In Salem today Rep Kevin Cameron had arranged a "packing party" for "Operation Love Box." The unfortunate name of an otherwise worthwhile cause to send care packages to Oregonians serving in the military overseas.

He probably refers to his kids keeping pet rodents as "Gerbeling" , a term whose origin, motivation for use, and degree of class is suspiciously like his two latest.

A lot of gays are conservative. Maybe it's a misguided effort to court their vote. We'll know if this xmas they come up with fruitcakes, packing fudge treats and it's "good to be homo for the holidays".

In a sense I think their extremist, marginalizing rhetoric is good for all minorities. It used to be that only they had to endure the barbs, but with the Reps acting like anyone a hair to the left of center is a moral degenerate, profligate socialist and un-American- if they are at all- it's little worse these days being a minority, once you've decided not to tow the neocon line.

BTW, did Fox mention the urban def of teabagging? Then how would they know better this time?

So, was it class or oversight that this post isn't entitled "Chu On 'Mr. Woody'"?

As you know, it was not Republicans who used a crude homosexual term to describe the tax protests.

It was Democrats who used the opportunity to show their contempt for homosexuals by using the term as a smear.

Sorry Joe... We were all laughing WAY too hard to be offended. Teabagging. tee heee eeeeeee!

I am not sure if you're actually asking for an answer to the question or if it's rhetorical. But Congressman Walden is one of the leading advocates for woody biomass in Congress. Given its recent attention I would guess that the nickname comes for that commitment but I would assume that Keith might have given you the context.

I think the tea party protests had more to do with runaway spending and the Bush-Obama bailouts. Nice try, though, Kari, with the continued class warfare rhetoric. Haven't Democrats been using this "tax the rich" talk for decades, just to have the rich get rich and the poor get poorer? How's that working out for you? No shortage of intellectual dishonesty here, as always...

SJ:

So you're ok with Cheney paying a 7% total tax burden on his last $1M in earnings while your average Joe the Plumber (if he was an actual plumber with an actual job) pays about a 30% burden on his last $10,000 in earnings?

And you're ok with Intel or PGE paying $10.00 in state income tax?

No shortage of "intellectual" dishonesty from you, as always.

Scott- Great that you're making assumptions about what I think and don't think. I simply stated that the tea parties had more to do with runaway spending than taxes on the rich or anyone else. What I've found is that people like you are having a hard time accepting the fact that Barack Obama, who campaigned on change and doing things differently, continued Bush's failed bailout policy and escalated the war in Afghanistan. Show me where I've ever stated any of what you allege that I'm saying. Ever. You should know better than to put words in someone's mouth.

Le Snort.

SJ:

Either you are being dishonest or you are just plain ignorant of the facts: the tea baggers were organized and supported by the retired RNC (Dick Armey) and the Fox News Corporation; they are the ones that have made this about class - protecting the wealthy class, that is.

And yes, the President does have a shit pile to clean up from the dangerous duo, but he hasn't continued Bush's bailout: all the banks are rushing to give the money back now because the Ds pushed and got oversight (to the horror of the complicit Rs) of the TARP funds; Afghanistan? Yes, Cheney/Bush bungled that one too (after Bush I's administration failed to effectively complete the end game in the late eighties, allowing the Taliban to take over after the Russians left) by quickly diverting attention from the real war on al Queada to the imagined justification for a war in Iraq . . .

What I have a hard time with is losers and whiners like you (and Dirty Dick Cheney); you guys lost, reform yourselves or become irrelevant. We're moving forward, because we can!

Mick-

Your lack of understanding regarding current events is hilarious. The tea parties were already organized by the time Fox News even acknowledged them. Here in Oregon, they were put together by Americans for Prosperity. And who needs tax cuts for the wealthy when Obama will hand over billions of dollars that our government doesn't have to wealthy Wall Street bankers so they can get bonuses for loaning money to people who couldn't ever pay it back? We're moving forward with more and more debt! That's awesome! "Progress" now consists of outdoing Bush on his worst policies! At least the teabaggers were consistent in their opposition to the bailouts. All I hear here is that the bailouts were bad under Bush and good under Obama. It's the same way that dissent has been patriotic for the last eight years but is now tantamount to treason.

SJ:

Thanks for responding, you've answered the first query in my post. Anyone that was paying attention knows that Dick Armey and Rupert Murdoch helped push the 'tea-baggers" to national prominence, your denial of that fact says everything we need to know about you.

