The Patterico Fact-Checker™: Ted Cruz’s claim that the IRS Tax Code Has more words than the Bible
Today I am introducing the Patterico Fact-Checker™: a new feature in which I fact-check claims of public figures that have been dealt with poorly by Big Media Fact-Checkers. Today we analyze Ted Cruz’s claim that the IRS tax code has more words than the Bible.
Claim:
“On tax reform, we, right now, have more words in the IRS code than there are in the Bible — not a one of them as good.”
–Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), speech at International Association of Fire Fighters legislative conference, March 10, 2015
The Facts
The literally translated King James Version of the Bible contains just over 800,000 words. There are as many as 3.7 million individual words in the IRS tax code. The claim, therefore, is:
True.
That’s how you do a fact-check, Big Media.
Instead, the Washington Post Fact-Checker just did a check of Ted Cruz’s claim, and after setting forth the two facts noted above, using the exact same words (which I copied above), refused to label it true. The “fact-checkers” instead engaged in a long disquisition about whether Ted Cruz’s admittedly “technically correct” fact had any meaning. Conclusion: it doesn’t, in their opinion because derp derp derp.
Frankly, the arguments of the piece doesn’t deserve any more scrutiny than that. If you want to stop reading the post here, therefore, I won’t blame you. It is enough to note that the “derp derp” part is not the realm of a fact-checker.
But I will address some of the piece’s silly arguments in the extended entry, because they are symptomatic of what is wrong with this country and with Big Media in general.
Extended entry
The author of the piece, Michelle Ye Hee Lee, makes her main Derpy Point in these words:
But does any of this matter? Here is another, possibly more relevant, comparison. It takes an average American taxpayer 13 hours to comply with the tax code, according to the IRS. Four hours of that estimate is devoted to actually completing the forms. The rest of the time is spent on record-keeping and other miscellaneous tasks. (The Fact Checker has explored this figure in the past.)
In comparison, it takes 90 hours for a marathon reading of the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, without commentary. At least that’s how long it takes for the annual U.S. Capitol Bible Reading marathon. (If you want to figure out how long it would take you to read the Bible, try this nifty “How long does it take to read the Bible” calculator.)
. . . .
We also wondered: Why does it matter to the average taxpayer that the tax code is hard to comprehend? Do Americans actually read the tax code, especially now that software programs make it easy to file taxes with a few mouse clicks?
Here we have someone pretending to be a sophisticate but actually making arguments that miss the point so badly it almost makes one weep.
Let’s start at Ms. Lee’s level of superficiality for one paragraph, and then we’ll get serious. Ms. Lee’s claim that you don’t really need to read the whole tax code to be a taxpayer misses the point that you don’t really need to read the whole Bible to be a Christian. I’d wager that many Christians would agree that the Gospel alone is all you really need — and in any event, I’d wager that a relatively small percentage of Christians have read the entire Bible. (I’d also wager that the percentage of Christians who have read the whole Bible is much, much higher than the percentage of journalists who have read the tax code!) So Ms. Lee’s statement bears the exact characteristics of what she claims about Ted Cruz’s statement: it is “technically correct but ultimately meaningless.”
But all of this really misses the main point.
The problem with the tax code, Ms. Lee, is the same problem with government laws in general: it is filled to the brim with handouts and goodies for special interests. These folks engage in a legalized form of bribery in which they hand politicians donations, and then, in a totally unrelated conversation that has nothing to do with the donation, ask for a tax break that no regular American gets — and actually obtain said tax break, but certainly not because of the donation or anything.
This process has absolutely zero to do with whether it’s hard for a taxpayer to file his own return, and everything to do with the concept of concentrated benefits and distributed costs.
It’s worth it to the company to hire a lobbyist and make hundreds of thousands of dollars (or more) in donations to make sure their tax break is in the code. They receive a concentrated benefit from that tax break.
By contrast, the costs of that tax break to the individuals taxpayers is small. It costs them at most a few bucks each, meaning there is a distributed cost to the tax break. The existence of the tax break will likely never be known to voters, because it’s not worth it for the average American to scour the tax code for small and pointless (to the taxpayer) tax breaks that are handed out like candy to corporate welfare recipients. It’s not even worth it for Big Media types like Ms. Lee to do that hard work; easier to sit on her behind and write a lazy screed about Ted Cruz than to seek out political corruption.
