they want. Do you not believe in democracy? 60 percent of Americans want to raise taxes on the rich, it MUST BE DONE, the will of the MAJORITY of the people, must be answered by the government. That is a democracy. Conservatives who fight against this are unpatriotic and un-American and against democracy.
You also say this "is the land of opportunity…" Yes it is, but some people start life on third base and other people start in the batter's box. Conservatives are very naive on this issue. There is not equal opportunity for everyone. Someone who is born to a family making $30,000 a year does not have EQUAL OPPORTUNITY as the person born to a family making $400,000 a year. If you don't agree with that, you haven't lived in the real world. Obama, and progressives like me, just want to even the playing field. We know life is unfair and you can never completely even the playing field, but you can make things a lot more just than they are now. You Conservatives want to empower the rich at the cost of the middle class. Obama was willing to raise taxes on those making $400,000, a compromise from his earlier $250,000 a year stand and YOU REPUBLICANS TURNED IT DOWN! You don't want to raise taxes on those making $400,00 a year, you don't want to raise taxes on millionaires either, but you want to cut social security and medicare. Maybe that's why Obama has a 56 percent approval rating and the Republicans in congress have a 26 percent approval rating.
Harv, I've made something of myself. I'm a sportswriter at a great paper. You're a loser business owner with five guys working for you, sounds like a real hopping business.
Can you cry in a champagne glass for me? I know you're still crying over Obama's win, cry in a glass for me. I want BitterClinger to cry in the glass too. I want make a toast for this year's glorious win and for Hillary Clinton upcoming victories in 2016 and 2020. I want to drink Conservative tears and make a toast.
Here's to you Harv and your loser Republican Party.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 30, 2012 at 10:30 PM
My parents paid for that stuff for me. They were producers just like me.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 30, 2012 at 10:31 PM
Yep you are a racist. You play into this whole white privilege crap. I was raised in a trailer where the light were often turned out because we could not pay the bills. That is hardly privilege. This has nothing to do with race and you brought it up. You think along racial lines because you hate white people.
I did not say that people who work for minimum wage are dumb because of their race. I said if you work your whole life for minimum wage you dumb or lazy. It is nearly impossible to work hard and do a good job and stay stuck at minimum wage for 30 years.
As far as my business goes. We do the best we can with just five people. I did do well enough last year to put myself into that hated top 1% group. Maybe I will do better next year.
Now as for hate lets see. You wrote Bitter Clinger, You want to drink conservative tears, you called me a loser. You might want to check that head of yours. I think you may be the hater and I know you are a race hater.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 30, 2012 at 10:41 PM
So what you're saying is that your parents' generation paid enough taxes to pay for all the benefits you've received, but YOU don't feel the need to pay enough taxes to pay for the benefits being received by today's children? Because right now, taxes are the lowest they've been in 50+ years, far below what your parents paid.
Posted by torqle on Dec 30, 2012 at 10:51 PM
My parents paid their way and I pay my way. They paid more in taxes than they consumed in government. I currently pay more in taxes than I pay for my mortgage, utilities, and all other personal expenses combined. I also give to charity. However, I do not owe it. I am not giving something back. I am doing it because I like the cause or I want to help.
I have already paid more than my fair share for the government services that I receive. It is insulting to ask me to give something back when I already gave more than I used.
How about I call some of you free loaders up next saturday and ask that you come cut my grass to give something back to me? Since you are not paying for the services that you receive, you are the one who needs to be giving back.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 30, 2012 at 11:05 PM
Chris - You might want to write your racist views under another name. I looked up some of your articles. Writing about girls soccer and high school sporting events is hardly the big time.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 30, 2012 at 11:12 PM
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect
Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the
common defence,
promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution
for the United States of America.
Posted by Corey Yates on Dec 31, 2012 at 11:59 AM
you are aware that there are 350 million people in the US. Is 1/3 of everyone you know on welfare? Flies in the face of common sense.
Posted by Corey Yates on Dec 31, 2012 at 12:04 PM
The Federal government does not administer welfare, unless you count agencies like FEMA. It does provide money to states to do so, and in order to ensure minimum standards it attaches strings. There is nothing in the enumerated powers amendment that prohibits this - it's part of seeing to the general Welfare of the nation.
