Small business taxes.

[Traep]

Enlighten me. I don't own a small business and I can't seem to find this information. What is the advantage of claiming all your small business income as personal income on your tax forms? Wouldn't it make more sense to corporatize your business and file separate taxes for you and the business?

[Skyborn]

Dont have an answer OP but did anyone notice that the Barackmeister was equating tax breaks on individuals with tax breaks on their small businesses last night...wtf was that?

[Carl Ragadamn]

Enlighten me. I don't own a small business and I can't seem to find this information. What is the advantage of claiming all your small business income as personal income on your tax forms? Wouldn't it make more sense to corporatize your business and file separate taxes for you and the business?

The advantage of claiming a small business income as personal income (commonly under a S-corp) is that the money is taxed once. If you create a cororation then the profit is taxed and then taxed again when you take the money as a personal gain.

[BladeSLicer]

The advantage of claiming a small business income as personal income (commonly under a S-corp) is that the money is taxed once. If you create a cororation then the profit is taxed and then taxed again when you take the money as a personal gain.

The disadvantage being that you'll quickly end up with some pretty hefty taxes when people like Obama take charge, as a large portion of the small businesses make $250k+ a year total (before expenses). Tis a shame!

[Traep]

The advantage of claiming a small business income as personal income (commonly under a S-corp) is that the money is taxed once. If you create a cororation then the profit is taxed and then taxed again when you take the money as a personal gain.

So if I'm understanding this correctly, all those small businesses that McCain is saying would have their taxes raised because they file as individuals and make over $250k could get around the issue by simply corporatizing their business? Obviously, it could still be better to file it all as personal income, depending on your situation, but that would still be a way around the issue, right?

[Carl Ragadamn]

The disadvantage being that you'll quickly end up with some pretty hefty taxes when people like Obama take charge, as a large portion of the small businesses make $250k+ a year total (before expenses). Tis a shame!

This would be one of the reasons I would never vote Obama. Especially since I can only take a loss on my 2 side companies for 2 more years.

[BladeSLicer]

So if I'm understanding this correctly, all those small businesses that McCain is saying would have their taxes raised because they file as individuals and make over $250k could get around the issue by simply corporatizing their business? Obviously, it could still be better to file it all as personal income, depending on your situation, but that would still be a way around the issue, right?

Either or would result in a tax increase.

[Carl Ragadamn]

So if I'm understanding this correctly, all those small businesses that McCain is saying would have their taxes raised because they file as individuals and make over $250k could get around the issue by simply corporatizing their business? Obviously, it could still be better to file it all as personal income, depending on your situation, but that would still be a way around the issue, right?

Either or would result in a tax increase.

Without multiple partners in a firm necessitating a standard corp the difference in amount the government takes of the pie is quite large. However if obama raises taxes on the bracket by 8-10% then it would near parity and would not matter how you incorporate a company.

[Slypieguy]

The disadvantage being that you'll quickly end up with some pretty hefty taxes when people like Obama take charge, as a large portion of the small businesses make $250k+ a year total (before expenses). Tis a shame!

No wai! Obama sed it's like 98% of them that make less than 250k! Obey the messiah!

[Dwhap]

The disadvantage being that you'll quickly end up with some pretty hefty taxes when people like Obama take charge, as a large portion of the small businesses make $250k+ a year total (before expenses). Tis a shame!


95% of small businesses make less the $250,000 a year. This is a fact.

I personally have an IT side business setup as a LTC (Limited Liability Company) which is similiar to a corporation. Last year my company Grossed $105,000.00 and I legally paid almost no taxes. This is because my net profit was only about $7,000. The trick is to expense as much as possible. For example, my car, truck, trailor, some of my furniture, etc were all bought by my company. I also expense as much as possible. For example, part of my house payment, meals, travel, gas, office supplies, etc can all be legally expensed. Now for this year, I will be paying a lot more taxes because I did not make any big purchases with my business, but I will still be paying less then 20%.

[Carl Ragadamn]

95% of small businesses make less the $250,000 a year. This is a fact.


It is not a fact because neither you nor Obama have stated what $250,000 you are talking about. Is it 250k net, gross, or what? On the brightside it means every farm operation in America will get taxed and food prices can go up more.