A QUICK ASIDE: This, by the way, is why you have to buy Coke from Mexico to get tasty actual sugar in the drink. Here in the United States, sugar magnates have convinced the U.S. Government — through a careful program of persuasion, and certainly not through bribery, no sir! — to enact giant trade barriers that drive up the price of sugar. So you get that delicious and nutritious high-fructose corn syrup instead. Other countries like Mexico don’t have the same laws, and their sugar prices are more reasonable. (END QUICK ASIDE.)
Here’s another point, made by Mary Katherine Ham this morning: the cost of the tax preparation industry is huge, and a tremendous drain on society’s resources. Ham notes figures that show U.S. individuals and businesses spend 7.6 billion hours per year on tax preparation: “the equivalent of 3.8 million full-time workers.”
To a socialist nincompoop like Jeff Spross, that spells JOBS! If that sounds right to you, then go read my post about Spross — or just Google “Bastiat broken window.”
I say this as the son of a CPA: the complexity of the tax code is a net drain on American society, just as it is a drain on society when someone throws a rock through the window of a business. Sure, a complex tax code means jobs for accountants, and a rock through a window means a job for the window repair guy. But if you could reform the tax code and prevent window vandalism, then the people who must devote their lives to addressing those problems could divert their energies to something more productive that actually improves our standard of living. The business owners, instead of paying accountants and window repair guys, could expand their business capital to provide a wider range of goods or services at a lower cost.
Ms. Lee ends with this:
Cruz makes the point that tax policies need to be drastically simplified, and many Americans likely would support that sentiment. But such a crude comparison, which provides no nuance or context, doesn’t capture why the tax code has become so complex and how it affects taxpayers.
In a way, comparing the raw word count in the tax code to the text of the Bible diminishes the real frustration that taxpayers feel, and the real impact that can occur from improper tax filings. The consequences of not filing your taxes is of far bigger concern than not reading the Bible — legally speaking, anyway. We can’t speak to possible eternal damnation.
Ha, ha! That probably seems funny to Ms. Lee, who is (I confidently predict) an atheist. I’ll leave it to others to rip apart this statement on religious grounds; it suffices here to note it, and note that it is silly, and dismissive of religion.
There is no defending the complexity of the tax code. Ms. Lee simply shrugs her shoulders and shows the apathy that allows that complexity to continue.
Also, what Ted Cruz said is true.
i just printed my fedex label for my tax docs to go to my guy in california
i already feel raped and i hate it so so so so much
the bible says render blah blah blah
the bible can be very glib sometimes
happyfeet (a037ad) — 3/12/2015 @ 8:00 amThere are only 200,411 words in Das Kapital. (That’s for the atheists.)
nk (dbc370) — 3/12/2015 @ 8:14 amThere is no better reverse barometer of who the most potent and potentially transformational Republican pols are than the Left’s attempts to destroy them. Their slander knows no boundries. And why should it when Republicans seem more than willing to buy into such transparent lies (e.g., Sarah Palin). It doesn’t help that the Republican elite does what they can to promote these attacks. Cruz has been in the line of fire for some time. Now Tom Cotton has made himself a target. The silver lining in all this is that there now appears to be a growing number of strong conservatives in the game. Kudos to the Tea Party.
ThOR (a52560) — 3/12/2015 @ 8:33 amI’m a member of Steve Forbes’ “do your taxes on a post card” school of thought.
But I kept thinking about which words were “as good” as the other words, like Cruz said:
amortization – not in bible.
firmament – not in tax code.
assets – not in bible, but “oxen” and “daughters” probably covers this.
Methuselah – not in tax code, but “payment schedule” probably covers this.
Fascinating topic.
– almost certainly true.
– But the bible, too, gives handouts and goodies to special interests, no?
carlitos (c24ed5) — 3/12/2015 @ 8:34 amIt would be interesting to hear their justification for even doing this so-called fact check, since they couldnt bring themselves to declare it true or false. Why bother, other than to engage in insipid sophistry?