And as anyone that has studied the facts can tell you, it wasn't the mortgages as much as the securitization of those mortgages (Lehman Brothers et al), the associated derivatives markets, and insurance hedges (AIG), all with the 'help' of some poorly designed risk formulas designed by newbie quants (see Wired for a good story on that one). So no, SJ, we don't buy your community reinvestment act back story as to why we're in this mess, we're in the shit hole we're in thanks to 'deregulation' and 'let market forces work' crap from the Rs.

I would remind folks that the TARP funds are actually investments (yes, potentially very, very bad investments - it's all that funny paper that the Rs let the market sell) and that the money is supposed to be coming back into the Treasury. Some of that TARP money is already rushing back in so as to avoid being subject to the D-sponsored oversight programs (can't steal from us as easily if we're watching over your shoulder, eh, Wall Street?), with interest. No, I'm not holding my breathe but I'm not writing it all off just yet either.

"The tea parties were already organized by the time Fox News even acknowledged them."

On February 27, 2009, in collaboration with others including Dick Armey and representatives of Richard Scaife, the organization met to discuss sponsoring a Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas and Washington, D.C. Tea party protest. By the way, AFP is led by Tim Phillips, a former partner with Ralph Reed's Century Strategies who laundered money through Century Strategies via convicted felon Jack Abramoff.

"And who needs tax cuts for the wealthy when Obama will hand over billions of dollars that our government doesn't have to wealthy Wall Street bankers so they can get bonuses for loaning money to people who couldn't ever pay it back?"

George Bush does - he was the one who enacted all those egregious and insane tax cuts and off-shore tax havens.

As far as paying back the GWB TARP giveaway, according to Reuters from this morning: "Most U.S. banks will repay government bailout funds by the fourth quarter of 2009, and banks will likely issue more stock over the next few quarters, analysts at Morgan Stanley said.

Analysts led by Betsy Graseck, however, said most large banks will repay funds from the Treasury's Troubled Asset Relief Program in the third quarter, while Bank of America Corp (BAC.N) and Citigroup Inc (C.N) may make a second round of payments in the fourth."

Yeah, I know - facts do seem to have a liberal bias.

Mick still doesn't get it. Your attempt at rewriting history is great, especially the claim that there was somehow all this tremendous oversight in a bill that most Senators openly admit they did not even read. Our own Senator, Ron Wyden, tried to attach a provision prohibiting that money from going towards bonuses for executives, which was later stripped out by Charles Dodd. I wouldn't want to be that guy right now. It's great that you're bashing tax cuts for the wealthy...typical liberal mantra there...yet defending billion-dollar bonuses for bankers, just because it was Obama who implemented that disasterous policy. It could also be argued that regulation contributed to the problem. Sarbanes-Oxley created the mark-to-market requirements that contributed considerably to the "toxic assets" that we the people are now holding the bag for. That's great that you can continue demonizing the banking industry while defending Obama giving these same people billions of dollars we don't have, and running up trillion-dollar deficits in the process. You want to talk about facts? The fact is, Obama is continuing the same bad policies that Bush implemented. I was against them when Bush did them, and am still against them. But hey, let's escalate Afghanistan, despite the fact that nobody in human history has ever successfully held that country. As long as Obama is doing it, it's okay!

Woody biomass. Mmm. Delicious.

I'll just keep saying it:

The Boston Tea Party protested taxes on tea by throwing tea in the ocean."

Obviously none of you were actually at any of the rallys. In my little podunk Oregon City, there were 3 or 400 HUNDRED folks across from CCC. It was a fairly narrow effort at bringing attention to outright runaway spending of all kinds. And Kari, the Boston Tea Party and after events were triggered by what level of taxation?? If you guessed 2 (two) percent you are correct. And we are all supposed to just lay down and take aggregate rates that add up to over 50% nowadays, while PERS folks retire at 4-12 grand a month forever with guaranteed 8% returns? Hell yes I am pissed. Screw your govt programs.

When the first round of bailouts was announced, people all throughout the country e-mailed their federal representatives in strong opposition. In fact, the response was so overwhelming that it even crashed the U.S. House's computer server. The e-mails, phone calls and letters ran, I believe, 9-1 against the bailouts, yet they still happened. Then they happened again. How, Carla, is that representation? Are citizens duly represented when they ask, 9-1, to NOT put future generations trillions of dollars in debt and it still happens anyway?

Scott in Damascus, thanks for posting the substantive basis for my comment. I can only assume SJ is a lost cause as he conveniently jumped over your response to dump another heaping, steaming pile of Cheney. "Sarbanes Oxley . . . significantly contributed to . . . [creating] the toxic assets" rotflmao!!!