[BladeSLicer]

It is not a fact because neither you nor Obama have stated what $250,000 you are talking about. Is it 250k net, gross, or what? On the brightside it means every farm operation in America will get taxed and food prices can go up more.

Yay, I was just thinking food was too cheap!

Also, I've always been curious where they get that 95% number as well.

[Caffy]

Yay, I was just thinking food was too cheap!

Also, I've always been curious where they get that 95% number as well.

I think it's like "3.5 groups" in "CaliMath" for those who are familiar with it.

Obama's campaign uses 95% as a figure 95% of the time.

Basicly it means "I don't know" or "I don't remember".

[Traep]

Either or would result in a tax increase.

Seems to me this wouldn't necessarily be the case. Obviously I haven't done any of the math but what would happen if your personal income tax rate dropped enough to offset having to pay a corporate tax rate? Might not even be possible, but it doesn't sound too far fetched from my point of view.

[BladeSLicer]

I think it's like "3.5 groups" in "CaliMath" for those who are familiar with it.

Obama's campaign uses 95% as a figure 95% of the time.

Basicly it means "I don't know" or "I don't remember".

Well that was the odd coincidence I noticed. He says 95% of the population will not be subjected to tax increases, and that 95% of the population will also experience a tax cut. That's odd when one considers that it's about 65% of the populace who pay 100% of the taxes. What cuts are those other 30% getting?

The numbers just seem largely fictional to me. I'd love someone to explain it in-depth.

[Dwhap]

It is not a fact because neither you nor Obama have stated what $250,000 you are talking about. Is it 250k net, gross, or what? On the brightside it means every farm operation in America will get taxed and food prices can go up more.

It sounds like you've been brain washed by the McCain campaign. Here is the fact check:

http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/15/smallbusiness/small_biz_taxes_factcheck.smb/index.htm?postversion=2008101612

"Even using the broad definition of small business that McCain likes, very few business owners would see their own taxes rise.

That's because the lion's share of taxable income comes from a small number of wealthy businesses. Out of 34.7 million filers with business income on Schedules C, E or F, 479,000 filers fall into the top two brackets, according to an analysis of projected 2009 filings by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

The other 34.3 million - or 98.6% - would be unaffected by Obama's proposed rate hike.

That includes Joe "The Plumber" Wurzelbacher, whom McCain invoked nearly two dozen times at the debate Wednesday night to illustrate the plight of the average worker and small business owner."

And as taxes go, only your profits get taxed... so I'm not sure what you mean when you say you aren't sure whether he will be taxing gross or net income...

[Caffy]

McCain Votes with Bush 95% of the time! :rolleyes:

[Titus Ultor]

It is not a fact because neither you nor Obama have stated what $250,000 you are talking about. Is it 250k net, gross, or what? On the brightside it means every farm operation in America will get taxed and food prices can go up more.

LOL. Do you honestly believe that any sizeable amount of our food comes from anything that could be considered a "small business"?

[BladeSLicer]

LOL. Do you honestly believe that any sizeable amount of our food comes from anything that could be considered a "small business"?

You do realize how large businesses can get and still be considered "small", right?

Besides, that just reinforces what he said. They are large enough to bear the brunt of these tax increases that Obama hopes to push through, and prices will rise thereafter.

[Dwhap]

LOL. Do you honestly believe that any sizeable amount of our food comes from anything that could be considered a "small business"?

Farms get government subsidies and special tax breaks anyway..

Sorry Carl Ragadamn, but you'r argument isn't based on any facts...

[BladeSLicer]

McCain Votes with Bush 95% of the time! :rolleyes:

Forget 23, 95 is the real conspiracy number here!

[BladeSLicer]

Farms get government subsidies and special tax breaks anyway..

Sorry Carl Ragadamn, but you'r argument isn't based on any facts...

Heh, the subsidies that were pushed through by your liberal friends which has raised prices and caused a famine over in North Africa?

[Traep]

Forget 23, 95 is the real conspiracy number here!

That was one of the worst movies ever!

[Titus Ultor]

You do realize how large businesses can get and still be considered "small", right?

