The Observation Deck

From Shelton's article: No one blames these predecessors for deliberately encouraging corruption or profiting from it. But this president, or at least his brain, Karl Rove, was up to his elbows in these schemes. And Dick Cheney is sitting pretty on his Halliburton stock.

From Fact check.org

Stock Options

That still would leave the possibility that Cheney could profit from his Halliburton stock options if the company's stock rises in value. However, Cheney and his wife Lynne have assigned any future profits from their stock options in Halliburton and several other companies to charity. And we're not just taking the Cheney's word for this -- we asked for a copy of the legal agreement they signed, which we post here publicly for the first time.

The "Gift Trust Agreement" the Cheney's signed two days before he took office turns over power of attorney to a trust administrator to sell the options at some future time and to give the after-tax profits to three charities. The agreement specifies that 40% will go to the University of Wyoming (Cheney's home state), 40% will go to George Washington University's medical faculty to be used for tax-exempt charitable purposes, and 20% will go to Capital Partners for Education, a charity that provides financial aid for low-income students in Washington, DC to attend private and religious schools.

The agreement states that it is "irrevocable and may not be terminated, waived or amended," so the Cheney's can't take back their options later.

The options owned by the Cheney's have been valued at nearly $8 million, his attorney says. Such valuations are rough estimates only -- the actual value will depend on what happens to stock prices in the future, which of course can't be known beforehand. But it is clear that giving up rights to the future profits constitutes a significant financial sacrifice, and a sizable donation to the chosen charities.

From Shelton's article: Bush's only other significant domestic policy is massive tax cuts that have redistributed wealth from the middle class to families earning more than $377,000 annually, while hiking federal fees, state and local taxes, and co-payments for veterans and Medicaid recipients

FACT: The 92.1 million taxpayers with annual incomes of less than $50,000 in 2003 saw a 47 percent reduction in their average tax bill from President Bush's 2001-2003 income tax relief. ("Who Benefits Most From Tax Cuts On Investment Income," The New York Times, 4/5/06)

FACT: The 26.9 million taxpayers with annual incomes between $50,000 and $100,000 in 2003 saw a 20 percent reduction in their average tax bill from President Bush's 2001-2003 income tax relief. ("Who Benefits Most From Tax Cuts On Investment Income," The New York Times, 4/5/06)

FACT: In the last five years, the President's tax relief has helped spur growth by keeping $880 billion in the hands of the American people.

From Shelton's article:In this tradition, Bush's justification for the Iraq invasion was fictional.

The 92.1 million taxpayers with annual incomes of less than $50,000 in 2003 saw a 47 percent reduction in their average tax bill from President Bush's 2001-2003 income tax relief

Your search for "Who Benefits Most From Tax Cuts On Investment Income" in all fields returned 0 results.

FACT: The 92.1 million taxpayers with annual incomes of less than $50,000 in 2003 saw a 47 percent reduction in their average tax bill from President Bush's 2001-2003 income tax relief. ("Who Benefits Most From Tax Cuts On Investment Income," The New York Times, 4/5/06)

Meanwhile, President Bush took us to war based in assertions about evidence that were not true, and, incidentally, were materially not true in any scientific sense, at the time he made them.

Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.

Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.

I have no idea what you're getting at with this:
Quote:

Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.


It's a little late in the game to serve as apologist for President Bush's Iraq mendacities. You and me have been around this bend before and when challenged to back-up your assertions way-back-when you delivered zip.

Well, Stephen dance all you want. I don't know whether I should mail you a straw or a flashlight or a gift certificate to Phoenix University.

Your dribble: Your search for "Who Benefits Most From Tax Cuts On Investment Income" in all fields returned 0 results.

FACT: The 92.1 million taxpayers with annual incomes of less than $50,000 in 2003 saw a 47 percent reduction in their average tax bill from President Bush's 2001-2003 income tax relief. ("Who Benefits Most From Tax Cuts On Investment Income," The New York Times, 4/5/06)

You find a data source from the disreputable White House, you repeat it's own mis-attribution while tagging it FACT, and then, called on your own deception,

Well, Stephen dance all you want. I don't know whether I should mail you a straw or a flashlight or a gift certificate to Phoenix University.

[color=red]Your search for "Who Benefits Most From Tax Cuts On Investment Income" in all fields returned 0 results.

FACT: The 92.1 million taxpayers with annual incomes of less than $50,000 in 2003 saw a 47 percent reduction in their average tax bill from President Bush's 2001-2003 income tax relief. ("Who Benefits Most From Tax Cuts On Investment Income," The New York Times, 4/5/06)

I still don't give up. I find the attribution at the web site of the White House!

They too, given over to their natural tendency to lie, have misattributed the data and you've bought into it hook, line and sinker.

***

Incidentally, the table on the White House page

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases ... 405-9.html

is a classic case of statistical manipulation. You see Stephen, I don't occupy a complicated tax situation, nor do most people who make <$50,000 a year, so I knew going into it that your "research" was crap and whatever data supported it was being manipulated.