JD (86a5eb) — 3/12/2015 @ 8:40 amany further questions:
http://freebeacon.com/politics/5-times-the-washington-post-failed-at-fact-checking/
narciso (ee1f88) — 3/12/2015 @ 8:43 amMichelle Ye Hee Lee asks in the course of her propagandizing:
Clearly it does, or else she wouldn’t have her panties in a wad over Cruz’s factually correct statements.
Then the dumb broad gives the game away by going off on her preferred tangent, because otherwise the proles might be tempted to commit wrongthink.
I recall Michael Medved (I almost never listen to that guy, but I caught this as I was changing stations) talking about how he had been “fact checked.” His comments were rated as “half true.” I forget what exactly he had said, and on what topic, but he proceeded to note that the “fact checkers” concluded that every single word he had actually said was true. So why did they rate his comments only “half true.” Essentially they concluded that Medved’s comments were true as far as he went with them, but he didn’t go far enough in the “fact checkers” opinion.
Unless conservatives add some bogus liberal counterargument to the point their making, then it doesn’t matter how true the point they’re making happens to be. The “fact checkers” will claim they’re only making half an argument, so they’re claim is only “half true.” And then the “fact checkers” proceed to make the argument all loyal Obamunists are supposed to make.
Or, as Michelle Ye Hee Lee puts it, the other “possibly more relevant, comparison.”
Just so the unwashed masses don’t get the wrong idea when conservatives express heretical ideas that are factually correct.
The comments over at the WaPo are brutal, by the way.
Steve57 (d68bce) — 3/12/2015 @ 8:50 amFACT CHECK:
“The consequences of not filing your taxes is of far bigger concern than not reading the Bible — legally speaking, anyway.”
Technically, this is correct, but it’s a meaningless nonsense fact because I don’t like what it entails and comes from an opposing partisan. Therefore, I refuse to mark it as accurate, even though it is literally true.
JWB (6cba10) — 3/12/2015 @ 8:55 amM _ c h _l l _ Y _ H _ _ L _ _
Pat, I’d like to buy a vowel?
It takes 10 years to get a PhD in theology.
Is there anyone on earth who can claim to be master of the tax code? How many years of study would that take? Forty years?
papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/12/2015 @ 8:55 amYou’d be lucky to live so long. Then, after you graduate, five years of productive government service before retirement.
No. But give it your best shot if you think you can make the case.
I’m in the process of rereading the entire Bible. I’ve read it (not the KJV, the New American version) cover to cover before, and parts of it several times. I thought it was time to read the entire thing again.
Steve57 (d68bce) — 3/12/2015 @ 8:55 amR.I.P. Terry Pratchett, beloved fantasy author of the Discworld series
Icy (a03665) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:01 amOh, no, Icy! That is a loss. He was one the great ones. The greatest of the new ones.
nk (dbc370) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:07 amI’d say that eternal life in heaven is a bigger perk than a homeowner’s exemption or a credit on buying new storm doors.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:08 amand yet we are told we must follow, the ways of a fallen world, and don’t dare teach your children about the Kingdom, because that could constitute ‘microagression’
narciso (ee1f88) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:11 ambut way to miss the point again,
narciso (ee1f88) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:13 amHow dare Cruz make an easily understood and impactful analogy? Let’s mock it!
nk (dbc370) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:15 amThere are only 28 words in “Dick and Jane”. (That’s for Obama’s constituency.)
nk (dbc370) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:19 amthis time of the year, pretty simple to get sugar’ed CocaCola in the USA.
seeRpea (b6bbec) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:20 amHi narciso, I have no idea what “microaggression” you are referring to. You’r objection to my point – The problem with the tax code = benefits for special interests. As opposed to the bible, I presume?
The bible grants perks to special interests:
– Death will pass you over if you put lamb blood on your door
carlitos (c24ed5) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:20 am– promised land to israelites
– God sends plagues upon Egypt
– mannah from heaven to survive in the desert
– forgiveness of sins
– eternal life if you accept Jesus as your lord and savior
“This process has absolutely zero to do with whether it’s hard for a taxpayer to file his own return, and everything to do with the concept of concentrated benefits and distributed costs.”