Besides, that just reinforces what he said. They are large enough to bear the brunt of these tax increases that Obama hopes to push through, and prices will rise thereafter.

Agricorps are full-size corporations, with more consolidation happening pretty much all the time.

[BladeSLicer]

Agricorps are full-size corporations, with more consolidation happening pretty much all the time.

I'm also curious, are you under the impression that there are no independant farmers? I happen to have quite a few in my family alone, and there's definitely plenty of them. They bring in a lot of money but they're forced to spend it all on equipment, feed, employees, and technology, and are hanging on by a thread atm.

[Dwhap]

I'm also curious, are you under the impression that there are no independant farmers? I happen to have quite a few in my family alone, and there's definitely plenty of them. They bring in a lot of money but they're forced to spend it all on equipment, feed, employees, and technology, and are hanging on by a thread atm.

You're right, and I'm willing to bet not one of the independent farmers in your family shows a profit of more then $250,000.00 which means they will will not get a tax increase (and will probably get a tax cut) under Obama.

[Duncandun]

The disadvantage being that you'll quickly end up with some pretty hefty taxes when people like Obama take charge, as a large portion of the small businesses make $250k+ a year total (before expenses). Tis a shame!

derp obamas tax increase only effects those who make 250k+ after expenses derp

[stalwart]

McCain Votes with Bush 95% of the time! :rolleyes:

huh? because bush votes in the senate, right?

[Septus]

I was gonna rape this thread but I see Dwhap's doing it all by himself.

[Slypieguy]

What cuts are those other 30% getting?


Refund (welfare) checks?

[Dwhap]

Heh, the subsidies that were pushed through by your liberal friends which has raised prices and caused a famine over in North Africa?

Who you're calling a liberal?

[Slypieguy]

Everyone is missing the more important point here. Even the business that makes 500k, or 500 million a year still doesn't need to be taxed more FFS. Especially not during a looming recession/depression

[Dwhap]

Everyone is missing the more important point here. Even the business that makes 500k, or 500 million a year still doesn't need to be taxed more FFS. Especially not during a looming recession/depression

I don't like taxes either, but if we are going to give breaks anywhere it needs to be the Middle Class right?

[Slypieguy]

I don't like taxes either, but if we are going to give breaks anywhere it needs to be the Middle Class right?

Giving breaks to middle class =\= raising it on businesses.

[Traep]

Everyone is missing the more important point here. Even the business that makes 500k, or 500 million a year still doesn't need to be taxed more FFS. Especially not during a looming recession/depression

It's sorta like reverse trickle-down economics. You invest in the lower and middle classes and give them tax breaks and in doing so they'll have more money to spend with big businesses that will see tax increases. This makes at least as much sense to me as the trickle-down theory with the added bonus that if you're in the lower income brackets there's almost no chance that your money will go to foreign investments where if you're getting the breaks at the top you can easily reinvest that in things that make you even more money but do absolutely nothing for the country.

[Slypieguy]

It's sorta like reverse trickle-down economics. You invest in the lower and middle classes and give them tax breaks and in doing so they'll have more money to spend with big businesses that will see tax increases. This makes at least as much sense to me as the trickle-down theory with the added bonus that if you're in the lower income brackets there's almost no chance that your money will go to foreign investments where if you're getting the breaks at the top you can easily reinvest that in things that make you even more money but do absolutely nothing for the country.

See the post above yours.

[Zuku]

Enlighten me. I don't own a small business and I can't seem to find this information. What is the advantage of claiming all your small business income as personal income on your tax forms? Wouldn't it make more sense to corporatize your business and file separate taxes for you and the business?

Go to a tax lawyer and don't listen to these dumbasses at this forum b/c you'll always find "experts" who know everything here. Your situation will depend on what state you live in and how much you anticipate your business will make.

[Traep]

See the post above yours.

I understand what you're saying. My only point is that, if everything were to work out, it wouldn't matter much that their taxes get increased because the added revenue coming in from those who are getting tax breaks spending more money would even it out.

[Niccoli]

What is this middle class you speak of?

