December 07, 2010
— Gabriel Malor The White House is doing damage control tonight as "progressives" continue to lose their shit over the tax cut compromise. Obama released a special video message directed to his supporters a few hours ago. He all but pleads for understanding from the faithless wretches:
“I’ve counted on your support because you understand the importance of changing our politics, of doing the hard work of finding the common ground,” President Obama said in a video message to supporters released Tuesday night. “It’s not perfect but this compromise is an essential step on the road to recovery.”“I know some folks – even good friends – are unhappy with the plan because, as with any negotiation, getting there required some give and take,” he said.
Click over for the video, if you like. He still looks like hell, like he's coming to pieces and he can't find the exit, though not as bad as he did for the press conference earlier today. Also: somebody needs to tell him to never wear a brown tie again in his life ever at all. Ever. At all.
I especially like the part where he concedes that the tax cut deal will force him to run for reelection on campaign to increase taxes:
And he vowed that “this is not the end of this fight. These tax cuts will expire in two years … and I will continue to make the case to the American people about why I don’t believe they should be renewed. In fact, I’m confident – as we make the tough choices to cut the deficit – it will become apparent that we can’t afford to extend these tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans one day longer.”
I wonder how it was that two years was selected. Obama wants none, the GOP wants a permanent cut. And they somehow whittled it down to the 2012 election season? Pure genius.
Oh, and a note on the Social Security payroll tax reduction. Here's how the White House put it:
The framework agreement reached by the administration includes an about 2%, employee-side payroll tax cut for over 155 million workers – providing tax relief of about $120 billion next year.This tax cut will have a major impact on jobs and growth – creating substantial numbers of jobs. It is widely recognized by economists across the political spectrum as a high bang for the buck way to boost growth and was cited by both major deficit reduction commissions as consistent with long term fiscal discipline.A payroll tax cut has been endorsed by experts and commentators from across the political spectrum. Just last month, both the President’s Fiscal Commission and the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Debt Reduction Task Force described a payroll tax cut in 2011 as an effective way to spur growth and job creation. The tax cut legislation would provide for a transfer of General Revenues to the Social Security Trust Fund, ensuring no negative impact on Social Security solvency. And, as economist Nouriel Roubini wrote earlier this year, a payroll tax cut would spur growth because “for employees, the increased take-home pay would boost much-needed economic consumption and advance the still-crucial process of deleveraging households.”
This, along with the unemployment benefits extension I wrote about earlier, has taken a lot of hits from Republicans who are pissed that it doesn't do as much for the job situation as perhaps a reduction on the employer side of the ledger. True, but unemployment isn't the only issue on the table, and it's not even the main one when it comes to tax cuts.
The main issue when it comes to tax cuts is tax cuts. Are you going to tell me that in 2012, an election year, with a more Republican Congress than we have presently, and an economy still in the crapper (even by the White House's overgenerous predictions), the President is going to have any progress raising the payroll tax by two percent?
Because that's just what it will be. This year it's a "tax cut." Two years from now it's going to be a "tax hike." And it's not going to conveniently be taxes on "the rich", those easily-maligned boogymen who apparently keep taking food off the tables of their fellow countrymen. It's going to be a tax hike on ever dollar earned up to the cap by almost every taxpayer in America!
I can't even tell you how awesomely awesome that is. I mean-- I am Jack's tumescent cock.*
But WAIT, there's MORE. The flip side to every taxation issue is a spending issue. Stop your ass right there, look back up to what I quoted from the White House. Pare away the bullshit. Do you see it? Do you see what they did?
I'm going to tell you a story: Sometimes I get my nieces balloons from the store. Helium balloons, y'know. And they're great and all, but they hang around for days and days, even after they're no longer sticking to the ceiling and really just rolling around looking pathetic on the floor, and my nieces always cry if I throw them out before they're completely exhausted and basically empty sacks on the ground. So the trick is to deflate them in fairly short order so they're empty sooner and I can just pick 'em up and put them in the garbage. It helps to poke a hole in them.
One more time:
[...] The tax cut legislation would provide for a transfer of General Revenues to the Social Security Trust Fund, ensuring no negative impact on Social Security solvency.[...]
Do you see it now? The tax cut deal will poke a hole in the so-called "Social Security Trust Fund." Even the illusion of a trust fund cannot be sustained indefinitely. And, like I just got through explaining, this is not a temporary tax reduction, no matter how much Obama says it is.
This is the opening gambit in starving the beast. And I know, I know. Many Republicans don't want to kill Social Security, they just want to replace it. Great. This payroll tax scheme dispenses with the argument that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Because it will be impossible to argue that Social Security isn't broke while all it's helium has leaked out and it's a slightly damp sack on the carpet.
Democrats are going to be standing around in 2012, an election year with a bum economy, trying to run campaigns on raising taxes not just for the wealthy, but also for everyone else, and also on spending more on their collapsing Social Security regime.
I am Jack's aching nipples.
*See here, if you don't get that particular reference.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
06:54 PM
| Comments (178)
Post contains 1125 words, total size 7 kb.
Posted by: B. Hussein Obama (D) Commander of Tides and Reducer of Ocean Levels at December 07, 2010 06:57 PM (bs5fH)
Posted by: TheQuietMan at December 07, 2010 06:58 PM (ttYEV)
Posted by: Cicero at December 07, 2010 07:00 PM (bs5fH)
Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 07, 2010 07:01 PM (h2+O0)
Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 07, 2010 07:04 PM (h2+O0)
Posted by: Hrothgar at December 07, 2010 07:04 PM (8nf3A)
Dumbass, that's the LAST thing your base wanted from you.
