Reader: Catholic group gets Univ funding, Factcheckers refute Obama on taxes, 4 abortion centers close in TX

Welcome to the Lunchtime Reader, where we assemble important stories to keep your eyes on.

Wisconsin is not establishing Catholicism as the State Church by including a Catholic student group called the Badger Catholic in the list of groups which receive funding from the University of Wisconsin. Five years of lawsuits later, the University will now provide the student group with $500,000 in back funding. The University asked the Supreme Court to hear the case, but the High Court refused to do so, declaring that funding such groups does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. http://cvote.to/3t

President Obama said: “Warren Buffett’s secretary shouldn’t pay a higher tax rate than Warren Buffett. There is no justification for it,” But guess what? President Obama lied. No, not simply a little stretching of the truth or blurring of the lines. A flat out lie. I know, shocking. The fact checkers are on the case. http://cvote.to/3x

Four abortion facilities in south Texas will soon close. This action is directly related to the State of Texas cutting funding to Planned Parenthood in a bill signed by Gov. Rick Perry. The abortion businesses closing are located in Rio Grande City, San Carlos, Progreso and Mission.  http://cvote.to/40

Other articles of interest:

Poll: 88% of Hispanic voters in FL support photo ID laws. 71% in CO. 73% in NM. http://cvote.to/3v

Riot police called in to protect pro-life protestors in France. http://cvote.to/3w

Nine myths on school debunked. http://cvote.to/3y

Peyton Manning, the star quarterback for the Indianapolis Colts, went to Europe to receive an adult stem cell procedure. http://cvote.to/3z

1,903 views

Categories:Uncategorized

11 thoughts on “Reader: Catholic group gets Univ funding, Factcheckers refute Obama on taxes, 4 abortion centers close in TX

  1. Carolyn says:

    Just a point of clarification regarding the Badger Catholic case – the 500k settlement that UW-Madison has to pay is actually is going to the lawyers (ADF) for legal fees incurred, not Badger Catholic.

    Regardless it’s a win from the ideological standpoint, and bolsters the case for religious groups to offer programs to students, as noted by Nico Fassino in the linked article.

  2. Scott W, says:

    “Four abortion facilities in south Texas will soon close. This action is directly related to the State of Texas cutting funding to Planned Parenthood in a bill signed by Gov. Rick Perry.” Wait a minute! I thought there was supposed to be a groundswell of popular support for a “woman’s right to chose” and would cause dumptrucks full of private donations to keep the mills a-runnin’. What are you saying?

  3. EDM says:

    Obama was repeating something that Warren Buffett himself claimed. Also, I think he intends to include tax burden from all sources, not just federal income tax as the fact check seems to assume.

    For all I know, it may still be a lie, but to fact check it, all you’d have to do is figure out the total tax burden compared to income for Warren Buffett and his secretary. Certainly someone could just ask him to show his work.

    I once read that Buffett offered a large chunk of cash to a room full of wealthy people if anyone could prove they paid a larger share of their income in taxes than their secretary. So, check up on it with Buffett.

    1. Joe M says:

      EDM. We don’t need to know about Buffet’s anecdotal circumstances in order to understand that, even if true, it does not apply to the over-all population. The wealthy demographic pays higher rates and an over-all larger amount of taxes. We know that and do not need to look any further in order to know that Obama’s premise is false. — The only point that he has is that there are exceptions to the norm that aren’t fair. Nobody disagrees with that and tax reform that would eliminate loop-holes would be popular reform. However, Obama’s version of that would be to cut loop-holes for people that don’t send his campaign money and to leave alone the organizations that do.

      1. EDM says:

        If only we could ban the anecdote from political discourse.

        And, I don’t think we can just assume that the wealthy (wherever you set the bar) pay a higher rate than the middle class when all income sources and tax burdens are taken into account. It may be the case or not, but I don’t see anyone presenting any real evidence.

        1. Joe M says:

          EDM. What do you mean nobody is presenting real evidence? Did you read the article linked to above? The evidence demonstrating that the wealthy pay higher tax rates than the middle class is widely available.

    2. Curious says:

      EDM, If Warren Buffet’s ideas are so worthy that the President is using his words on his campaigning trips, why is it that one of Mr. Buffet’s top companies is suing the IRS to avoid paying over 1 BILLION dollars in OWED tax dollars to the government. If Mr. Warren Buffet were serious in his words, he aught to lead by example and PAY the taxes his company OWES (these are not future taxes). Words of Mr. Buffet are NOTHING without following them up with actions. He talks a big talk, but I guess that talk is for the “other rich guys”.
      God Bless,

    3. Curious says:

      EDM,

      Also, Mr. Buffet is not a fool. He knows well how to play the federal system. The name of his company that owes taxes dating back to 2002, (and newer taxes from 2005 – 2009) is Berkshire. Does this name ring a bell? Berkshire is the same company that invested $5 billion into struggling Bank of America very recently. This was done in response to Bank of America stating its intention to cut 3,500 jobs (1% of its work force). Turns out investing in Bank of America was a smart move for Berkshire: it lowered the company’s tax bracket from the maximum 35% to 14.2%. Buffet knows how to play the system well as he speaks out of the other side of his mouth for the “other rich guys”. God Bless

      1. EDM says:

        Joe M: As I’ve already said, the link is talking about federal income taxes. Buffett was talking about total tax burden. I haven’t seen any evidence that either Buffett’s claim about him and his staff are lying, and I haven’t seen anyone demonstrate that the general principle is wrong despite claims of notably absent but “widely available” evidence.

        1. Michael F says:

          EDM: Here is an article from Fox Business that includes statistics released by the IRS. —- http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/09/21/buffett-deception/ —- If you don’t like Fox, I’m not asking that you read the whole article, just the figures. And check their accuracy, if you wish. But there is the evidence you asked for.

        2. Joe M says:

          EDM. I misunderstood your argument. I guess it didn’t cross my mind that anyone would wonder whether or not non-federal taxes would be patterned differently. After all, wealthy people tend to own larger homes that are taxed more, buy more expensive things paying higher sales taxes, pay higher state income taxes, etc. I think that people are referring to federal taxes here because they are debating federal policy. — Here is one study I found with a quick google search: http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/f0d61da2a1658d1a7580498fc0583ee2.pdf

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

STAY CONNECTED


DON'T MISS A THING

Receive our updates via email.