[Traep]

Go to a tax lawyer and don't listen to these dumbasses at this forum b/c you'll always find "experts" who know everything here. Your situation will depend on what state you live in and how much you anticipate your business will make.

Yeah but I was only looking for a general idea of the pros and cons of corporatizing a small business. It's kind of hard to insert a political ideology into the general idea at least.

[Ziegler]

I don't like taxes either, but if we are going to give breaks anywhere it needs to be the Middle Class right?

how about this...we give tax breaks to the ones who actually pay taxes, and decrease the freebies of the ones who dont? :idea:

[Slypieguy]

I understand what you're saying. My only point is that, if everything were to work out, it wouldn't matter much that their taxes get increased because the added revenue coming in from those who are getting tax breaks spending more money would even it out.

Well, if you raised them enough, they would just move out of the country/outsource more instead and joe middle class would be out of the job :(

[Carl Ragadamn]

Farms get government subsidies and special tax breaks anyway..

Sorry Carl Ragadamn, but you'r argument isn't based on any facts...

You're right, and I'm willing to bet not one of the independent farmers in your family shows a profit of more then $250,000.00 which means they will will not get a tax increase (and will probably get a tax cut) under Obama.

Ah so it is net, because I have not seen the Obama campaign say 250k net once. I refuse to use logic to try and determine what either campaign is intending because you will find yourself off somewhere other than where they were going.

[DocGonzo]

/sigh

we are already giving tax breaks and subsidies to corps that move out of the country and replace US jobs with those for folks in the third world that work for cheap with no safety or environmental protections

saves them money , right?

Henry Ford was once asked why he paid his auto workers so much, he replied, "some one has to be able to afford to buy my cars"

the U.S. needs to stop basing it's economy off of gambling (wall street), and go back to actually making stuff, or we will quickly descend into a second rate nation after China and India

as for taxes, small business and Obama's plan...

Fact check: Plumber Joe's taxes
McCain has entrepreneurs spooked about tax hikes, but fewer than 2% of small business owners would pay more under Obama's plan.

Last Updated: October 16, 2008: 12:30 PM ET

(CNNMoney.com) -- In speech after speech, presidential candidate John McCain hammers on the claim that his rival Barack Obama will raise taxes on many small businesses.


At the debate on Wednesday night, McCain said, "The small businesses that we're talking about would receive an increase in their taxes right now."

More typically he has said: "What [Obama] hasn't told you is that he would tax half of the income of small businesses in America," a line used in La Crosse, Wisc., last week.

Should small business owners fear for their wallets if Obama is elected? Not the vast majority, business and tax experts say.

To make its claim, according to a McCain spokesman, the campaign counts as a small-business owner any taxpayer who files a Schedule C, E or F - the forms used to report gains and losses from business ventures and farms.

Using that definition and citing IRS data, the campaign notes that "56.8% of total small business income is earned by businesses in the top two rates, which Barack Obama has pledged to raise."

It's true that Obama has proposed raising taxes on the top two income rates.

But there are three main problems with McCain's charge.

What is a small business?
First, it relies on a broad definition of what counts as a small business, including everyone who files a Schedule C, E and F.

But most people who file those forms don't run a business for a living: Those forms are also used to report income from freelance and consulting work, real-estate rentals, and most other non-salary sources.

For example, McCain and Obama both file Schedule C returns, thanks to their book royalties - but they hardly should be considered small business owners.

In 2005, there were 21.5 million Schedule C returns filed, according to the IRS.

A more realistic definition of small businesses turns up far fewer firms. The Small Business Administration estimates that there were 6 million small businesses in 2005, as measured by those with fewer than 500 employees and with staff on the payroll other than the owner.

Who pays?
Second, even using the broad definition of small business that McCain likes, very few owners would see their own taxes rise.

That's because the lion's share of taxable income comes from a small number of wealthy businesses. Out of 34.7 million filers with business income on Schedules C, E or F, 479,000 filers fall into the top two brackets, according to an analysis of projected 2009 filings by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

The other 34.3 million - or 98.6% - would be unaffected by Obama's proposed rate hike.

That includes Joe "The Plumber" Wurzelbacher, whom McCain invoked nearly two dozen times at the debate Wednesday night to illustrate the plight of the average worker and small business owner.

