"If they cared about public opinion -- what the hell was going on a year ago?"

A year ago, they truly believed that raising taxes on the rich was going to be super-popular.  And they also believed that the economy would be booming by now due to the Porkulus.

Perhaps they can be taught.

Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 05:47 PM (uFokq)

FIFY!

I find this disappointing. I was hoping the Democrats would not move to the center, but it was inevitable.

Eh, doesn't really matter at this point. The GOP just needs to hammer home --

9.6

9.6

9.6

"they think an argument on tax policy, even about tax-cuts for those despised rich people, feeds the larger narrative of Obama's failed policies and supersized state"

If the Senate Republicans hold firm and the lame-duck leadership of the Senate and House allow the matter to come up for debate, Congress could end up passing a bill to extend the Bush tax cuts by a year or two for all brackets.  That puts the burden on Obama to veto it or sign it: neither option works to Obama's political advantage.

If the lame-duck leadership refuses to allow the matter to be introduced, then the Democrats own the tax increases that kick in on Jan. 1.  Even if the next Congress takes up the matter and extends the tax cuts retroactively to Jan. 1, 2011, the Democrats will be damaged by the November/December reports of the "looming tax increases" and the January reports of "the new, higher tax rates across the board."

Posted by: DarkLordOfTheIntarWebs at September 13, 2010 05:52 PM (IkEhE)

You mean the Yapper of the House?

Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 05:51 PM (uFokq)

MEH!!!...yachts made HERE are for the plebes...mine's from New Zealand!

Eh, doesn't really matter at this point. The GOP just needs to hammer home --

9.6

9.6

9.6

Posted by: laceyunderalls at September 13, 2010 05:50 PM (pLTLS)

The way to do that is to have Zombie Reagan ask, "Are you better off now than you were four years ago," with the comparable Aug 2006 vs Aug 2010 numbers on the screen as he speaks.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo ( NJConservative) at September 13, 2010 05:48 PM (LH6ir)

The Jenny-in-Chief?  (To be a Jackass, he'd have to have balls.)

The way to do that is to have Zombie Reagan ask, "Are you better off now than you were four years ago," with the comparable Aug 2006 vs Aug 2010 numbers on the screen as he speaks.

Don't forget the quote that we had to pass it so we didn't exceed eight percent unemployment. Also,  the clip of Gibbs asking the press to not call it 'stimulus' but 'stabilization' bc clearly it was stabilization all along. Clearly!

Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 05:47 PM (uFokq)

It's not "THE Democrats."  It's "A FEW Democrats."  The bulk of their party is still stuck on Leftard.  And to the extent that the Democrats "defect" to the center, it pretty much spits in the face of their "no tax cuts for the rich" base while showing the rest of the electorate that gee, maybe the Democrats were LYING when they said that tax cuts across the board were bad for the economy.

They keep talking about the Bush tax schedule as a "tax cut for the rich." But it's not. Everybody will pay more if it is allowed to expire.

http://tinyurl.com/2cmduve

Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 05:57 PM (uFokq)

Excellent!  That's an ad in itself: the car at the edge of the cliff, maybe its front wheels already over the edge.  Panicked Average Voter at the wheel, the rest of his family in the car with him.  "What do I do?"

A knock on the driver's window.  He rolls it down and The Republican says, "Looks like you're up against a pretty deep deficit."

The Driver tries to stay calm but his voice cracks with panic.  "Yes, yes I am.  What should I do?"

The Republican says, in a firm, patient and kind voice: "You have a choice to make.  Do you want to put it in D for Disastrous Deficits?  Or R for Real Reform?"

Driver looks at wife and kids and they all nod in agreement.  He shifts into R.

"what the hell was going on a year ago?"

A year ago they didn't have an election coming up in a few weeks, and figured they had a whole year to convince 52% of the voters that the unicorns were in the mail.

It didn't work out.

Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 05:57 PM (uFokq)

That should be the line Boener or someone uses every time Obama pulls the R/D analogy off the 'prompter.

"Pres. Obama says you should vote 'D' for drive. We're not a car we're a country, and we've seen 'D' stands for only one thing--debt, debt, debt."

_{I want to see Boner with a sledge hammer.}

Boner is dead, man.

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at September 13, 2010 06:01 PM (9hSKh)

Exactly.  The President has this line of idiocy down pat, backed by the MFM.  From BusinessWeek:

(Bloomberg) — Hand the wealthiest Americans a tax cut and history suggests they will save the money rather than spend it. Tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 under President George W. Bush were followed by increases in the saving rate among the rich, according to data from Moody's Analytics Inc. When taxes were raised under Bill Clinton, the saving rate fell.