Posted by essbird on Dec 31, 2012 at 3:09 PM
I work on the high school sports desk of the Chicago Sun-Times. Yes, I've covered girls soccer but I also covered Simeon high school basketball with the best player in the country with Jabari Parker and University of Illinois basketball. I work on the sports desk, editing and posting stories, working on the Chicago Sun-Times sports page. Journalists would kill to have the job that I have. I applied for a similar position in 2006 at the Elgin Courier and 75 people applied for that one position. Know what you're talking about before you make ridiculous posts. I work on the sports desk at the Sun-Times, that beats your BS little "company" with five guys. Also, I have the courage to put my name out there because I am proud of what I do. Put your name out there, let me google search your impressive company of five guys, if anything even shows up at all. At least when you google my name, you find things, I doubt anything will show up when I google your name.
I rose to the top of my profession, I work doing what I love, what do you do? Post your name, I would love to read about your chicken $hit business.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 31, 2012 at 8:13 PM
"promote the GENERAL welfare" What about the welfare of the people who have to pay for all this crap. It's certainly not doing any good for my welfare.
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be UNIFORM throughout the United States;
Posted by esterc on Dec 31, 2012 at 8:24 PM
You wrote, "I did do well enough last year to put myself into that hated top 1% group. Maybe I will do better next year."
Yeah, and then the alarm clock woke your lying a$$ up and your dream was over.
You wrote, "I was raised in a trailer where the light were often turned out because we could not pay the bills."
You can take the man out of the trailer park, but you can't take the trailer park out of the man. You're far right-wing, racist, tea party remarks prove this point very well. You said that people who work minimum wage jobs are dumb. That is a breath-takingly elitist, anti-immigtant, racist remark considering that the vast majority of people who work minimum wage jobs are recent immigrants or minorities.
You call me a hater. No, I don't need to hate. Obama won back to back electoral college landslide victories. We progressives don't need to hate, we win. We are the party of winners. Now you and Bitterclinger are badmouthing the president and the poor and middle-class with Bitterclinger calling Obama a socialist. Who are the haters? You guys got your clocks cleaned in back to back presidential elections. One of the most liberal presidents in this country's history destroyed the two losers you put up against him in 2008 and 2012 and you Conservatives can't stomach it. This country is moving more and more to the left as the demographics change, as more and more HIspanics, the people who you refer to as stupid, vote, and you can't accept it. You are the party of haters.
Obama has a 56 percent approval rating. The Republicans in Congress have a 26 percent approval rating. We don't need to hate, we will just bask in the glory of victory. All you old, white, men can do the hating, it's what you do best anyway.
And yes, I would love to drink yours and Bitter's tears. You Conservatives are the biggest cry babies in the world and your tears would be delicious. I would also like to drink Karl Rove's tears after that meltdown of Faux News on Nov. 6. His tears would be especially sweet.
Please, post your name. I would love to read about your "booming" business. LOL
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 31, 2012 at 8:30 PM
"GENERAL welfare" What about the welfare of the people who have to pay for all this crap. It's certainly not doing any good for my welfare.
When are you liberals going to learn politicians don't care about the "underserved", they only care about using your money to buy votes.
"There is nothing in the enumerated powers amendment that prohibits this" The 10th amendment does.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The federal government takes in more revenue than ever before. How is it that the American people aren't paying enough? Everything you earn from now until May will be taken from you by the government. Why are you agitating for more of your economic servitude to the federal government?
Posted by esterc on Dec 31, 2012 at 8:44 PM
That is a pitiful response. You covered high school basketball and some university basketball. Get real thats a part time job at best and I am sure the pay matches the position. But at least you are working unlike a lot of the folks who take your side on most issues. I will give you credit for doing what you love. Thats the way it should be. I just hope you make enough that I do not have to subsidize your passion.
As far as my business goes. We are small in size but that is not uncommon for a engineering firm. We have designed products for Apple, Cat, Panasonic, Goodyear and many other companies that you come in contact with everyday. I personally hold five patents for my ideas. As a company we own more. Just today, I meet with my Accountant to discuss how we will get around paying the confiscatory taxes that you support. Believe me, these taxes will lead to less investment in the USA and will extend the unemployment problem that we already face.