"Joe wants to buy the business that he has been in for all of these years ... he wanted to buy the business but he looked at your tax plan and he saw that he was going to pay much higher taxes," McCain said.

In an interview afterward with WTOL, Wurzelbacher acknowledged that he'd still like to eventually buy the plumbing company he works for but that he wouldn't yet be hit by higher taxes.

"I want to set the record straight: Currently I would not fall into Barack Obama's $250,000-plus," he said. "But if I'm lucky in business and taxes don't go up then maybe I can grow the business and be in that tax bracket - well, let me rephrase it. Hopefully, that tax won't be there."

Few owners are that lucky in business. In a member survey conducted late last year, the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) found that only 14% of respondents said they had $200,000 or more in annual income.

What gets taxed?
Third, even if you're one of the rare business owners making enough money to be affected by Obama's proposed tax increases, you still won't see a big hike in your tax bill.

McCain's claim that Obama "will increase taxes on 50% of small business revenue" - the line he used in the second presidential debate - is incorrect because of how income is taxed.

If a business owner falls into the top bracket, that doesn't mean that all of his or her income is taxed at the highest level.

For example: If a small-business owner makes $210,000 in taxable income, he edges into the 33% bracket, one of the two top tax rates that Obama would like to raise.

But he would pay the higher tax only on the amount that exceeds the cutoff - in 2007, the two top tax rates applied to single filers with income of $160,850 or more and joint filers with income of at least $195,850. As a single filer, this business owner would see his federal taxes increase $1,475 under Obama's plan, which calls for raising the 33% tax rate to 36%.

"While Obama does favor raising the top two rates, the quote is not true because not all the small business income of those in the top two rates is taxed at the 33% and 35% rates," said Gerald Prante, a senior economist at the nonpartisan Tax Foundation.

The bottom line: McCain's claim only works by using an overly broad definition of what counts as a "small business" - and even with that definition, fewer than 2% of business owners would be hit by Obama's proposed rate increase. For those who are affected, the increase would be levied only on a part of their earnings, not all of them.

nuff said?

[Malhavok]

Enlighten me. I don't own a small business and I can't seem to find this information. What is the advantage of claiming all your small business income as personal income on your tax forms? Wouldn't it make more sense to corporatize your business and file separate taxes for you and the business?

Too lazy to read thread.

The advantage to incorporating for the most part is liability protection. For most small businesses that means registering as an LLC which provides you with the tax treatment of a proprietorship or partnership and the legal exposure of a corporation.

There isn't really any advantage to going C Corp for tax reasons for most businesses. You can deduct business expenses as a proprietorship just as you do as Corporation or LLC. There are some advantages (employee benefits and retirement is better as a Corp) but they generally aren't good enough to justify the expense of going C corp.

[Caffy]

the U.S. needs to stop basing it's economy off of gambling (wall street), and go back to actually making stuff, or we will quickly descend into a second rate nation after China and India

Yes, our economy basicly makes paper.


as for taxes, small business and Obama's plan...



nuff said?

No.

More needs to be said about how full of shit all politicians and their campaign promises are.

Only an incredibly guilable person would believe either of these douchetards is going to stick to their word, and actually do what they've been promising for the last 2 years.

[Septus]

Only an incredibly guilable person would believe either of these douchetards is going to stick to their word, and actually do what they've been promising for the last 2 years.

But you're still voting for McCain amirite?

[DocGonzo]

Yes, our economy basicly makes paper.




No.

More needs to be said about how full of shit all politicians and their campaign promises are.

Only an incredibly guilable person would believe either of these douchetards is going to stick to their word, and actually do what they've been promising for the last 2 years.

well now..i wasn't gullible enough to buy the last Administration's bullshit for 8 years, why would it be different now

what i do take note of is the approach and underlying philosophy...then i have to make a judgment based on the facts i have

W never even pretended to be a fiscal conservative, at least Obama has tried to show that for everything he wants to spend, he has an idea of how to pay for it , with the goal of being revenue neutral

a much better approach than what we have had for the last 8 years, imo...still bullshit, but at least it bears some resemblance to reality rather than just laughing and putting it on the credit card because the ideology followed thinks it's smart to "starve the beast"

McCain is clueless about the national checkbook, and while i admire his desire to get rid of pork, he is completely out to lunch when it comes to how insignificant that is in comparison to the entire budget and what needs to be done to balance out checkbook

fuck putting our bills on the chinese credit card, fuck putting 2 wars and this bailout off budget...at least Obama is paying lip service to trying to be transparent in all of this...and i think that's a step in the right direction...until and unless something better comes along

that help?