Posted by: nickless© at December 07, 2010 07:06 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Hrothgar at December 07, 2010 07:07 PM (8nf3A)
It's not really that they feel THEY don't pay enough, it's that they feel OTHER people don't pay enough.
Posted by: nickless© at December 07, 2010 07:08 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at December 07, 2010 07:08 PM (UOM48)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at December 07, 2010 07:09 PM (UOM48)
Posted by: Hrothgar at December 07, 2010 07:10 PM (8nf3A)
Libs are so mad at him, you could ask that question at Daily Kos right now and they wouldn't even know you were trolling.
Posted by: arhooley, conflicted Californian at December 07, 2010 07:11 PM (BJzi5)
Posted by: ParisParamus at December 07, 2010 07:11 PM (del3r)
Posted by: Hrothgar at December 07, 2010 07:12 PM (8nf3A)
I think it was pretty neat today when he said that talking taxes with the GOP (with a huge mandate) was like negotiating with terrorists holding America hostage. But then added, you don't negotiate with terrorists unless someone has gotten hurt. Which is a new twist on that old hoary chestnut. New polic in the making, perhaps?
And when he said that Republicans are definitely going to repeal middle-class tax cuts ASAP leaving those for the rich in place, that was AWESOME. And when he said that tax cuts for millionares and billionares are the GOP's holy grail.
And that if the GOP wants a fight, they will find he's up to the challenge. Just not this time. But you wait, he's up for it.
Living in New England, I can't help but compare and contrast the pressers he and Rex Ryan gave in the last 24 hours.
Rex Ryan was more articulate, funnier, and more mature. By far.
Posted by: Truman North at December 07, 2010 07:12 PM (HLGCA)
Posted by: arhooley, conflicted Californian at December 07, 2010 11:11 PM (BJzi5)
LOUSY FREEPER TROLL!
Posted by: nickless© at December 07, 2010 07:13 PM (MMC8r)
About now? Ace shouldn't have banned Greg, he'd help us out.
Posted by: Kemp at December 07, 2010 07:14 PM (JpFM9)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at December 07, 2010 07:14 PM (UOM48)
(God, he's just so dreeeeamy!!!)
Posted by: Stupid Typical Fucking Moonbat at December 07, 2010 07:17 PM (EW49d)
Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 07, 2010 07:17 PM (h2+O0)
Posted by: Comanche Voter at December 07, 2010 07:18 PM (3ESDJ)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at December 07, 2010 07:19 PM (UOM48)
Me too.
Posted by: jmflynny at December 07, 2010 07:20 PM (fP/nY)
All right. If I'm not back in ten minutes, send out a search party.
Posted by: arhooley, conflicted Californian at December 07, 2010 07:21 PM (BJzi5)
29 as a Redskins fan
don't sweat it mr. pink, there's still time, in fact its not like Da Bears have a much better record or something.........oh wait..........forget it, my bad
Posted by: navycopjoe at December 07, 2010 07:22 PM (S9k9+)
Mr. Pink? Sorry. But...
Coincidence? I think not! The Washington Redskins and the Washington Generals wear the same color uniforms.
Can't you root for the Ravens or something?
Posted by: Truman North at December 07, 2010 07:29 PM (HLGCA)
What? He made a video? Just for us???
SQUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEALLLLL!!!!!!!!
OMGOMGOMGOMGOMG!!! This is better than that time I went on Oprah and she gave me a free waffle iron!!!!!
Posted by: KosKid at December 07, 2010 07:30 PM (EW49d)
Posted by: Barry Dean Stanton at December 07, 2010 07:31 PM (OdjhZ)
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at December 07, 2010 07:34 PM (XVaFd)
Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 07, 2010 07:34 PM (h2+O0)
Posted by: arhooley, conflicted Californian at December 07, 2010 07:35 PM (BJzi5)
I ain't a brilliant mathematician like Paul Krugman, but if a 2% employee-side payroll tax break is equal to $120B, and if the employee contribution is half of the total payroll tax, then that means that the federal gubmint collects, um, ($120B * (100/.02) * 2) = $12 Trillion dollars in payroll taxes alone, not to mention income and sales taxes. You bastards!
Posted by: skh.pcola at December 07, 2010 07:36 PM (vsFI8)
Posted by: Clyde Shelton at December 07, 2010 07:37 PM (NITzp)
Posted by: AZDREAMER at December 07, 2010 07:37 PM (l4f5R)
Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 07, 2010 07:43 PM (h2+O0)
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at December 07, 2010 07:44 PM (XVaFd)
Posted by: Clyde Shelton at December 07, 2010 11:37 PM (NITzp)
Odd for Obama. Smart for us.
Posted by: Oldcat at December 07, 2010 07:44 PM (CN+Qv)
Well, from one worse than Congress, anyway.
Wait...
Bugger.
Posted by: AoSHQ's DarkLord© at December 07, 2010 07:45 PM (aoLEL)
No, really, I totally blanked on a whole year. Somewhere a wire got crossed and I woulda sworn up and down that 2014 was the presidential election year. Which is crazy. Presidential election years are always leap years and 2014 isn't a leap year. Everyone knows that. Heh. Hehehe. *twitch*
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at December 07, 2010 07:47 PM (XVaFd)
Gah, the website won't let me post a link, even with tinyurl. What am I doing wrong?
Posted by: Grey Fox at December 07, 2010 07:47 PM (u4D3B)
I wonder how it was that two years was selected.
Hmmmmm..... let's see...... Economy is so fucked up, chances of it turning around in the next 18 months are pretty small.