@Joe White

There is nothing that says 'teabagging' is singularly a 'gay' act.

Sorry to foil you pathetic attempt is distract...

"And you're ok with Intel or PGE paying $10.00 in state income tax?"

Actually no, since they had no taxable income, they should have paid ZERO in taxes.

Anyone else having trouble trying to follow KeithChu on Twitter?

Liberals continue to pretend that they can raise taxes on 'someone else'.

When you raise taxes on your doctor or your plumber because 'he is rich', he will simply raise his rates in order to pay the increased cost of doing business.

You'll pay the tax when you go to the doctor, or need a plumber.

A tax on one is a tax on all.

The point is that liberals enjoy increasing the tax burden on the poor while pretending that they are not.

We're raisin' 'em on you, Joe. That way, maybe you'll keep your dick in your pants!

Our Republican brethren...

And your common mother is the whore non-parliamentary democracy. Bastards both.

Posted by: Dan Petegorsky | May 22, 2009 8:24:47 AM

Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals:

Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

Oh, and right on cue, a great example of social values over facts. Score cheap points for progressivism! I always suspected that Dan was an empty headed apologist for the nanny anything, and that statement proves it! I never knew that when Jay Leno was saying "why the long face, John" about Kerry, that he was an eloquent Republican promoter! Man. Newt Gingerich, not Ronnie Raygun, was the great communicator!

I guess that makes a lot of the BO trolls pretty eloquent too.

And Kari, the Boston Tea Party and after events were triggered by what level of taxation??

Could we have a bit of real history? Both tea events were manufactured outrage, by the wealthy, spun in the press as something that everyone is down with. If John Hancock's motivation was to disrupt the triangle trade between India, England and the US because that cheap tea was hurting his import business. The English dumped the tea, not into the harbor, but on the market, killing the price. Hancock used the press to whip up sentiment, and, like cowards, they tried to pin in on native Americans. That's important. It wasn't symbolic or to make a point. Why the hell would you try to pin it on someone else if you're making a statement? It was about results, and Hancock saw his profits return directly.

That's at least 10 times now, in the last 3 months, that TA and Kari have gone off on the 5th grade version of American History, knowing better or choosing to remain ignorant. Well, now we have an outlet. Everytime you diss your readership that way, I'm gonna write a check to my new, favorite cause .

Posted by: Carla Axtman | May 22, 2009 7:14:58 PM

Actually no, since they had no taxable income, they should have paid ZERO in taxes.

OCCP and apparently the Oregon Dept of Revenue, disagree.

Accounting 101

"Profitable" and "taxable income" are not the same thing. That is why you have financial accounting books and tax accounting books. Different sets of rules.

Profit = The amount of the excess of total sales revenue over the total costs of production of the good(s) or service(s) produced by a business firm.

Taxable income = the portion of income that is the subject of taxation according to the laws that determine what is income and the taxation rate for that income.

Of course, you and OCCP know this and choose to ignore it.

Riding the cotton pony? It's certainly a more charitable conclusion than you are woefully unaware of basic, American history.

The Boston Tea Party was a protest against taxation without representation, incidentally

Oh, DO learn some history. Incidentally. It was our 3% white privileged males creating a bogus argument that they were underrepresented compared to the 3% of white privileged males in Britain that could vote.

All the way into early-19th-century Britain, almost nobody had the right to vote. A poll conducted in 1780 revealed that the electorate in England and Wales consisted of just 214,000 people - less than 3% of the total population of approximately 8 million. In Scotland the electorate was even smaller: in 1831 a mere 4,500 men, out of a population of more than 2.6 million people, were entitled to vote in parliamentary elections. Large industrial cities like Leeds, Birmingham and Manchester did not have a single MP between them, whereas 'rotten boroughs' such as Dunwich in Suffolk (which had a population of 32 in 1831) were still sending two MPs to Westminster.

Has the event become such a fetish that three regular BO writers can't acknowledge the basics? Using google I have found 8 instances, during the teabagging, where this was laid out with no response, no less continuing to promote the fetish. Just what the hell is your problem with history?

I feel like Black Adder when he told Percy that he was could buy a rotten borough, and Percy started neighing like a horse, did a little dance, and emitted some non-sense syllables. Black Adder looked at him and said, "you...don't know...what a rotten borough is, do you?" "You...don't know...what the Boston Tea Party was, do you?"

@carla

While credits are applied against tax due, NOL carryforwards are used prior to the computation of Taxable Income.

For your ref: IRS Form 1120 Lines 28, 29a, 30