Patterico – You are completely correct that Lee wrote a BS piece focusing on the wrong part of Cruz’s message. However, I do get conflicted when people complain about the constitutionally provided ability of people to petition their government, which is the free market in action. It happens at the local, state and federal level. Individuals, corporations and nonprofit groups can do it, but there is no guarantee of success. If you want to eliminate the practice, please feel free to amend the constitution, but in my experience, not every corporation lobbies for concentrated benefits and I’m not sure I see the connection to the increased complexity of the individual tax code.
So on the one side you potentially advocate limiting free speech by preventing certain entities from petitioning their government for things that they want, a very non-free market thought process in my mind, but not limiting such activities results in outcomes with which you are not happy.
How do you resolve the conflict while retaining freedom for all parties?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:21 amthat is not the argument, the government has become so large, in part thanks to Tommy Corcoran, that you need sherpas to navigate the Everest like tax structure,
narciso (ee1f88) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:26 amAs I said above, I’m a fan of the Steve Forbes “taxes on a post card plan.” I just thought it was funny that, in a post about taxes vs. the bible, Patterico was complaining about “special interests.” The IRS can come after you hard, but they can’t turn you into a pillar of salt.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:44 amAnd you still haven’t identified any carve-outs for special interests.
Which special interest gets an exemption from the rules, which according to the Bible apply equally to everyone?
Steve57 (d68bce) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:44 amA code, any code, isn’t unjust simply because it doesn’t punish the innocent along with the guilty.
Or conversely because it doesn’t equally reward the guilty along with the innocent.
It’s unjust when it arbitrarily punishes some people while rewarding others for the same conduct. Which is where our tax code differs from the Bible.
Steve57 (d68bce) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:54 amThere are only 200,411 words in Das Kapital.
The tax code is an easier read.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:54 amPatterico,
I suggest you award Eeyores.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:55 am“concentrated benefits and distributed costs.”
Patterico – Do utilities lobbying against stupid administrative EPA carbon rules made bypassing Congress which require significant capital investment hence some unique pollution tax credits meets your standards for the above? In that situation I see companies attempting to avoid concentrated costs only partially offset by concentrated benefits, but costs will be distributed widely to consumers, but not through the tax code, through utility bills.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:57 ambon appetit:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/03/12/here-are-all-400-pages-of-the-fccs-net-neutrality-rules/
forget they don’t have the authority to do any of this;
narciso (ee1f88) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:57 amYeah, I like the progressive idea of a tax return on a postcard, too.
A. How much money did you make?
nk (dbc370) — 3/12/2015 @ 9:58 amB. Remit A.
re #23: of course there is a special interest group in the Bible – the Jews! They are the chosen people. but for reward *and* punishment.
seeRpea (b6bbec) — 3/12/2015 @ 10:01 ambtw: the Pascal lamb blood didn’t help if you weren’t Jewish
forgiveness of sin (repentance) is available to all of humanity regardless of creed (‘Old Testament’ at any rate)
the major problem with the tax code is that its purpose to raise revenues is perverted
seeRpea (b6bbec) — 3/12/2015 @ 10:03 amby the same code to affect social and economic changes.
narciso – To whom is your #21 directed?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/12/2015 @ 10:05 amIt’s not that businesses, like people, can petition the government it’s that
they have more money to get listened to than other people. And the changes
that are made to help them usually make it harder or more expensive for those
who were not listened to.
And the reason for the size of the tax code is all the twists and turnings needed
to afford them their carve out while maintaining a stranglehold on those who try
to make it legitimately or who don’t have the money to be heard.
And by the way, we aren’t taxed on income (which I define as profit from investment
jakee308 (49ccc6) — 3/12/2015 @ 10:07 amin other’s enterprise or ones own). We tax the expenditure of ones LIFE as most folks
trade their time and energy for a salary or payment. Thus is is higher than it should
be as NO corporation pays taxes on it’s overhead but individuals do.
SeeRpea, it’s not like the Jews were getting any special carve-outs from the rules.