Obama is also in a position to keep the economy from recovering, what with his continued attacks on the free-market and small business, all while maintaining a level of uncertainty that is like poison to long-term investment.
Meanwhile, Republicans made gains in the Senate and took control of the House.
Now, Obama (against his will, doncha know) goes along with the Republicans on the extension of the evil and despised tax cuts, even before they take their seats in January, all while making it very clear he is totally against this idea, but hey, whattya gonna do?
So, when unemployment is still floating around 9.5% in early 2012 and the economy is still in the shitter, just who do you think The Won is gonna blame as he's running for reelection?
Who rolled who again?
(by the way, thanks for the b-day card, Gabe!)
Posted by: wiserbud at December 07, 2010 07:49 PM (EW49d)
Posted by: The Mega Independent at December 07, 2010 07:51 PM (5I0Yr)
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at December 07, 2010 07:55 PM (XVaFd)
Posted by: sifty at December 07, 2010 07:55 PM (MoA1d)
I hear it was a helluva party.
Well, from what I remember, yeah it wasn't bad.
Next time, nothing less than you actual attendance will be acceptable.
Posted by: wiserbud at December 07, 2010 07:57 PM (EW49d)
Anyone awake that can handle getting someone banned. Raykon is still around after being previously banned currently shitting all over the ONT thread. And if you really want to think of it as a good reason beyond you know him being a worthless troll that has been previously before, I'm sure you can infer this as a threat against the site.
416 Pretty sure, I can shut this site down, give me the word, God<, and I will do it :-)Posted by: RayKon at December 07, 2010 11:37 PM (CFlmM)
Posted by: buzzion at December 07, 2010 07:58 PM (oVQFe)
Posted by: gesc at December 07, 2010 07:59 PM (31LCC)
Posted by: canopfor at December 07, 2010 08:07 PM (TObez)
He is freaking out about Obama and the tax thing. Dayum. Love it!
Damn, I didn't even think to watch Olberdouche! May have to set the DVR for later tonight.
Watching Rachel Maddow run Obama's press conference. Man, is this Maddow guy is pissed off!
And it's amazing how Obama still says his HRC bill covers "all Americans" then, 10 seconds later, says "Hey, it covers most Americans."
Lying fuck.
Posted by: wiserbud at December 07, 2010 08:07 PM (EW49d)
Posted by: BigBoreCore at December 07, 2010 08:09 PM (qy0ZZ)
Posted by: wiserbud at December 07, 2010 08:13 PM (EW49d)
Posted by: Pres. Toonces Queeg at December 07, 2010 08:15 PM (8lAR4)
Queef Olberdouche finally understands how Obama operates (go to the 8 minute mark):
"You rubes just don't get it."
Posted by: The Q at December 07, 2010 08:15 PM (2dOeM)
Gabe great post . . . again. I am going to have to read it a couple of times though, it is that good.
I hadn't heard about the general revenue transfer piece though.
For Obama to have lowered the employee tax on an entitlement that, according to the SOS Trustees' 2010 report is 41B in the red for the last fiscal year with 2014 the key year where those receiving will exceed those paying in on top of the Disability Insurance part of the fund set to go broke in 2018, Obama has just invalidated his core position on tax cuts being "irresponsible."
Posted by: journolist at December 07, 2010 08:21 PM (LwLqV)
Still gotta get 'em to give up the gubmint cheez, but if you can start peeling folks away bit by bit...
Posted by: AoSHQ's DarkLord© at December 07, 2010 08:26 PM (aoLEL)
Posted by: Chrissy Matthews at December 07, 2010 08:29 PM (bgcml)
About now? Ace shouldn't have banned Greg, he'd help us out.
Posted by: Kemp at December 07, 2010 11:14 PM
Raykon is trolling the ONT, maybe it can come here and post lyrics about how the looney lefties are handling their betrayal
Posted by: kbdabear at December 07, 2010 08:29 PM (vdfwz)
From today's lecture to America:
Q Thank you, Mr. President. YouÂ’ve been telling the American people all along that you oppose extending the tax cuts for the wealthier Americans. You said that again today. But what you never said was that you oppose the tax cuts, but youÂ’d be willing to go ahead and extend them for a couple years if ***the politics of the moment*** demand it.
So what IÂ’m wondering is when you take a stand like you had, why should the American people believe that youÂ’re going to stick with it? Why should the American people believe that youÂ’re not going to flip flop?
THE PRESIDENT: Hold on a second, Ben. This isnÂ’t the politics of the moment. This has to do with what can we get done right now.
[Imagine if Bush had said that today!]
Posted by: Rewrite! at December 07, 2010 08:34 PM (y/a/9)
THE PRESIDENT: Hold on a second, Ben. This isnÂ’t the politics of the moment. This has to do with what can we get done right now.
Smartest. President. Ever.
Posted by: wiserbud at December 07, 2010 08:39 PM (EW49d)
Posted by: Original Mikey is now Uncle Mikey at December 07, 2010 08:43 PM (JnCUA)
he wants it stopped becuase it was a backroom sellout, in his opinion, and didnt include the new members or the tea party.
his stance was (I could be wrong) all or nothing and that this was bad stuff on all levels including the death tax.
anyone want to deconstruct hughs argument, becuase if everything Gabriel Malor said is dead on, im at a loss squaring it with everything else ive heard today
Posted by: rumcrook at December 07, 2010 08:44 PM (60WiD)
Posted by: iknowtheleft®© at December 08, 2010 12:37 AM
I told her not to touch that grail
Posted by: Dr Indiana Jones at December 07, 2010 08:44 PM (vdfwz)
What, we have to create them but Dems can save or create them? Dang!