[Septus]

McCain is clueless

I think that's all that really needs to be said. George W. Bush is a perfect example of a McCain presidency.

Full of ideology but all in all is a fucking retard who would have no choice but to appoint other people based on nothing other than ideology, inevitably leading to said appointees fucking shit up and McCain and Congress blaming each other.

I feel it's rather obvious that Obama would be able to open up to rational debate with intelligent minds. McCain is a brainless dolt.

[Caffy]

well now..i wasn't gullible enough to buy the last Administration's bullshit for 8 years, why would it be different now

what i do take note of is the approach and underlying philosophy...then i have to make a judgment based on the facts i have

W never even pretended to be a fiscal conservative, at least Obama has tried to show that for everything he wants to spend, he has an idea of how to pay for it , with the goal of being revenue neutral

a much better approach than what we have had for the last 8 years, imo...still bullshit, but at least it bears some resemblance to reality rather than just laughing and putting it on the credit card because the ideology followed thinks it's smart to "starve the beast"

McCain is clueless about the national checkbook, and while i admire his desire to get rid of pork, he is completely out to lunch when it comes to how insignificant that is in comparison to the entire budget and what needs to be done to balance out checkbook

fuck putting our bills on the chinese credit card, fuck putting 2 wars and this bailout off budget...at least Obama is paying lip service to trying to be transparent in all of this...and i think that's a step in the right direction...until and unless something better comes along

that help?

That's alot of text to say that you like the lesser of two evils.

I prefer my view. All politicians are full of shit.

But you're still voting for McCain amirite?

Which I've said dozens of times has nothing to do with his retarded policies. :rolleyes:

[Septus]

Which I've said dozens of times has nothing to do with his retarded policies. :rolleyes:

RACIST

[DocGonzo]

That's alot of text to say that you like the lesser of two evils.

I prefer my view. All politicians are full of shit.



Which I've said dozens of times has nothing to do with his retarded policies. :rolleyes:

so why are you choosing McCain then?

so that a young earth creationist can be a heartbeat away from the nuclear button?

[Caffy]

so why are you choosing McCain then?

so that a young earth creationist can be a heartbeat away from the nuclear button?

That crazy third branch. You know, the one that is appointed for life, and can rape the constitution on a whim. The one that we don't actually get to vote for. :(

[Septus]

That crazy third branch. You know, the one that is appointed for life, and can rape the constitution on a whim. The one that we don't actually get to vote for. :(

Oh you mean the one that just sits on their asses and does nothing? :P

Seriously though the Supreme Court has basically been neutered on all policies except fucking abortion and gay rights.

[DocGonzo]

That crazy third branch. You know, the one that is appointed for life, and can rape the constitution on a whim. The one that we don't actually get to vote for. :(

another perfect reason for me to go Obama, and one of the underlying causes for me to vote against McCain (besides the Palin fiasco)

Roe v Wade is settled law, it should stay that way...it won't if McCain gets to put up the next 3-4 Justices

somebody has to balance out Scalia (fucking insane), Thomas (a cipher who votes the way he is told), Alito and Roberts (the most dangerous, and Chief Justice for at least the next 20 years)

after looking at some of the things the Roberts court has already done (the gimme to the credit card companies, and telling a lady she had no grounds for a suit about equal pay because she hadn't known she was getting screwed for 20 years...etc), no sane person can want that to go unchecked

oh yeah..an dthat wacky "unitary executive" thing that Roberts and Alito have already said they believe Cheney's version of...

could just be me...

[Entreri]

95% of small businesses make less the $250,000 a year. This is a fact.