The findings may weaken arguments by Republicans and some Democrats in Congress who say allowing the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans to lapse will prompt them to reduce their spending, harming the economy. President Barack Obama wants to extend the cuts for individuals earning less than $200,000 and couples earning less than $250,000 while ending them for those who earn more.

Well, guess what, Skippy?  The money rich people save doesn't go into the mattress or the Scrooge McDuck family vault.  It gets invested into businesses and job creation.

Give consumers tax cuts to fund consumption without simultaneously giving producers the ability to expand, and you just end up with more dollars chasing the same amount of goods -- i.e., inflation.

We complain here that Obama is a complete incompetent.  That he can't do anything without making things worse.  Well I have to take issue with that.  He proved it in the last election and he is proving it virtually every day, at least the days that he isn't golfing or vacationing that he is extraordinarily good at one thing.

Blaming other people for everything under the sun.  And that leads me to a question.

Of all jobs in the world, shouldn't the job of President of the United States be a position of responsibility?  Shouldn't that job be held by a responsible person?

Obama is not up to this job and he proves it every single time he points the finger anywhere else than toward himself.

Posted by: Serious Cat at September 13, 2010 06:15 PM (bAySe)

The full paragraph is instructive and enlightening:

CASTLE: Oh yeah, you think about why did it toughen up? Why did, is there a squeeze there, sure you think about those things, but I had a primary back in '92. I had I think a much more qualified opponent, couple opponents, than I do now. That was tight too, but it didnÂ’t have the money influence that this one has. IÂ’ve been sitting here thinking about Sarah Palin and wondering if sheÂ’s ever been in Delaware. I donÂ’t know if she has or not or even through Delaware for all that matters. You know, ah there are all these various influences that you donÂ’t expect and you hope people will pay attention to how outside all of it is.

So it's been 18 years since he's had to actually compete in a political race?  No wonder he's so out of shape competitively: he assumes that politics is all "automatic," as in this quote from the same interview:

CASTLE: Bottom line is if sheÂ’s nominated, Republicans lose the election automatically. ItÂ’s that simple.

Well, geewhillikers, Sparky.  If you get nominated, maybe you should assume that you will win automatically and just stop campaigning.  That how it works in Delaware?  (Not THIS year.)

I'm hoping for someone live blogging their Delaware vote tomorrow. I can imagine the screaming meemies with the signs will be thick just outside whatever buffer zone they have over in DE.

It's going to be interesting to observe how Delaware voters handle this.  Any opinions outside of the state really mean nothing at this point.

Posted by: DarkLordOfTheIntarWebs at September 13, 2010 05:52 PM (IkEhE)

------------------------------

Nahncy Pah-Lose-ee? 

Not to worry, the Dems aren't moving to the center.  They'll say anything to get elected and they have a history of doing just that.

What's needed is for the Republicans to have the Dems explain why more taxes are bad for the economy as a sign of good faith and repentance.  Then, of course, there won't be enough revenue to fund existing programs so the Dems are going to have to talk about cuts, and not defense cuts either.

76; Blaming other people for everything under the sun.  And that leads me to a question.

Of all jobs in the world, shouldn't the job of President of the United States be a position of responsibility?  Shouldn't that job be held by a responsible person?

Obama is not up to this job and he proves it every single time he points the finger anywhere else than toward himself.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 13, 2010 06:24 PM (r1h5M)

--------------------------

"I am President Obama, and the buck stops...with George Bush!"

Posted by: martha stewarts left nipple at September 13, 2010 06:33 PM (kN1ie)

I think saying that Palin isn't familiar with the state is a valid and reasonable criticism, although not entirely persuasive, since it's not like different senators vote on different bills depending on where they are from. The entire country has a stake in every senator elected.

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 06:44 PM (S5YRY)

Superbly done, toby.

Awesome!

Suzy Kolber is doing the Jets game tonight.

YEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH!!

Posted by: curious at September 13, 2010 06:47 PM (p302b)

No offense intended.  It was put in to showcase the hypocrisy. How the hell has she not been excommunicated, shunned, and set aflame at the stake?

Posted by: DarkLordOfTheIntarWebs at September 13, 2010 05:52 PM (IkEhE)

You mean the Yapper of the House?

How 'bout the Squeaker?

