Minnesotas own wingnut.....

Or the ones that are spreading delusions in order to bring about an oligarchy, not only breaking the laws of census, but also the constitution of the United States of America.

Which party will wake up first? Which "party" will start putting America first? Will the Americans simply choose to ignore where America is right now? It has taken us many many years to dig the hole we are in. Will Americans continue to choose divisions of our Nation...or wake up and smell the roses?

I've been saving these:

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

"A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have."

Thomas Jefferson

In a letter to James Madison in 1785, for instance, Thomas Jefferson suggested that taxes could be used to reduce “the enormous inequality” between rich and poor. He wrote that one way of “silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise.”

Madison later spoke in favor of using laws to “reduce extreme wealth towards a state of mediocrity (meaning the middle) and raise extreme indigence towards a state of comfort.”

During the early days of the republic, the government relied mostly on tariffs to collect revenue, under the theory that since the rich bought most of the imports, they would pay most of the taxes.

“The rich alone use imported articles, and on these alone the whole taxes of the general government are levied,” Jefferson wrote in 1811. “The poor man, who uses nothing but what is made in his own farm or family, will pay nothing. (With) our revenues applied to canals, roads, schools, etc., the farmer will see his government supported, his children educated and the face of his country made a paradise by the contributions of the rich alone, without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings.”

The theme of spreading the wealth has ebbed and flowed throughout American history, but it has constantly been present. When Abraham Lincoln introduced the first federal income tax in 1862, it was at a flat 3 percent rate for anyone making more than $600 a year, which was then a respectable salary. For instance, farmhands, who earned an average of $200, did not pay the tax.
.
.
In times of economic peril, the tax rates were raised – rather than lowered – to ensure that money was more evenly distributed. During the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt's administration boosted the highest tax rate from 63 percent to 79 percent in order to fund his New Deal programs. He pushed it to 94 percent during World War II.

Roosevelt was matched by Dwight Eisenhower in the 1950s, who, with the aid of a Republican Congress, maintained an income tax rate of more than 90 percent for top earners. It took Lyndon Johnson to lower the upper tax rate to 77 percent. It remained near that level until the second year of Ronald Reagan's presidency.

A few selective quotes that support your political agenda doesn't negate historical facts.

Oh, please. I wasn't trying to do anything except quote something I read that I thought was amazingly appropriate to what is currently happening in our country.

If nothing else, your historical facts prove that politicians, all of them, speak from both sides of their mouths, and it really depends on to whom they are speaking. Mr. Obama, with the aide of all the technology, is just getting caught more at it.

If your implication is that the Democratic Party is the one doing that, I couldn't disagree more. Where was the concern about defending the Constitution during the years under Bush when his administration was actually crapping all over it? The only ignoramus spreading delusions about the Census is Bachmann, and those who believe her are just plain misinformed.

Are those rhetorical questions? It's obvious how you lean politically, and I know how I do. Obviously, our answers would be very different.

As for which party will start putting America first, well, I think it's quite obvious that there isn't really a monolithic "America." I would ask, which party will start putting the American people first, instead of corporate interests? I think there are too many Democratic politicians who are just as bad as Republican ones when it comes to being bought and paid for by corporate interests, but I can sure count a lot more who genuinely serve the interests of the American people among the Democrats.

Except that it has actually been happening all along.

Of course you'd think that of Obama.

I no not feel either party represent me. Neither party has for years. As my statement states, will Americans continue to choose divisions? Both parties have contributed to an oligarchy, for many years, otherwise we would not be sitting where we are at. When I stated putting America first....I was referring to the American people. If I am to wear a label...call me conservative, ( however I would question what type of definition that protrays to America these days) but as far as a party, right now I am not republican...and darned sure I am not democrat. I am in hopes that at some point , one party or another will be one I can feel claim to. Neither party is a feeding trough right now, that supplies the food I choose to partake in. I see the divisions of the parties, as doing nothing more than dividing our country and our people. This does lend the power/voice to our government and out of the hands of the American people.

I will re-post my whole quote...not just the portion you chose.

I no not feel either party represent me. Neither party has for years. As my statement states, will Americans continue to choose divisions? Both parties have contributed to an oligarchy, for many years, otherwise we would not be sitting where we are at. When I stated putting America first....I was referring to the American people. If I am to wear a label...call me conservative, ( however I would question what type of definition that protrays to America these days) but as far as a party, right now I am not republican...and darned sure I am not democrat. I am in hopes that at some point , one party or another will be one I can feel claim to. Neither party is a feeding trough right now, that supplies the food I choose to partake in. I see the divisions of the parties, as doing nothing more than dividing our country and our people. This does lend the power/voice to our government and out of the hands of the American people.