Leviticus 18:
In which God warns the Jews he’ll treat them exactly like he treated the previous inhabitants of the promised land, should they act the same way.
It’s not like the Jews got any special deals.
Ezekiel 33:
Steve57 (d68bce) — 3/12/2015 @ 10:11 amYou’re being serious? The Jews? Those who accept Jesus as their lord and savior?
carlitos (c24ed5) — 3/12/2015 @ 10:22 amMs Ye Hee Lee’s unwillingness to unequivocally acknowledge the obvious accuracy of Ted Cruz’s factual statement is yet another example of the WaPo’s continuing prejudice against anyone who refuses to kowtow to leftist dogma. Ye Hee Lee took a cheap shot at Cruz because she knew it was what her editors expected and what the WaPo’s publisher demands, it’s another reiteration of the ghoulish politics of personal destruction the paper’s slack-jawed partisan readers expect, and it’s why anyone who respects truth and admires integrity wouldn’t spend a plugged nickle on the reprehensible rag.
ropelight (f82839) — 3/12/2015 @ 10:26 amre #34 (and #35): my bad, i saw the words “special interests” and didn’t integrate the rest of the phrase “exempted from rules”.
seeRpea (b6bbec) — 3/12/2015 @ 10:37 amThe Jews are a special interest but the opposite of exempted from rules, they got tons more.
All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God…
but God shows His love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
That looks pretty inclusive to me.
And guess what, it doesn’t matter one bit whether Steve or me or any other living person on Earth is being serious.
All that matters is if God is serious about it,
and you will find out.
Hopefully you will be rejoicing when you do.
MD in Philly (not in Philly at the moment) (deca84) — 3/12/2015 @ 10:42 amThanks for the public service Pat.
MD in Philly (not in Philly at the moment) (deca84) — 3/12/2015 @ 10:46 amIt is sad that such a straightforward article has to draw snark.
“It’s not that businesses, like people, can petition the government it’s that
they have more money to get listened to than other people. And the changes
that are made to help them usually make it harder or more expensive for those
who were not listened to.”
jake308 – I disagree. What you are suggesting is limiting forms of speech you dislike or speech from certain types of people.
Corporations are groups of people, that’s why they make money and have profits to spend on lobbying. Enviro wacko groups are collections of individuals who banded together and have enough members and money that people pay attention to them. Individuals certainly can lobby too. When I spent a summer interning for my congressman in Washington there were always calls from certain individuals he would take.
If you have a proposal for limiting speech to government officials, please throw it out there.
And the reason for the size of the tax code is all the twists and turnings needed
to afford them their carve out while maintaining a stranglehold on those who try
to make it legitimately or who don’t have the money to be heard.
I think the size is largely because stuff keeps getting added, but nothing gets deleted.
And by the way, we aren’t taxed on income (which I define as profit from investment
in other’s enterprise or ones own). We tax the expenditure of ones LIFE as most folks
trade their time and energy for a salary or payment. Thus is is higher than it should
be as NO corporation pays taxes on it’s overhead but individuals do.
I am certainly taxed on my profits from investment in the businesses of others, jake308. I have no idea what you are talking about here.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/12/2015 @ 11:00 amThat’s like saying people who drive within the speed limit are a special interest that get an exemption from traffic fines.
Oddly enough, your misconception that the Jews get a special exemption from the rules (which only applied in full to Jews !!?!?!?!) is the same misconception that Muslims have. The entire religion is built on misunderstanding the previous revelations, that Muhammad amusingly claims correct.
Steve57 (d68bce) — 3/12/2015 @ 11:04 amConsequently Muslims are a special interest group that get a special exemption from the laws of Allah.
http://www.sunnah.com/muslim/50
Sahih Muslim: The Book of Repentance
That’s what an exemption looks like. Allah will arbitrarily hold people accountable or not, depending on his whims.
Like you, carlitos, the Muslims hadn’t read the Bible, either. So they thought Yahweh was giving the Jews a free pass simply for being Jews. So whoever wrote the Quran gave that special deal to the Muslims.
But if you can cite a biblical passage that says Jews will get a special deal, then please do.