Posted by: Waterhouse at September 13, 2010 06:56 PM (1eQP1)

--Congrats Ombudsman, you've achieved Moron Gold® Status.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at September 13, 2010 06:56 PM (rNJC9)

Well fuck me.  And fuck you, asshole.

How 'bout the Squeaker?

Posted by: gail at September 13, 2010 06:57 PM (f46PC)

Beaker of the House.

Posted by: Waterhouse at September 13, 2010 07:00 PM (1eQP1)

Both excellent.

Posted by: Ian S. at September 13, 2010 06:36 PM (p05LM) .

i liked what Ace said about her in the youtube Blogcon thing.

she has more plastic in her than a 67 Corvette........  somewhere there is a name in there.......

Posted by: Public Service Message at September 13, 2010 06:50 PM (IhHdM)

And credit card accounts.  Them and South Dakota, from back in the days when those two states had unregulated interest rates on credit cards.

Posted by: CAC at September 13, 2010 07:03 PM (Gr1V1)

Taaffe O'connell, you say?

Posted by: Public Service Message at September 13, 2010 07:06 PM (IhHdM)

Separation of Church and State?  What's that?

Come on over and the shit that goes down every election season!

Obama is not up to this job and he proves it every single time he points the finger anywhere else than toward himself.

Every time Zero blames Bush, what I hear is "Bush had power, Bush made decisions, Bush got things done.  Don't blame me, I don't have the power, I don't know what to do, I can't get anything done."  It totally dimishes Obama in my eyes. 

Blaming somebody else is not the way to win respect or support for your argument.  It just makes you look small and insignificant.  And Americans do not want a weakling president.

 By the time you get off the most boring road on earth, the new jersey turnpike, you are anxious to "get through Delaware as fast as you can"

You want boring?  Try I-44 through Missouri. 

Come on over and the shit that goes down every election season!

Posted by: Every Black Church at September 13, 2010 07:14 PM (BP6Z1)

He's a long legged Mack Daddy!!  His Mama was a whore and his Papa was a black buck in heat!!

  And Americans do not want a weakling president.

Obviously they do.  52% voted for him.

And Americans do not want a weakling president.  Obviously they do.  52% voted for him.

At the time of the election, Zero was telling everyone he could stop the oceans from rising, and all that "yes we can!" crap.  I don't think most of the 52% thought he'd be as lousy as he's been in office.  Sure, the BDS people love hearing him blame Booosh, but the thrill is gone for about 10% of them.

We just got a Sara Palin robo-call and I missed it.

Next on the technology agenda:  Telephonic robo-handjobs. 

I find this so odd. If they cared about public opinion -- what the hell was going on a year ago?

No election near.

Years ago in an IT magazine, I saw an amazing ad from a data-backup system vendor.  There was a picture of a hobo-type sitting in the darkness next to a campfire, under a bridge.  The caption said "Hey, I wonder whatever became of Bob, after he accidently deleted the master file?"

Now I want to see one just like it that reads "Hey, I wonder whatever became of all the Dems and RINOs who gave the big F-U to 70% of the voters, and voted for ObamaCare?"

Accidents in the workplace can have serioous consequences, eh?

The Speaker, madam

La Palosey

At such already low rates, there is NO correlation between cap gains rates and economic growth.

Repeat: there is NO correlation between cap gains rates and economic growth.

From 1981-2001, top cap gains rates ranged between 20-29.2%, yet real GNP growth (especially per capita growth) was higher than it's been 2001-2010, while the maximum rate was 15%.

All we're really arguing about is how to split the bill for the cost of government. Should billionaires and centimillionaires get to pay taxes at a lower rate than even those in the bottom bracket, who pay 13.5% PLUS payroll taxes?

N-O. Hell no. Fuck no. No.

If Republicans pursue this extension for the rich they will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

" it makes good sense to maintain things as they are in the short term..."

And then we'll bleed you suckers dry.

@207: Trolls? Would that be a reference to me?

Fuck you. Troll, in this case, means "someone who didn't around to posting until he was home from the office and the kids were in bed."

Troll? I'd wager I've made more contributions to Republican candidates than you have, ever.

Troll? How about some data? Because a real troll would never provide actual data. So here, take a gander at the chart and graph at the bottom of <a href="http://www.indexmundi.com/united_states/gdp_real_growth_rate.html">this page</a>. You look at that graph, Sport, and tell me if from looking at it you can determine when the maximum cap gains rate went up or down. You can't. Why? Because the maximum cap gains rate doesn't have any effect on the economy.

Troll? Fuck you.