Yet again, we allow them to frame the story.
Where is our next Reagan?
Posted by: wiserbud at December 07, 2010 08:46 PM (EW49d)
THANK YOU FOR THIS POST.
This "horrible deal" as some conservatives have called it is Breakdown2-Election Bugaloo. The President is forced to beg his own party, with a neutered Dem congress falling to pieces over it. We will not only control the House in January but effectively have de facto control of the Senate as well, with Nelson, Lieberman, Tester, Webb and Manchin rotating in their R-siding. Lieb, Tester, Webb, Nelson and Manchin have to pretend to be about fixing shit anyway with 2012 over their head, but taking the "principled" position with the Obama-cooptive GOP just soliifies our power in the upcoming year.
It is a sandwich with a dried turd instead of dried tomatoes, but it is filet minon for us compared to what the Democrats are eating right now.
Posted by: CAC at December 07, 2010 08:48 PM (lV4Fs)
he wants it stopped becuase it was a backroom sellout, in his opinion, and didnt include the new members or the tea party.
his stance was (I could be wrong) all or nothing and that this was bad stuff on all levels including the death tax.
anyone want to deconstruct hughs argument, becuase if everything Gabriel Malor said is dead on, im at a loss squaring it with everything else ive heard today
Posted by: rumcrook at December 08, 2010 12:44 AM (60WiD)
Well I believe the first thing to point out is that if we want to keep taxes from going up it can't include the new tea party candidates. The tax cuts would expire before they were seated.
Posted by: buzzion at December 07, 2010 08:49 PM (oVQFe)
Posted by: iknowtheleft®© at December 08, 2010 12:37 AM
I told her not to touch that grail
Posted by: Dr Indiana Jones
It's the loss of power from her gavel... once the power goes so does the force holding her togeather. soon it will only be a blob on the floor.
Posted by: beanervt at December 07, 2010 08:50 PM (eOxf1)
Look, you hostage-taker.....
o_O
Waitaminute...... are you calling me a Hostage??!?!?
How DARE you??!??!
Posted by: wiserbud at December 07, 2010 08:51 PM (EW49d)
Posted by: Dan at December 07, 2010 08:58 PM (1jzSs)
I ran into this Malkin piece thru Lucianne in which she claims UI benefits are to be extended out for 155 weeks:
"State unemployment benefits last up to 26 weeks. Bipartisan-supported Washington mandates have raised that to 99 weeks. The current proposal would raise the total to 155 weeks. The cost of the joint federal-state program is borne by employers who pay state and federal taxes on a portion of wages paid to each employee in a calendar year."
Someone has their facts wrong and I think it is not you.
Posted by: GnuBreed at December 07, 2010 09:05 PM (h0RtZ)
Posted by: Dan
Something is surely up, our congressman (welch) who's one of the stuck up pelosis ass dems had a telephone conference tonight to discuss financial responsibility. I declined as I knew it would be little more then a push to tax the rich for money.
Couple hrs later hes on Gretta V show pushing for that exact thing in the name of political financial responsibility. Every time Gretta hit him on waste or fraud in gov he said oh yes but without tax's on the bla bla bla. So it is a concerted effort by the leftard nation to either scold 0bozo or to really push for that they will never get.
Posted by: beanervt at December 07, 2010 09:06 PM (1Ag/D)
Posted by: rightlysouthern at December 07, 2010 09:10 PM (l0mhx)
But don't worry; that number is expected to rise.
Couple this with the recent release of 598 Taliban types in Afghanistan, and we are talking about a target rich environment. Us as targets, I mean.
Posted by: GnuBreed at December 07, 2010 09:17 PM (h0RtZ)
Posted by: GnuBreed
but they love us now when they shoot and bomb us...
Posted by: beanervt at December 07, 2010 09:20 PM (1Ag/D)
This is all just proof that the Big Money controls politics in America. I believe that Obama is a liberal at heart, but not courageous enough to stand up for his values. Republicans deserve to win because they have the courage to stand up for their twisted, selfish, immoral convictions. I applaud you guys for being tough and backing down the pussy Democrats again.
Walter
Posted by: Walter at December 07, 2010 09:21 PM (oA4y0)
Republicans deserve to win because they have the courage to stand up for their twisted, selfish, immoral convictions.
Take the shit out of your ears and listen to the arguments.
Conservatism will set you free, moonbat.
Posted by: garrett at December 07, 2010 09:25 PM (QoP+8)
Where the hell is that dude who shouts en fuego! anyways?
That's a damned provocative (as opposed to basic shit-stirring) propostion!
Bully for you, Gabe!
(I don't have any response to it right now. I'm gonna think on it for a while...)
Posted by: Deety at December 07, 2010 09:26 PM (Jb3+B)
Posted by: Laughingmyasoff at December 07, 2010 09:28 PM (YlXYu)
Posted by: The Q at December 07, 2010 09:29 PM (2dOeM)
Republicans deserve to win because they have the courage to stand up for their twisted, selfish, immoral convictions.
Twisted: Recognizing that, throughout history, socialism fails every time it is tried.
Selfish: "Obama's gonna pay my mortgage!"
Immoral: Recognizing that money in the hands of the people is better used than money in the hands of the people.
Yeah, those damn Republicans are just pure evil.
Posted by: wiserbud at December 07, 2010 09:31 PM (EW49d)
Posted by: guy who shouts "en fuego" when the giy who shouts "en fuego" is busy at December 07, 2010 09:33 PM (EW49d)
Posted by: Walter at December 07, 2010 09:34 PM (oA4y0)
A chart scarier than the unemployment one
Posted by: GnuBreed at December 07, 2010 09:34 PM (h0RtZ)
Immoral: Recognizing that money in the hands of the people is better used than money in the hands of the people.government.
dammit.