Hint: you won’t find one.
Romans 2:
Steve57 (d68bce) — 3/12/2015 @ 11:16 am@Steve57:Which special interest gets an exemption from the rules, which according to the Bible apply equally to everyone?
Non-Jews. They don’t have to follow the rules that Jews do. They only have to follow the seven Noachic commandments.
Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 3/12/2015 @ 11:26 amThe WaPo “factchecker” seems to feel she has the same accountability to readers as the IRS thinks it has to American taxpayers… in a word, none.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 3/12/2015 @ 11:30 amBut, but…
chosen people!
But, but…
promised land!
Ted Cruz! Bibi disrespecting Obama! Pinocchio!
Arrrrghhh!
http://www.postlibrary.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/scream.jpg
(carlitos confronts the Bible)
Steve57 (d68bce) — 3/12/2015 @ 11:34 am“What you are suggesting is limiting forms of speech you dislike or speech from certain types of people.”
Dalyrocks:
Where in what I said did I suggest limiting anyone’s forms of speech?
I only stated the reason for the problem; (tax rule bloat) and I stated facts (there’s also rules added by politicians to pander to certain other groups who provide votes).
Please don’t say I said something because that’s what you want to hear people say.
jakee308 (49ccc6) — 3/12/2015 @ 11:57 am“Please don’t say I said something because that’s what you want to hear people say.”
jake308 – My mistake. I thought you were suggesting that there was a problem and that a potential solution indicated limitations.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/12/2015 @ 12:55 pmWhy does Ms. Lee feel the need to go after Sen. Cruz’s simple statement? Could it be she believes government has and should replace God? This is a good example of the culture war and what advantage the left had until along came the Internet. Thanks Patterico for starting this great thread. Great posts too.
AZ Bob (c8f5ae) — 3/12/2015 @ 2:27 pmTalk about your apples-to-bowling-balls comparisons.
Sometimes I feel about the Democrats like I feel about the people who lived in the MGM version of Dorothy’s Kansas. Some of them are nice, some of them are nasty. But none of them sees any color at all — and none of them even knows enough to miss it. So they go on being nice or nasty, growing corn or teaching school or selling patent medicines in black and white. And if you asked one of them, “Hey, what color is that pumpkin over there?” he or she would stare back at you blankly, as if you’d been speaking Tralfamadorian.
The Dems in our world do see things in color. What the Dems in our world can’t see is the truth — no more than Auntie Em could see that Dorothy’s slippers were ruby-red. The Dems can’t tell when the truth is present; they can’t tell when the truth is gone. They don’t even know what you or I are talking about when we use the words “true” or “truth” or “truthful.”
That’s why they’re shameless liars. That’s why their arguments are filled with spectacular non sequiturs.
Beldar (fa637a) — 3/12/2015 @ 2:57 pmBy the way, I understand that Google and Microsoft have just fired every living soul in each of their respective online security/privacy units. Symantec is self-liquidating at fractions of a penny on the dollar, as is virtually every other cyber-security business.
No need for them anymore — not since we learned from Hillary that the Secret Service can replace them all, simply by guarding the premises on which the servers are located.
This should free up enough capital to pay for President Hillary’s AmWorks program.
Beldar (fa637a) — 3/12/2015 @ 3:01 pmI read the entire Bible (KJV) in the early 1960s. Have not read it in its entirety since. Bits of it, yes; I prefer the Oxford/Cambridge translations, either the NEB or REB.
Laozi’s Tao Te Ching has 7154 words (well, actually a few less, I pasted this translation into Open Office Writer : http://www.taoism.net/ttc/complete.htm .)
There is too much tax code to be obeyed.
htom (4ca1fa) — 3/12/2015 @ 3:59 pm“Sometimes I feel about the Democrats like I feel about the people who lived in the MGM version of Dorothy’s Kansas. Some of them are nice, some of them are nasty. But none of them sees any color at all — and none of them even knows enough to miss it. So they go on being nice or nasty, growing corn or teaching school or selling patent medicines in black and white. And if you asked one of them, “Hey, what color is that pumpkin over there?” he or she would stare back at you blankly, as if you’d been speaking Tralfamadorian.”