Now back to where this discussion started. You said that your grandmother worked all of her life for minimum wage. I said that anyone who works there entire life for minimum wage is ether dumb or lazy. I stick by that remark. Then you let your inner race hatred ooze out for everyone to see. Try to keep that contained. It will only lead you to deeper hatred and a bitter life.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 31, 2012 at 8:51 PM
Chris -
I finally figured you out. You are a sports fan. You pick your politics like you pick a sports team. You stick by them regardless of their record. That is admirable in the sports world. It shows a lack of independent thought and is the characteristic of a follower in the rest of life. Obama needs folks like you. Hitler did to.
As far as my politics go, I fall more on the Libertarian side of things. I read some of your post. You seem to support legal prostitution. I would vote with you on that one. There are probably more social issues that we would agree on. I stand for freedom on social issues and economic issues. Its no ones business how you conduct your private life and its no ones business how much money anyone makes. The point is that you have no idea about who I support. I will not be as easily lead as you. I will evaluate the issues and make up my own mind.
Now as to your point about being old white men. You just keep exposing your racial hatred. Whitey is not keeping you down. Your racially biased attitude is not helping you. I know you probably blame whitey for making your grandma work her whole life for minimum wage. It was not Whitey's fault. She just was not motivated or was lazy or worse yet was just plan dumb. That had nothing to do with the fact that she was from any one race. It was just the cold hard fact of life.
By the way, that whole tear thing is psycho. Its something a serial killer would say. Do your self a favor and drop that one. It just highlights your hatred and weirdness.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Dec 31, 2012 at 9:13 PM
Part-time job? I work on the high school sports desk eight hours a week, five nights a week? How is that part time? What are you talking about? What planet do you live on?
Also, your condescending remark about "atleast I'm working unlike a lot of folks who take my side on most issues"...Most lawyers vote democrat, lawyers don't work? Most journalists vote democrat, journalists don't work? Most young urban professionals today vote democrat, they don't work? Most University professors and grade school and high school teachers vote Democrat, they don't work? Your argument that most liberals don't work is also absurd. You sound absolutely insane. You are one of those tea-party whackos that scares people away from the Republican Party. With people like you, the GOP doesn't stand a chance.
And your comments on those making minimum wage are hateful and based in racial and immigration hostility.
You sound like an absolute right-wing loon.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 31, 2012 at 10:18 PM
You wrote "I finally figured you out. You are a sports fan. You pick your politics like you pick a sports team. You stick by them regardless of their record."
Please, let's compare the records of Bill Clinton's presidency to George W. Bush's presidency. I'll also compare Obama's record to W.'s. W left the White House with a 22 percent approval rating, worst of all time. Second worse, Jimmy Carter at 44 percent, double W. Why did W leave with such a low approval rating, the American people saw the record of eight years of conservative deregulation, corporate welfare, and war mongoring.
You really want to compare records?
Also, talking about old white men is not racism. I am talking about the base of your silly party. How can you deny it? Over 90 percent of Romney voters were white. Discussing that is not racism. It is reality. You Conservatives should be discussing it too, because it is a serious problem. You cannot win elections with hatred for homosexuals and Hispanics while clinging desperately to a dwindling white vote.
Your remarks about people working on minimum wage, you calling them "dumb" and "lazy" shows the racism and anti-immigration mindset that is always there when you scratch the surface of conservatism. The majority of people who work minimum wage jobs are either minorities or new immigrants. You calling these people dumb and lazy displays breathtaking levels of bigotry.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Dec 31, 2012 at 10:30 PM
Maybe you should pay attention to what you read. I told you that I am not a Republican. Then you spent most of your post talking about Republicans and Conservatives. You mention homosexuals and assume that I have some issue with them. I told you I am for freedom on both economic and social issues. That applies to people's sexual orientation. Maybe once you learn to read they will let you start covering things other than high school sports.
