December 07, 2010
— Ace He vowed he'd do the wrong things, and contended mightilly to do so.
Now with the economy in tatters at least partly due to his mismanagement, he attempts to do the right thing, because he's all out of wrong things.
Here’s a theory: Obama said, “What the hell.” Once he knew he had to give in, and would get criticized for giving in, he figured he might as well go whole hog. The whole deal seems designed to test conservative arguments about how best to help the economy right now, with the understanding that if the economy improves markedly as a result, he will get more credit for his role from the independents he lost so decisively in the 2010 election. And if it doesn’t, then the GOP will be in the position he was in this year in relation to the stimulus — their desired policy won’t have worked either, and he won’t get blamed for acceding to political reality in going along with it.Paul Krugman and the Nation and Moveon.org were going to be enraged no matter what compromise he struck. So…what the hell. Go long. Try the Hail Mary. Nothing Barack Obama could have done indicates just how empty his own economic policy quiver is.
Over at Huffington Post, commenters are surprisingly open to Obama's "bold, relentless experimentation."
Open? Oh wait, I meant openly deranged.
I3addog—Obama’s nothing more than a shill for big business. Sold out once again. I have never regretted a Presidential vote as much as this one. Go ahead. Unfan me....
Mea25—In 2 words: hope shattering. Remember “HOPE”? Was $arah right? I think she was. I feel sick and violated.
...
Richard Dial—This is awful. The Audacity of Hope indeed. I am disappointed yet again by the timidity of this President, for whom I was so very excited and for whose presidency I had such high hopes. Who’s going to run against him in 2012? I need to start contributing now…
Tribal Knowledge—I wanna play poker with Obama. I need the money.
Belogical2010—What a contrast, Julian Assange standing tall against all the ev*l power of the world gov’t and he’s getting arrested. then we got Wimp Bama trying to convinces us he’s done a great job again. This victory is right up their with saving the economy and healthcare
foxinretreat—CLASS WARFARE and some civil unrest , brewing in a neighborhood near you. Hey oligarchs how it turns out is anybody’s guess. I hope Wikileaks unleashes its info on the banks ASAP, I could care less if WS has to tank to stop this madness.
More quotes at the link.
I like the bit about "$arah" being right.
At Hot Air, a quote from Charles Hurt, suggesting that Obama really might be a one-termer after all.
The left is apoplectic that their savior would turn around on them and adopt Bush’s most “draconian” tax policies that “only favor the rich.”If they were frustrated before, now they are palpably angry and publicly voicing their disillusionment with Obama.
Without those voters rocking with enthusiasm, Obama could not have won in 2008.
Now, ask yourself this question: How many people do you know who voted for Obama in 2008 but now express regret about the vote or reservations about his leadership?
Probably plenty.
Now ask yourself this: How many people do you know who voted against Obama in 2008 but have since been won over?
Probably not a single one.
All that math adds up to a very lonely number: One, as in One Term.
That said, businesses/markets/banks are likely to gain some confidence from this deal, and that means that money that's been sitting out and being hoarded might start being spent and invested. That would help Obama a bit, but it would also help the Republicans, and probably more, since any recovery that happens from this point forward can be credited to Republican ideas and Republican governance.
Posted by: Ace at
08:47 AM
| Comments (179)
Post contains 676 words, total size 4 kb.
Posted by: Mazzuchelli at December 07, 2010 08:49 AM (piR98)
Posted by: Bomber at December 07, 2010 08:51 AM (qzoN5)
Subject: No
A "deal" has been announced to extend all of the Bush tax cuts--including those for millionaires. Some deal.
But the fight isnÂ’t over. Progressives and Republicans are joining together to defeat the deal (for different reasons). In the House, several members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, led by Rep. Peter Welch, have already stated their opposition. In the Senate, Bernie Sanders has promised to filibuster.
We need to support the efforts of those staying in this fight.Members of the Daily Kos community voted 3-1 in opposition to the deal. While that is far from unanimous, it is overwhelming. Opposing the deal isnÂ’t an easy choice, but it is the best of bad options.
If Democrats cave while they still control Congress, what is going to happen when Republicans take over next year? Further, to pay for these tax cuts you better believe the next Republican demand will be steep cuts to Social Security, Medicare, the new health care law, and more.
When progressive members of Congress go out on a limb like this, and oppose not only the conservative onslaught but also their own leadership, a show of support from the grassroots goes a long way to keeping them in the fight going.Keep fighting,
Chris Bowers
Campaign Director, Daily Kos
Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 07, 2010 08:52 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: archie bunker
You hear that, dunce? Your friends on the fringe are gonna keep fighting -- fighting logic, and fighting the laws of economics.