Posted by: wiserbud at December 07, 2010 09:35 PM (EW49d)
they are taking capital away from hard working people like you and I
*tires to remember the last time a poor person offered me a job.......
Posted by: wiserbud at December 07, 2010 09:36 PM (EW49d)
Posted by: Walter
It's not the people, it's the principal.
Who's going to back you when it's you on the block?
Posted by: beanervt at December 07, 2010 09:37 PM (1Ag/D)
they are taking capital away from hard working people like you and I
*tries to remember the last time a teacher or a union worker created a job....
Posted by: wiserbud at December 07, 2010 09:37 PM (EW49d)
Do you really think any of those CEO's or Goldman Sachs thieves are worth $150M/year.
Do you think a politician should make over $6million a year?
Posted by: wiserbud at December 07, 2010 09:39 PM (EW49d)
slick thief who short sells a AAA rated toxic MBS' to a pension plan and makes millions.
Do you really want to start discussing how much most Democrat politicians are worth? And then get into who is one your side?
Really?
Posted by: wiserbud at December 07, 2010 09:41 PM (EW49d)
Hey.. was just listening to coast to coast (yeah yeah.. its for kicks) and the guest that was one was talking about wikileaks. He said the original founder isn't Assange, but the guy who did all the paperwork and setup everything was CASS SUNSTEIN.
If true, that would explain why Obama didn't want to go after them..
It could also be why it seems the democrats are rudderless at the moment.. not putting their lameduck time to good use. Because they're scared shitless.
This could not only bring down the whitehouse, but our dear leader could be tried for treason. Oh god where is that new box of tissues
Posted by: John Frum at December 07, 2010 09:42 PM (qQG8/)
twisted: supporting rich thieves;
selfish: supporting murder in Iraq (2003), Guatemala (1954), Chile (1973), Iran (1953), Honduras, Panama (etc to secure cheap oil, bananas, coffee for Americans
immoral: supporting murder in Iraq (2003), Guatemala (1954), Chile (1973), Iran (1953), Honduras, etc to secure cheap oil, bananas, coffee for Americans
you guys love installing murdering dictators around the world who will betray their own people to do business with American corporations just to enrich themselves and their families and friends. Sick immoral bastards.
Posted by: Walter at December 07, 2010 09:45 PM (oA4y0)
Even if its not true, it should be spread.
Sunstein was the one who talked about discrediting his 'enemies' aka republicans by spreading false info about them through conspiracy theories.
Spread it. Nail Sunstein. He's a dangerous self-annointed mastermind who belongs in a straight jacket
Posted by: John Frum at December 07, 2010 09:48 PM (qQG8/)
Posted by: Deety at December 07, 2010 09:51 PM (Jb3+B)
I thought it just stained your teeth.
P.S. Coffee for everyone else is altruistic and good
Posted by: iknowtheleft®©
Lefties know best.... and what does a tax increase that don't happen turn into small business putting dictators in charge and supporting murder?????
Only in a leftie mind void..
Posted by: beanervt at December 07, 2010 10:00 PM (1Ag/D)
I'm so sick of the avarice-driven politics of people like Walter.
What others make is none of your business. You want more cash, go out and get it. Quit coveting other people's shit, you greedy bastard.
Posted by: rdbrewer at December 07, 2010 10:05 PM (rTYap)
Posted by: rightlysouthern at December 07, 2010 10:06 PM (l0mhx)
Posted by: typical right winger at December 07, 2010 10:24 PM (SwkdU)
Ya a coup of coffee...
Posted by: beanervt at December 07, 2010 10:30 PM (A8x3Z)
Posted by: fluffy knows geography at December 07, 2010 10:42 PM (SwkdU)
Posted by: fluffy knows geography
They call it revisionist history fluffy..If they don't like it they revise it.
Posted by: beanervt at December 07, 2010 10:49 PM (6oimd)
twisted: supporting rich thieves;
George Soros
selfish: supporting murder in Iraq (2003), Guatemala (1954), Chile (1973), Iran (1953), Honduras, Panama (etc to secure cheap oil, bananas, coffee for Americans
No Cuba? Oh, sorry, those are the "good" murderers.
immoral: supporting murder in Iraq (2003), Guatemala (1954), Chile (1973), Iran (1953), Honduras, etc to secure cheap oil, bananas, coffee for Americans
No Cuba? Oh, sorry, those are the "good" murderers.
you guys love installing murdering dictators around the world who will betray their own people to do business with American corporations just to enrich themselves and their families and friends.
BWAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAA!!!!
Carter?
Sick immoral bastards.
Your knowledge of history is pathetic, to say the least.
Posted by: wiserbud at December 07, 2010 10:54 PM (EW49d)
And the MFM are going to suck it into overtime to get their gods re-elected.
Yes? O'Donnell? Bielat?
Posted by: BeckoningChasm at December 07, 2010 10:55 PM (bvfVF)
Posted by: Starbucks Executives at December 07, 2010 10:56 PM (EW49d)
Murdering your political enemies?
What's wrong with that?
personal to Hugo Chavez: Call me, lover.
Posted by: Sean Penn at December 07, 2010 10:58 PM (EW49d)
Posted by: Walter at December 07, 2010 10:58 PM (oA4y0)
Posted by: fluffy at December 07, 2010 11:01 PM (SwkdU)
Posted by: fluffy at December 07, 2010 11:05 PM (SwkdU)
Eat it.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at December 07, 2010 11:07 PM (OdjhZ)
Posted by: Walter at December 08, 2010 02:58 AM (oA4y0)
You mean the Prime Minister that overstepped his authority and proceeded to stage a coup against the constitutional monarch and rightful ruler of the country in the Shah? In other words the CIA did not overthrow the Iranian government. It helped to reinstall the rightful government..