I never said that people who work for minimum wage are dumb. I said that people who work for minimum wage for their entire lives are dumb, lazy or have no ambition. Many people of all races work for minimum wage for a short period while they move up the ladder. Most of these people are teens working in restaurants or fast food. Other than your grandmother, I have never heard of anyone staying at the same minimum wage job for their entire lives. You and I both know that someone has to have some major deficiencies to stay stuck in a job like that for their entire life.
Calling people old white men does shine the light on your racist mindset. You see everything through the color of peoples skin. Even though people plenty of white people voted for Obama. You prejudge people who are both old and white. You assume that they somehow hate hispanics or blacks or what every. Like I said you are a sports fan. You see skin color as a jersey. Thats a simpletons way to live.
The government and your party need people like you who are easily told what to think. I do encourage you to work on your racist views. You will live a better life and might even live a more successful one.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Jan 1, 2013 at 1:01 AM
Once again covering high school sports is not much of a job. Maybe its a start. But I can't imagine anyone with ambition wanting to stay there very long. Maybe once you advance past using cliches like "what planet do you live on" you might get to cover a real sports event.
Very few people think the schools are doing a good job. Very few people love lawyers and most people think the media is biased and they are. Is this is the best group you can pick to represent your point of view? Lets face it the base of the Democratic party is losers. Its the single mom who has to depend on WIC. Its the Union guy who could not earn a living, if he had to negotiate on his own. Its the guy who has been unemployed for two straight years and would rather have a unemployment check than a job. There are also a lot of folks that are easily convinced to blame their failures on the someone who is successful. You fit in that group.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Jan 1, 2013 at 1:25 AM
"With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." — James Madison in a letter to James Robertson
Posted by esterc on Jan 1, 2013 at 1:04 PM
"With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." — James Madison in a letter to James Robertson
Posted by esterc on Jan 1, 2013 at 1:07 PM
Do those Vietnamese and Cambodian guys working in your pathetic, bankrupt "five-man" company know what a tea-bagging, far-right racist you are?
So you're not a liberal, you're not a moderate, you're not a conservative, you're not republican…what are you, besides a lying, racist coward? You claim to be a libertarian, and yet your posts show that you are a far right tea bagging racist who hates the poor and the middle class.
The guys who work on the high school sports desk at the Sun-Times have degrees from Illinois, Northwestern, and Missouri. They are far smarter than you and the morons working in your thriving five-man business. I went to the University of Illinois, what crap school did you attend?
You claim that liberals don't work and then I destroy your argument by saying that most lawyers, teachers, and liberals are democrats and THESE PEOPLE WORK. What's your pathetic response…you say that most people hate these workers and that most liberals are single mothers. So now we have established that you hate people working for minimum wage and single mothers.
Whyt don't you just come out and say you hate black and HIspanic people? No, you hide your racism under " I hate people who work minimum wage jobs and I hate single mothers."
Pathetic, like your five-man business. What's the name of your business, anyway? I don't think this thing even exists. I think you live in some trailer park with your mother.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Jan 1, 2013 at 1:55 PM
I have a feeling that this five-man business of yours is five middle-age guys living in the same trailer park, drinking cheep beer and listening to Rush Limbaugh while you moan and complain about single black mothers taking your "hard-earned" money.
What's the name of this "company", I don't think this thing even exists. I read your posts and I'm thinking "trailer trash".
Finally, you say the base of the Democratic party are losers? Really? What's your base, Southern whites? The only thing keeping your party alive is the South. So your base consists of religious fanatics, gun fanatics, anti-homosexual fanatics, and guys who still think they're fighting the Civil War. Yeah, a bunch of winners there.
The Democratic base are losers, huh? Well we won the last two elections pretty easily. I think the only losers are you and those guys living in your trailer park, Harv.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Jan 1, 2013 at 2:07 PM
You have to have your team to tell you how to think. I am not a member of any party. I have agreed with positions that the Republicans take and the Libertarians take. I have even sided with the Democrats from time to time. The problem is the Democrats want to control our money and the Republicans want to make us all go to church. I disagree with both sides on many of these issues because I have an independent mind and can think for myself.
