Posted on 02/27/2008 11:00:42 AM PST by NCDragon
his liberalism, pro-arabism and pro-abortionism is dirty
Take his pandering to the unions, for instance, it's pure fascism, at its best. From the WSJ/online:
Mr. Obama's proposal would designate certain companies as "patriot employers" and favor them over other, presumably not so patriotic, businesses.
The legislation takes four pages to define "patriotic" companies as those that: "pay at least 60 percent of each employee's health care premiums"; have a position of "neutrality in employee [union] organizing drives"; "maintain or increase the number of full-time workers in the United States relative to the number of full-time workers outside of the United States"; pay a salary to each employee "not less than an amount equal to the federal poverty level"; and provide a pension plan.
In other words, a patriotic employer is one which fulfills the fondest Big Labor agenda, regardless of the competitive implications. The proposal ignores the marketplace reality that businesses hire a work force they can afford to pay and still make money. Coercing companies into raising wages and benefits above market rates may only lead to fewer workers getting hired in the first place.
Under Mr. Obama's plan, "patriot employers" qualify for a 1% tax credit on their profits. To finance this tax break, American companies with subsidiaries abroad would have to pay the U.S. corporate tax on profits earned abroad, rather than the corporate tax of the host country where they are earned. Since the U.S. corporate tax rate is 35%, while most of the world has a lower rate, this amounts to a big tax increase on earnings owned abroad.
Put another way, U.S. companies would suddenly have to pay a higher tax rate than their Chinese, Japanese and European competitors. According to research by Peter Merrill, an international tax expert at PriceWaterhouseCoopers, this change would "raise the cost of capital of U.S. multinationals and cause them to lose market share to foreign rivals." Apparently Mr. Obama believes that by making U.S. companies less profitable and less competitive world-wide, they will somehow be able to create more jobs in America.
Huh? My comment was meant in jest. I was mocking the reporter’s attitude toward Obama. I agree that he is an authoritarian leftist.
breathtakingly ignorant.
Sorry, I jumped to conclusions.
so, Obama was right on both counts by denouncing AND rejecting. :)
Well, he’ll have to work harder is all.
he can’t slickster his way out of this one. He was caught off guard but this may be a deal breaker to even many democrats in the general.
only because he was forced into it by Hillary who was clear and direct. russert made it an issue that denouncing wasn’t enough and Obama tried to equivocate.
We knew what he was saying. hilllereee just trid to make Obama look bad so Russert continued the questioning which was a good thing and so Obama cleared it up. hillleree has done her share of glad handing with many, many, many evil and corrupt people in her lifetime. She’s far from CLEAN.
I don’t think he was trying to “slickster” out of anything. He was asked a question. He answered it. Tim was satisfied. It was hillleree who tried to make it an issue then Tim pursued more questioning and Obama made it clear to reject and denounce. She was like Teacher, Teacher he did this...yada, yada. She has lost and now can only ATTACK EVEN MORE.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.