Posted by: buzzion at December 07, 2010 11:09 PM (oVQFe)
Left wing dictators like Mao, Kim, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc are horrible, but no Liberal supports those dudes.
Liberals support staying the fuck out of other countries business. You guys want to control the world so you can import cheap commodities and do business and have strong corporate profits...at the expense of the powerless locals who get screwed. this is immoral
Posted by: Walter at December 07, 2010 11:13 PM (oA4y0)
Posted by: Laughingmyasoff at December 07, 2010 11:17 PM (6F1Bg)
Posted by: Bosnia and Kosovo at December 07, 2010 11:17 PM (oVQFe)
Merry Christmas, Walter!
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at December 07, 2010 11:17 PM (OdjhZ)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Mosaddegh (if you trust wikipedia..but im sure you will accuse them of being liberals)
Posted by: Walter at December 07, 2010 11:17 PM (oA4y0)
Posted by: Walter at December 07, 2010 11:20 PM (oA4y0)
Posted by: fluffy at December 07, 2010 11:24 PM (SwkdU)
Posted by: Walter at December 08, 2010 03:20 AM (oA4y0)
Yeah and Hitler was democratically elected too. So was that guy down in Honduras. Niether of those statements are controversial either. Niether is pointing out how all three attempted to overstep their authority.
Posted by: buzzion at December 07, 2010 11:30 PM (oVQFe)
Posted by: Donny Kerabatsos at December 07, 2010 11:32 PM (OdjhZ)
Posted by: Hugo Chavez at December 07, 2010 11:57 PM (SwkdU)
Posted by: Dalai Lama at December 08, 2010 12:13 AM (SwkdU)
Posted by: Central Intelligence Agency at December 08, 2010 12:30 AM (SwkdU)
So I take it walter must be the front man for the localvore establishment..
.
Posted by: beanervt at December 08, 2010 12:50 AM (2j+Hf)
No, once you get up into the "truly rich" category your income is no longer "earned income". This is where the laws were originally written to shit on the common man, contrary to the rhetoric shit out by the progressives who pushed the GD income tax on us. Not only that, but there is no SS withholding on unearned income.
So where do they get their income? Mostly from capital gains which is taxed at a much lower rate. They also get income from dividends and interest but someone with half a brain would see that given out stupid punishing tax laws you would be better off getting your income by "buying and selling" rather than "keeping and investing". This is where our tax laws have become totally screwed. And no the so-call "fair tax" will not fix that either.
The only way to fix this BS unfair system is to go to a simple flat tax on all income from all sources and regardless of the amount and with zero deductions. If your kid delivers newspapers and makes a couple of hundred dollars of income during the year then he pays a flat percentage of that income in taxes. That sounds tough but kids need to learn at an early age that the government maw will suck everything into it that they allow.
I am still waiting to see what the real "deal" with this tax deal is. The upcoming tax increase was going to impact me hard because about 1/4 of my current income is from "qualified dividends" at a lower rate. That would have been lost with the expiration and resulting tax increase.
And the way the media is talking now, it looks like this is really anything but a done deal. I am ambivalent about that because I do think when the new congress comes to town a better deal for Republicans can be made and it can be made retroactive.
I think Obama knows this too which is the only reason he was willing to sign off on this deal.
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 12:54 AM (e4sSD)
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 12:56 AM (e4sSD)
How's the weather down there?
Posted by: beanervt at December 08, 2010 12:57 AM (2j+Hf)
The question was whether enough Democrats would join them in support, especially in the House, where liberal resentment of the president's concessions on tax breaks for the wealthiest runs strong.
Yes, lets repeat that mantra "Bush tax cuts for the rich".
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 12:59 AM (e4sSD)
No snow yet but the Farmer's Almanac is predicting a lot of snow here this winter again. They predicted it last year but we only got one light dusting. It seemed to pass us by every time. The year before we got a lot of snow.
Now that I don't have to go to work I can take the snow or leave it. When it snowed heavy here I used to be the one responsible for picking up the people who couldn't get in because I had a pickup truck that was high off the road.
In the early morning before the road graders packed the snow into glare ice if the level was above your car bumper you would not get anywhere.
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 01:03 AM (e4sSD)
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 01:08 AM (e4sSD)
The almanac hasn't been to "on it" with the forecast here either. Still it's good crapper reading material.
Some areas are reporting 22" of the white stuff more near the mountains. I don't mind driving it's the idiots that can't drive in it that you have to watch out for and there's a heck of a lot more of them in the last decade.
Glad to hear you can sit it out now, it's a perk of retirement that's well deserved..
Posted by: beanervt at December 08, 2010 01:15 AM (FbZ3x)
Posted by: Vic
Gorbull warming...hehee
Thursday night we're suppose to go down to 7 burrrr. You near the ocean or way inland?
Posted by: beanervt at December 08, 2010 01:17 AM (FbZ3x)
Here’s the next deal the radical commie SOBs are wanting since they lost their super-majority. And of course, they are blaming it on the Republican “Tax Cut for the Rich” logjam.
Tax Debate Fuels Democratic Effort to
Eliminate Filibuster in New Session
Democratic lawmakers are ratcheting up a campaign to kill the filibuster after Republicans threatened last week to block any legislation until issues on tax cuts and the federal budget were resolved.