The folks that work for me appreciate opportunity. Thats why the came to this country. They left places where people like you worked to increase the government to the point that it became oppressive. When we talk politics they point out that they saw all of this before and it lead to an civil war and in some cases genocide. Its usually starts with a someone like Obama blaming the wealthy or another race "old White men" for all of the problems. Then it leads to the killing fields like in Cambodia. The people that work for me suffered under just this kind of oppression. They would laugh at you for your naivety. They would warn you about the quest for utopia that leads to holes filled with dead bodies. They would look at your tear drinking comments and know that you are just the kind of guy that could be easily lead to join the ranks of those who would carry out the atrocities that they fled. Consider your little rant about drinking tears. Something like that only comes from a hate filled deranged mind. Maybe one day you will learn to think freely for yourself. You will need to put away your racist views and hatred first. Whitey is not your problem. Your problems are deeper than that.
You and I both know that the base of your Team (Democrats) is primarily losers or parasites. They are ether people who take more from the government than they contribute or they are people like lawyers who profit from the laws that make it easy to sue . They might be a part of the Teachers union who work the system for their own gain at the expense of the students and tax payers. They might be Professors who make much more than they could in the private sector at the expense of the students who owe huge loans to pay these salaries. They are even business men who work the system to give themselves advantages against their competition. At any rate your team is full of losers and parasites.
Lastly, I would never be so dumb as to give out my name or company name on a site like this. There are tear drinking nut heads like you out there. If you had half a brain you would hide your own identity. Do you really think it would help your career to have anyone see your hateful post? How would your boss like to see those tear drinking remarks or see your hatred for old white people? They might fire you or demote you to covering kindergarden spelling bees. I guess thats the next step down from high school soccer.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Jan 1, 2013 at 2:33 PM
I put my name after what I write because I have nothing to hide. I am in favor of tax hikes for the rich in order to restore the middle class. I am in favor of compassion towards the poor, whether that be extended unemployment benefits or welfare. That is the just and Christian thing to do. I will gladly put my name after my beliefs, I am a proud progressive and proud member of the Democrat Party and a proud supporter of Barack Obama. I have nothing to hide.
Of course you won't put your name on your posts becase they show a hatred towards minorities and immigrants and single mothers. You have no idea that in the real world, for a lot of the poorest minorities and immigrants, it's either make minimum wage or don't work at all. We can thank you Conservatives for that. You make fun of people making minimum wage and at the same time you want to destroy unions, offering these people absolutely no power to bargain for higher wages. You are such hypocrites. Employers don't have to pay these immigrants anything more than minimum wage because you Conservatives destroyed the labor movement in this country. You also vote against raising the minimum wage. You destroyed the labor movement, and with George W. you destroyed a great economy and took away thousands of jobs, and then you call people who don't earn livable wages stupid and lazy. Unbelievable hypocrisy.
Your cowardice is also amazing. You're like Mitt Romney with the way you flip flop. You are against tax cuts for the rich, you insult the poor, you insult unions, you insult teachers, you insult single mothers, you bash any form of welfare, you talk about a liberal bias in the media, you insult the president and then you claim you don't belong to any political ideology. You are a complete fake. You show no conviction. It is clear by your posts that you are a far right conservative, but you don't have the balls to own up to it. Absolute coward.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Jan 1, 2013 at 8:58 PM
Just like I said you are a good little team player and a race hater. I say that no one without a defect would work their entire life on minimum wage and you try to turn that into something racial. You hate white people and you believe minorities are inferior and need your help. They do not. They are perfectly capable of making a success on their own. They need opportunity not hand outs. They need Freedom.
This has to be hard for you to grasp. Because, you have to put people in groups. They are rich or poor. They are black or they are white. This is a great tool that politicians use to manipulate you followers. It has been used effectively by Hitler, Pol Pot and now to lesser effect by Obama. These politicians know that they can play on your low self esteem and get you to blame others for your failures. Once they have you under their spell they can count on you and your hatred. You will do their dirty work. You will get so hyped up that you will foam at the mouth and lust to drink the tears of the people who oppose your tyranny. Its people like you who were used to carry out genocides all over the world.
The labor movement destroyed itself. No one will be paid more than they are worth for extended periods of time. The company will go out of business or move. I have worked in two companies with unions. I was amazed how lazy the people were. They were asleep at their stations half the time and made it damn near impossible to get anything done. There were a few hard workers among the union folks. They were singled out by the union for harassment. One of these companies folded. The other one moved to another country.