I personally have an IT side business setup as a LTC (Limited Liability Company) which is similiar to a corporation. Last year my company Grossed $105,000.00 and I legally paid almost no taxes. This is because my net profit was only about $7,000. The trick is to expense as much as possible. For example, my car, truck, trailor, some of my furniture, etc were all bought by my company. I also expense as much as possible. For example, part of my house payment, meals, travel, gas, office supplies, etc can all be legally expensed. Now for this year, I will be paying a lot more taxes because I did not make any big purchases with my business, but I will still be paying less then 20%.

You can expense out healthcare for your family too if you list them as employees. I heard something about that from a guy that knows pretty much every tax loop hole there is.

[Caffy]

another perfect reason for me to go Obama, and one of the underlying causes for me to vote against McCain (besides the Palin fiasco)

Roe v Wade is settled law, it should stay that way...it won't if McCain gets to put up the next 3-4 Justices

"Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land.... There is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent, as well as Casey." - Chief justice Roberts

somebody has to balance out Scalia (fucking insane), Thomas (a cipher who votes the way he is told), Alito and Roberts (the most dangerous, and Chief Justice for at least the next 20 years)

Yes, we can't have any of those guys who actually follow the constitution. It's just paper that can be reinterpreted any old time we feel like it.

Who cares about silly things like the second ammendment, and states rights? I sure don't! :rolleyes:

The founders didn't lay out the powers of the federal government for their own entertainment. That's the limit of the power they wanted them to have. The judges Obama has supported don't believe that. They subscribe to the "living constitution" which is total bullshit.

There is a very specific method for changing the document if you don't like it. The courts are not involved. Well, I should say they're not supposed to be involved.

[Carl Ragadamn]

I like where this thread is now going...I would jump in but the urge to troll Doc would win out over my actual views.

[DocGonzo]

"Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land.... There is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent, as well as Casey." - Chief justice Roberts



Yes, we can't have any of those guys who actually follow the constitution. It's just paper that can be reinterpreted any old time we feel like it.

Who cares about silly things like the second ammendment, and states rights? I sure don't! :rolleyes:

The founders didn't lay out the powers of the federal government for their own entertainment. That's the limit of the power they wanted them to have. The judges Obama has supported don't believe that. They subscribe to the "living constitution" which is total bullshit.

There is a very specific method for changing the document if you don't like it. The courts are not involved. Well, I should say they're not supposed to be involved.

as for Roberts..i look where he came from, his history..he is a plastic shell that whores for his masters...don't believe me, check it out yourself...if you think he won't take up the first case he can get his hands on , then you are more naive than you initially appear

as for constructionists - Scalia's own words in the past have let out some pretty scary stuff...like his thinking the 1st amendment is over rated (from an interview in Europe last year, i had the link, but had to re do my hard drive a few weeks ago...if i can find it i will link it for you to read)

the second Amendment bit has been settled, it's an Individual Right, case closed this past summer...i don't know of anyone (including Obama's own statement on it after the decision) that is arguing it

i'm all for a solid interpretation of the Constitution...ask anyone around here who knows me, you won't find a more staunch supporter...which is why W and Cheney should be tried for Treason (along with others) for hteir violation of their oath of office concerning the 4th and 5th Amendments among others ( FISA bypass and illegal wiretapping, etc)

but if you think Scalia, Alito, Roberts and Thomas are any kind of Constitutional devotees, then do read their thoughts on a "unitary executive" and the "powers" that Cheney has claimed for the office of the VP....then get back to me

states rights - i;ve said it before, and i will fucking say it again...STATES DO NOT HAVE RIGHTS ... nor does the Fed....they have Powers granted via the secular covenant of our Constitution...ALL RIGHTS BELONG TO THE INDIVIDUAL...fucking period, can it be any more clear?

sorry...i will stick to my earlier opinion... McCain is not up to the task, Palin is fucking frightening to contemplate, and the thought of the damage that could be done to our Nation by SCOTUS after the neocons finish stacking the court (unitary executive completely denounces checks and balances and makes POTUS a dictator to rival any fascist)

much less the horrifying thought of Palin taking over if McCain passes away

fuck that....i'm going for the black guy