– Beldar
I think the Dems go around seeing everything in gray – it’s Republicans who go around seeing everything in black and white.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 3/12/2015 @ 4:11 pmyo listen up here’s a story about a little guy that lives in a blue world
and all day
and all night
and everything he sees
is just blue like him inside and outside
happyfeet (831175) — 3/12/2015 @ 4:53 pmplus also yellow is involved
happyfeet (831175) — 3/12/2015 @ 4:53 pmHmmm, seems like I’ve heard that before..but where? No, no, not those exact words but darn close. It’s like it was the Secretary of..something or other trying to… Oh, drat. It’s on the tip of my tongue. Well, I’m sure I’ll remember it as soon as I post this…
J.P. (cc46f4) — 3/12/2015 @ 5:25 pmre #55:
It is a line in the song ‘Dear G-d’ by Being as an Ocean
seeRpea (b6bbec) — 3/12/2015 @ 6:02 pmhappyfeet, in that blue world there are literally krillions of krill, and all but one will end up being nothing but a huge whale’s dinner. Well, maybe a couple of whales. The Clinton whale had his feast, Obola has been gorging on the protein (and Omega-3,) but without his teleprompter, he is presently diving way beyond his depth; and dive-master Kerry earned his certificate by mail from a Nicaraguan PO box and hasn’t demonstrated any aptitude for the needed rescue. The rumor of a third whale is premature.
bobathome (ef0d3a) — 3/12/2015 @ 6:38 pmThere is too much tax code to be obeyed.
htom (4ca1fa) — 3/12/2015 @ 3:59 pm
Which is the point.
kishnevi (91d5c6) — 3/12/2015 @ 7:10 pmIn dictatorships the system is set up so the government has some dirt on everybody. In Cuba, unless you’re in the party elite or a foreigner, the only way to get medicine is to go on the black market. Chicken is allowed but so rarely it’s a luxury item. Beef, lobster, cheese, and shrimp are for tourists only. They have checkpoints on the roads, and will stop city buses, and search vehicles and people’s persons and bags for contraband such as the wrong kind of food.
Then they own you . They own nearly everyone, since it’s a total surveillance police state and it’s impossible to survive within the legal limits of the maximum wage of $20/mo. and the food provided on your ration card.
And in the US we have the tax code…
Steve57 (d68bce) — 3/12/2015 @ 10:10 pmcarlitos wrote:
Given that they seem to think they can get blood from a stone, don’t be certain that they wouldn’t try!
The taxpayer Dana (f6a568) — 3/13/2015 @ 5:35 amI should have pointed out, this is another series of nakaz, (Czarist edicts) we will be expected to obey.
narciso (ee1f88) — 3/13/2015 @ 7:04 am#60
I’ve had my bank account turned into a pillar of salt when I was doing a job with a single address that later turned into multiple addresses andI didn’t allocate expenses properly across them, or so they said using their interpretation of the code. My appeal was denied, and my bank account was preemptively exterminated and replaced with a bitter salt taste. A miracle really, since you normally can’t taste a bank account.
The IRS can sit in your bank account and monitor activity without a warrant which God can also do if he wants.
I think the render unto Caesar lesson for today is that refusing to pay taxes isn’t worth it.
Jesus also did not organize his ministry as a 501(c)3 so all your donations are not deductible
Not the IRS, but the Bible consistently runs afoul of the NLRB. Leaving aside admonitions on how to beat a slave, I wonder if the government would sanction an employer that decided that since he is the boss he can pay anyone whatever he wants?
steveg (794291) — 3/14/2015 @ 11:52 amGod is rough on investors who do not risk to earn a return. The IRS is rough on those that do
steveg (794291) — 3/14/2015 @ 12:06 pmsteveg (794291) — 3/14/2015 @ 12:06 pm
That was a great comment, Steveg.
felipe (56556d) — 3/14/2015 @ 12:28 pmWhereas I’ve been taking an approach that requires a felling axe, the man brings a scalpel and cuts right to the heart of the matter.
Well done, sir.
Steve57 (d68bce) — 3/15/2015 @ 1:18 am