I know its hard for you to believe. But some of us do not have to join a team and root blindly for any cause. We can make up our minds on issues independently of party affiliation. Thats hardly being a coward. It being a individual with free will.
Now get some rest. There might be some kids playing soccer or basketball tomorrow. The bosses at the paper will need a lackey to cover it.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Jan 1, 2013 at 10:16 PM
I am assuming you drunk when you posted this one. What a rambling mess. You hit all of your leaders talking points and even made up a few for good measure. You got Rush Limbaugh in there and covered guns and homosexuals. The one that I liked best was the part about the civil war. That is just funny.
You also showed once again how hate filled you are. Now not only do you hate white folks but you also hate Southern folks. Funny thing is people from the North are fleeing like roaches from the North to the South. Take a look at Detroit. You guys have run it totally in the ground with all of those unions and taxes. Chicago is not much better. Crime is out of control up there and the state is damn near broke. You even attack people who live in trailers. I know you would prefer they live in the projects of Chicago. That is such a great example of Government success. You guys and your ideas have trapped the poor there for generations.
Try not to let your hateful views slip out at he soccer fields. You might loose that big job of yours. Its bad enough to be a grown man having to cover kids sporting events. It will even be worse having to wear that little McDonalds hat.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Jan 1, 2013 at 11:57 PM
In most states, the cash aid to a mother with one child is around $300, throw in another $300 in food stamps and try to find a place to live because the wait for subsidized housing is 2-4 years long. What you are claiming is bull crap and most people with half a brain know you are just talking crap to try to make your 'teabilly' philosophy known to the world
Posted by Lynne B Reno on Jan 2, 2013 at 8:03 PM
well bud, you are a hell of a lot richer than I am, and my son is a degreed accountant and lives on about 50k in an urban area, so maybe you people earning over 250K should take your babies out of the private schools, sell the Lamborghini and suffer like the rest of us
Posted by Lynne B Reno on Jan 2, 2013 at 8:06 PM
$1T Welfare
Fox news having a ball with that number.
Correct number is $746 Billion
Congressional Research Service has a detailed report.
+ 33% since Great Recession
Fox does not mention that tax exemptions are almost twice the 746 number.
Republicans have not presented a tax increase since 1990.
Yet! They borrowed $10,000 Billion.
Take good care of fifteen million ultra rich. Shaft seventy million.
Posted by clarenceswinney on Jan 3, 2013 at 3:06 PM
The time, effort and resources necessary to provide these people with the same opportunities we enjoy is ussually not available. They are not dying of hunger in the street, however they are also no more likely to get a job that pays a living wage.
Posted by Mark Colwell on Jan 4, 2013 at 7:06 PM
It is true that most people are only on welfare for a very short time, however it is also true that most people on wefare at any given time have been there for a long time. If 100 people spend an average of three months on welfare (300 months) and 50 spend an average of 30 months (1500 months) most of the people receiving aid at any given time will have been there a long time while most people who recieve aid will have recieved it for a short time.
Posted by Mark Colwell on Jan 4, 2013 at 7:13 PM
They aren't likely to find jobs with the federal government crowding out the private sector. The Federal government's workforce grew at almost a 12% clip since 2009. Private sector jobs have grown less than 1% since 2009.
With an administration focused on extracting as much money as possible from the private sector to spend on inefficient, counterproductive, and dependence creating federal government programs instead of policies that facilitate job creation and economic growth the future is as bleak as it has been since the 1970's.
Posted by thesafesurfer on Jan 5, 2013 at 12:48 PM
I am glad that Obama has successfully raised taxes on those who make $450,00 a year or more.
According to a 2012 study performed by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, in a 65-year sample study, it was determined that raising taxes on the rich does not hurt the economy in any way. It does not slow down the economy one bit, no matter what lies economic Conservatives like you spin.
The greatest times of economic growth in this country…the fifties, sixties, and nineties, saw tax increases on the wealthy. The worst times of economic growth post Great Depression, 2000-2008, saw major tax cuts for the rich.
Tax cuts for the rich don't work.
What's your response to that Harv?