Senate Democrats, mostly junior
members, are vowing next session to a majority vote that would eradicate the
three-fifths vote requirement for legislation to move through the upper
chamber.
I don’t think it is as simple as that but they stand zero chance of passing this. The filibuster thing is more than a “Senate Rule” as I understand it.
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 01:19 AM (e4sSD)
I am pretty far inland which complicates things. It gets a lot colder here in the Winter and a lot warmer in the Summer than the nearest NOAA station which is located to the East. In fact, it is far enough East (Florence, SC) that it is impacted by the ameliorating effects of the ocean
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 01:22 AM (e4sSD)
The problem here is that we lie in a transition region. We sit on the line that separates the "beach weather" from the "mountain weather". That line shifts back and forth as the wind patterns shift so predicting accurate weather for here is damn tough.
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 01:25 AM (e4sSD)
And it just dropped some more so maybe we will beat yesterday. Yesterday's low was 13.0, it is now 13.3.
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 01:28 AM (e4sSD)
The problem here is that we lie in a transition region
So you get the worst of it all.. I'm kind of the same, have the lake (champlain) which keeps it a little warmer until frozen on my east and the ridges where elevation starts to climb to my backdoor the west. It's like a pocket that can have higher snow or cold then 12 miles away in Burlington.
Posted by: beanervt at December 08, 2010 01:32 AM (FbZ3x)
Another commie election steal in MN
Source: Emmer to Concede in Minn. Gov. Race
Emmer trailed Dayton by nearly 9,000 votes heading into a recount that has changed little. A Democratic official close to Dayton said the senator hadn't received a call from Emmer. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to comment publicly on the matter.
In the Supreme Court's decision, justices said local officials were within
their power to use more than one method for pairing the number of votes and
voters. In some places, officials count slips of paper known as voter
receipts rather than count signatures in polling place rosters. The goal is to
make sure vote tallies in precincts match the number of voters.
Local officials can count all kinds of different ways to make sure a Democrat wins. I just can not believe that the courts openly rule crap like this. Perhaps they believe the people in MN are not paying any attention to this kind of shit.
Hey you assholes on the MN Supreme Court reading AOS. This is how revolutions in the banana republics got started. The influential citizens saw that the rule of law had become subverted and decided to eliminate the “subverters”.
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 01:37 AM (e4sSD)
Posted by: backhoe at December 08, 2010 01:37 AM (0bk6W)
Posted by: fluffy at December 08, 2010 01:37 AM (SwkdU)
We are supposed to be warming up by then; 58/38. LOL, we'll see. The normals here for this time of year are 59/39, not the 37/13 that we got yesterday.
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 01:41 AM (e4sSD)
From the Hill, this will piss you off
FCC push to regulate news draws fire
Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) pushed back on Monday against a contention by a Democratic FCC commissioner that the government should create new regulations to promote diversity in news programming.
Barton was reacting to a proposal made last week by FCC Commissioner Michael Copps, who in a speech suggested that broadcasters be subject to a new "public values test" every four years.
The SOB wants the FCC to “regulate news content”. Now I am not happy with ANY of the network news programs, including Fox, but this is not the damn answer. The damn Democrat/commies already have every news agency in their back pocket so why in the hell is this Democrat asking for more government control of the news?
LetÂ’s not forget why the FCC
was established to begin with. It was used to shutdown a radical who dissented
with FDR.
This is another agency screaming to be zeroed out in 2011. Transfer
frequency allotment to the Dept of interior, revoke all other regulations, and
fire everybody.
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 02:12 AM (e4sSD)
True he was an initial supporter of FDR and his new deal (go figure) but he became disillusioned when FDR didn't move fast enough in converting the USA to communism.
FDR shut him down by creating the FCC and the "fairness doctrine". If you think the Supreme Court will protect us, think again.
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 02:26 AM (e4sSD)
Obama totally surrendered, no compromise.
This is the start of a 2012 primary fight.
Hillary will challenge him.
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 02:28 AM (e4sSD)
http://tinyurl.com/39pubvx
This is in addition to the built in exemption for unions.
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 02:33 AM (e4sSD)
Her current lead story is about The Dream Act, which is to be voted upon today.
Some of the crimes an illegal could have committed and still get a pass under The Dream Act:
Examples of misdemeanors in California:
(1) Assault, CPC § 240
(2) Battery, CPC § 242
(3) Domestic Violence, CPC § 273.5
(4) Criminal Threats/Harassment, CPC § 244
(5) Reckless driving, CVC § 23103
(6) Possession of Firearms, CPC § 12020
(7) Indecent Exposure, CPC § 314
(
Solicitation of Prostitution, CPC § 647
(9) Vandalism, CPC § 594
(10)Trespass, CPC § 602
Texas Penal Code
Examples of misdemeanors in Texas:
(1) Public Lewdness, Texas Penal Code § 21.07
(2) Indecent Exposure, Texas Penal Code § 21.08
(3) Terroristic Threats, Texas Penal Code § 22.07
(4) Burglary of Vehicles, Texas Penal Code § 30.04.
(5) Deadly Conduct, Texas Penal Code § 22.05
(6) Assault, Texas Penal Code § 22.01
(7) Soliciting Membership in a Criminal Street Gang, Texas Penal Code, § 71.022
(
Soliciting Prostitution, Texas Penal Code § 43.02
(9) Unlawful Carrying of Weapons, Texas Penal Code § 46.02.