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Jan 5, 2013 at 7:05 PM
I'm glad that Obama has successfully raised taxes on those who make $450,00 a year or more.
According to a 2012 study performed by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, in a 65-year sample study, it was determined that raising taxes on the rich does not hurt the economy in any way. It does not slow down the economy one bit, no matter what lies economic Conservatives like you spin.
The greatest times of economic growth in this country…the fifties, sixties, and nineties, saw tax increases on the wealthy. The worst times of economic growth post Great Depression, 2000-2008, saw major tax cuts for the rich.
Tax cuts for the rich don't work.
What's your response to that Harv?
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Jan 5, 2013 at 7:07 PM
I am glad that Obama has successfully raised taxes on those who make $450,00 a year or more.
According to a 2012 study performed by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, in a 65-year sample study, it was determined that raising taxes on the rich does not hurt the economy in any way. It does not slow down the economy one bit, no matter what lies economic Conservatives like you spin.
The greatest times of economic growth in this country…the fifties, sixties, and nineties, saw tax increases on the wealthy. The worst times of economic growth post Great Depression, 2000-2008, saw major tax cuts for the rich.
Tax cuts for the rich don't work.
What's your response to that Harv?
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Jan 5, 2013 at 7:08 PM
I'm glad that Obama has successfully raised taxes on those who make $450,00 a year or more.
According to a 2012 study performed by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, in a 65-year sample study it was determined that raising taxes on the rich does not hurt the economy in any way. It does not slow down the economy one bit, no matter what lies economic Conservatives like you spin.
The greatest times of economic growth in this country…the fifties, sixties, and nineties, saw tax increases on the wealthy. The worst times of economic growth post Great Depression, 2000-2008, saw major tax cuts for the rich.
Tax cuts for the rich don't work.
What's your response to that Harv?
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Jan 5, 2013 at 7:10 PM
I am glad that Obama has successfully raised taxes on those who make $450,00 a year or more.
According to a 2012 study performed by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, in a 65-year sample study, it was determined that raising taxes on the rich does not hurt the economy in any way. It does not slow down the economy one bit, no matter what lies economic Conservatives like you spin.
The greatest times of economic growth in this country…the fifties, sixties, and nineties, saw tax increases on the wealthy. The worst times of economic growth post Great Depression, 2000-2008, saw major tax cuts for the rich.
Tax cuts for the rich don't work.
What's your response to that Harv?
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Jan 5, 2013 at 7:11 PM
My response is that it is none of your business how much someone earns. Its not your money. But I am a Freedom guy and you are by any means necessary guy.
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Jan 5, 2013 at 7:13 PM
How are you responding to these post so quick? I posted like three minutes ago?
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Jan 5, 2013 at 7:16 PM
What does the "none of your business" argument have to do with the point I made? For years, Conservatives have said that raising taxes on the rich will hurt the economy and studies show they don't. This goes against everything you guys have preached since Reagan. You have to do better than "it's none of your business…"
A glorious victory for Obama and progressives everywhere. Finally, the American people, around 60 percent, have seen through the nonsense that raising taxes on the rich somehow hurts the economy.
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Jan 5, 2013 at 7:22 PM
What makes you think you have a right to other peoples money?
Posted by Uncle_Harvey on Jan 5, 2013 at 7:26 PM
Why do you think that we progressives "have rights to other peoples' money?" We're not taking their money. Now, the government DOES HAVE A RIGHT to tax its citizens. The government is asking the wealthiest Americans to pay a little more in taxes. Why do you Conservative/libertarians think you can reap all the benefits of a great country and give nothing back? How is a country supposed to survive with no income? I mean, if it was up to you, there would be no taxes, right? Where would you draw the line?
Also, were you complaining like this from 2000-2008, when the middle-class and the poor were paying disproportionate amount of taxes? Did you stick up for their rights or do you just stand up for the rich.
What makes you Conservtives/Libertarians think you have a right to the middle-class's money.
Also, you Conservatives are the one that started this class warfare back in 1981, when Reagan talked about the Welfare Queen from the South Side of Chicago driving around in a cadillac, taking away your hard-earned money.
Karma's a biatch, no?