(10)Engaging in Organized Criminal Activity, Texas Penal Code § 71.02
New York Penal Law
Examples of misdemeanors in New York:
(1) Assault, New York Penal Law § 120.00
(2) Stalking, New York Penal Law § 120.45
(3) Forcible touching, New York Penal Law § 130.52
(4) Sexual abuse in the second degree, New York Penal Law § 130.60
(5) Unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, New York Penal Law § 135.05
(6) Endangering the welfare of a child, New York Penal Law § 260.10
(7) Insurance fraud in the fifth degree, New York Penal Law § 176.10
(
Health care fraud in the fifth degree, New York Penal Law § 177.05
(9) Welfare fraud in the fifth degree, New York Penal Law § 158.05
(10)Criminal possession of methamphetamine manufacturing material in the second degree, New York Penal Law § 220.70
Posted by: Ed Anger at December 08, 2010 02:48 AM (7+pP9)
Posted by: Mark at December 08, 2010 03:34 AM (nCmeo)
Posted by: Walter at December 08, 2010 03:13 AM (oA4y0)
You lying sack of shit. Who was reading Mao's little red book of quotations? Hint, you probably huffed a few of their choads. Speaking of cocksuckers, Billy Ayers and his ilk set things up nicely for Pol Pot to conduct genocide undisturbed by any of his fellow bombthrowers and jizz receptacles. Commie libs were big Stalin supporters, you fucking idiot, who were first in favor of staying out of WW2 when the murdering Georgian gimp had a pact with Hitler and then wanted FDR to come to the aid of his fellow commie cripple when Adolph beat him to the punch on violating the deal. And for your further education, Nazis were national socialists so you can fucking A well own those shitheads too.
I can't tell if you're too young to know what the fuck you're talking about or some senile prick from the sixties that did more acid than the entire Grateful Dead; either way you've got shit for brains and are an object of ridicule.
Posted by: Captain Hate at December 08, 2010 03:52 AM (ccPlf)
Posted by: Deety at December 08, 2010 01:51 AM
Deety, it's 5:00 a.m., are you up? Because I've got your answer: Turley is a lefty lawyer who's so far to the left that he hates Obama for being a pussy sellout. I know this from lurking MSNBC for laughs.
Posted by: arhooley, conflicted Californian at December 08, 2010 04:04 AM (BJzi5)
Honestly, this the first I have ever heard of this. Do tell!
I guess I could just go and look it up on Wikipedia but since I'm not turning in a PhD dissertation, I'd rather go with a more trustworthy source like Vic!
I don't doubt it and it very much fits in with the picture of "the way the world works" that I've manage to construct so far but I've truly never even heard this before.
Posted by: Deety erasing gaps in her Knowledge at December 08, 2010 04:19 AM (Jb3+B)
Posted by: Captain Hate at December 08, 2010 04:23 AM (ccPlf)
Posted by: Alex at December 08, 2010 04:25 AM (yY28H)
Posted by: Walter at December 08, 2010 03:13 AM (oA4y0)
That is some powerful self-delusion.
Fuck you, Walter, and change your name-- I don't like a clueless prick like you defiling the name of my sainted grandfather.
Posted by: nickless© at December 08, 2010 04:30 AM (MMC8r)
Yeah, he was making some speech in defense of some corrupt-ass judge from Louisiana, from what I can gather but he was doing it very well!
I'll admit it, sometimes I just like hearing corrupt rhetoric when it's done skillfully.
Content wise, it was complete horseshit but it was still one hell of a performance!
Posted by: Deety appreciates a fine Demagogue at December 08, 2010 04:31 AM (Jb3+B)
Posted by: Vic at December 08, 2010 04:35 AM (e4sSD)
Now there are three words that I'd never thought I'd see strung together in one sentence! I guess the "I'll reward you handsomely if only you'd help me liberate a vast treasure locked away in an evil bank" email fraud no longer pays big bucks.
Posted by: ya2daup at December 08, 2010 04:36 AM (yRrAd)
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at December 08, 2010 05:02 AM (B2LxR)
Hey gabe, I thought the payroll tax reduction was a one year reduction, while the income tax rates extension was for two years, no?
And about the amount of the payroll tax reduction: was the tax reduced by 2% (which is about $130/yr, max), or was the tax rate reduced by 2% of income (which is about $2000/yr, max). I hope it is the latter, but all of the press reporting that I have seen, and the WH announcement online, says it is 2% of tax. Has this deal been put to paper in an actual Bill or Resolution we can read?
Posted by: Mike F'n Castle! Delaware's most beloved politician at December 08, 2010 05:28 AM (K/USr)
Posted by: ford the IINO. Independent in name only at December 08, 2010 06:36 AM (Ki7fm)
TEABAGGER!
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at December 08, 2010 06:54 AM (mHQ7T)
Posted by: richard mcenroe at December 08, 2010 07:46 AM (0GCID)
Bubble balloons.
Not crinkly aluminized mylar, not leaky latex, but a relatively soft, stretchy plastic like a beach ball. They're often clear.
My niece got me one over a week ago for my frrrth birthday, and it's still taut, even with a single pin-prick patched with scotch tape.
What you don't see in this video is how Obama thinks about the fight that he just lost: He believes he gave in to Republican "hostage takers", with the American people as the hostages he's trying to save.
Unbelievably offensive: Republicans are hostage takers, and Obama gives in to hostage takers. I don't know which is worse.
Finally, as to taxes: How about this, O? For every percent increase in any bracket, you take an across-the-board whack at spending. I'm sick of the assumption that spending can only ratchet up, and it's either raise taxes or go into debt.
Posted by: DJMoore at December 08, 2010 09:42 AM (auErC)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.3637 seconds, 306 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: eman at December 07, 2010 06:55 PM (b1GWR)