Posted by Chris Pellizzari on Jan 5, 2013 at 7:45 PM


text:
Baddy82: I will give you a tool that finds you 10000 fresh proxies for $5
in: Social Marketing • Expected delivery ~2 days
This tool will find you around 10000 fresh proxies each time you run it and saves it to a text file. Perfect for use with Scrapebox, SEnuke and XRumer. It comes with Elite Proxy Switcher to test the proxies for speed and security.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Chip Hackler is an assistant professor in the Film Studies Department at the University of North Carolina Wilmington. His films include Two Hours in the Dark, Dawn Patrol and Cathedral, an adaptation of the acclaimed short story by Raymond Carver.
Chip's dramatic short Two Hours in the Dark will be featured at the 2010 Heartland Film Festival.


text:
Playing Sisters in A Prairie Home Companion: Tomlin couldnt help but point out the obvious she and Meryl Streep bare little resemblance to one another. You want to hear something hilarious? Because I thought we looked so different, No ones going to believe were sisters. Speaking to Streep, Tomlin said, I tried to make your nose like mine. I mean, I tried to make my nose like yours! Tomlin went as far as to have noses molded to try and make her look more like Streep. But, according to Tomlin, her nose was too wide to make it work.
Despite the fact casting the two actresses as sisters may have seemed like a stretch, it works in the film. Somehow, it was just an absolute blessing, wasnt it? Bob [Altman] must have known. I dont know how he would have known because I looked and thought, We just dont look anything alike. Whos going to believe were really sisters? I believed that [the audience] would believe it, but in my mind I had doubts. Plus, you have busywork to do so I spent a lot of time have noses sculpted.
Adapting to Different Comic Sensibilities: Lily Tomlin said she didnt have any difficulty adapting to Garrison Keillors sense of humor in the script. Im a big fan of Garrisons, explained Tomlin. Ive listened to Prairie Home Companion for a very, very long time. Except for one period where he went someplace and we didnt know where he went. We felt abandoned. Anyway
Writer Garrison Keillor said Tomlin redid her part completely. Tomlin acknowledged thats probably the truth. Oh yeah, I did. I redid [Meryl Streeps] too, laughed Tomlin. I was very busy. I didnt think about it. You think of yourself as an actor and you come in and do it. I love Garrisons sensibility anyway. Its something I relate to and have a rapport with. You just want to do the part. You want to come in and do justice to your character and serve the movie and the story. And I dont want to embarrass myself with Miss Streep.
Tomlin says she was taken by Keillors stage presence after watching a live production of A Prairie Home Companion. Ive only seen it once live. I saw it last summer at the [Hollywood] Bowl and Garrison is so funny. On the radio you dont get to see him. His expressions standing up there, I thought, This is so good for the movie. I said, This shows even funnier live than it is on the radio. The sound effects, everything that went on that night at the Bowl was so hilarious. Doubly hilarious.
Meryl Streep on Reuniting with Kevin Kline: A Prairie Home Companion marks the first time Streep has shared the screen with Kevin Kline since the two starred in Sophies Choice. However its not the first time the two have acted together since that film's release in 1982. Well, actually we did The Seagull and I wrestled him to the ground in that in Central Park about five years ago. He's a good old friend and so when you say that you haven't worked with him it seems more like he's never been out of my life. But I love working with him. I really loved watching him do this part because it's like Kevin unleashed. It's like, 'How can I make my part bigger?'
He's endlessly inventive and shameless and it reminded me of the first time I'd ever seen him perform in On the 20th Century, which was a play on Broadway. I thought, 'Boy, this guy should be drummed out of Actor's Equity for what he just did.' He was hamming it up and pushing it so far. People were screaming with laughter. But on film Kevins not really known for that kind of thing, so it was really great to see him do it.
Warming Up to Sing in A Prairie Home Companion: I didn't prepare too much, said Streep. We just had like three days to get ready and I like to sing. It's just really fun to sing and I don't get to much. And at my house I'm not allowed to because your children can't stand it when you sing. It's been hard to wait until everybodys out of the house because there are a lot of them, and sing. Anyway, I was really glad to be able to do it. It was so much fun, so much fun. Pure joy.
Page 2: Robert Altman's Style and Working with Lindsay Lohan