Fight, fight, fight!
Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 07, 2010 08:54 AM (uFokq)
... any recovery that happens from this point forward can be credited to Republican ideas and Republican governance.
Can be but won't. No matter how much he disappoints his base, the media will still credit liberal policies for any recovery.
Worse still, the failed stimulus coinciding with the Fed's empty quiver has us playing from way behind. We're only now getting to tactics that would have worked at the start but look desperate now. Investors can smell desperation.
Posted by: spongeworthy at December 07, 2010 08:54 AM (rplL3)
about the businesses and money. There have been two things holding back spending. Tax uncertainty and Obamacare uncertainty.
While this helps alleviate some fears about taxes, the Obamacare fears are still there.
Posted by: Ben at December 07, 2010 08:55 AM (wuv1c)
Another thing, dunce. You are ordered to 'believe' that the Republicans are going to screw over the elderly.
Believe it!
Then tell your friends to believe it, too.
Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 07, 2010 08:55 AM (uFokq)
Are they really so concerned about the deficit, or do they want more money to waste and they know the credit card is maxxed?
They're incensed they don't get to suck more money out of the private sector in a massive recession.
Posted by: nickless© at December 07, 2010 08:56 AM (MMC8r)
" I feel sick and violated."
That is the funniset thing I've read all month.
What did he too not wear the condom?
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 07, 2010 08:57 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: archie bunker at December 07, 2010 12:48 PM (0YS61)
Fuck off John Ryan.
Posted by: buzzion at December 07, 2010 08:58 AM (oVQFe)
The whole idea was to raid the Treasury and then we would have no choice but to take money away from the earners/wealthy and re-fill the govt coffers ...for the children.
Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 07, 2010 08:59 AM (uFokq)
anyone see Keity Ellison on that Crazy Ed's show last night?
his premise: why are we giving people this money?
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 07, 2010 08:59 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: kefka at December 07, 2010 09:00 AM (VC56G)
Posted by: Bomber at December 07, 2010 09:00 AM (qzoN5)
The level of economic ignorance and idiocy from the left is truly mind-boggling. How can they possibly be opposed to something that will start us down the road to recovery and that should have been done a long time ago?
We're dealing with some seriously disturbed people on the left. They are clinically psychotic.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at December 07, 2010 09:00 AM (b6qrg)
Was $arah right? I think she was. I feel sick and violated.
Yep. Sarah's been right every fucking time.
The crazy thing is that a Republican House Sarah helped to build may now save Obama.
Posted by: Truman North at December 07, 2010 09:01 AM (G5JPI)
52% voted for Obama (pbuh) in the 2008 election. Of the 2.1% margin, most were probably "independents." But if many of the hard left can be beaten into submission by Obama's inability to be anything other than a narcissistic ass, then maybe the independents won't even come into play.
That assumes that the Republican party can nominate someone who doesn't make the right want to puke, and that's is a dangerous assumption.
I wonder if COD will be available? She already has a big war chest!
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo ( NJConservative) at December 07, 2010 09:01 AM (LH6ir)
It won't be credited to the Republicans, but the Republicans will retain power. In good times (if the economy recovers), the status quo wins reelection- a Republican Congress in that case.
But here is the bigger story: the news media has lost its narrative it could have had with Republicans "caring more about the rich" tossing any hopes for a deal, and Republicans causing the tax hike (which is utter horseshit).
Now, if the deal fails, it is entirely on the Congressional Democrats.
We won the narrative going into Boehner's leadership in January 2011, so that rather than have an always-negative media with the "Republicans raised taxes" bomb, it becomes "Obama wins negotiation with Republicans despite Democratic objections". We won't be the victor in the eyes of cable news but we won't be the villian either.
Posted by: CAC at December 07, 2010 09:02 AM (lV4Fs)
Posted by: evensickerofObama at December 07, 2010 09:02 AM (sFUT5)
Let's not fool ourselves or allow the MFM to fool us. Not increasing taxes in itself will not improve the economy. What this does is prevents the Democrats from pushing a tax increase that, on top of everything else, would have put the coup-degras on us.
Posted by: Vic at December 07, 2010 09:03 AM (e4sSD)
My favorite is the contention that this Tax rate stalemate, somehow, leads to us adding to the deficit.
Posted by: garrett at December 07, 2010 09:03 AM (XyX1Y)
Posted by: real joe at December 07, 2010 09:03 AM (IpIBJ)
We're working on that.
Posted by: The DREAM Act at December 07, 2010 09:03 AM (b5lnz)
Posted by: kefka at December 07, 2010 01:00 PM (VC56G)
I disagree. I've been doing voting studies since before most Morons was born, and I know that many people 'vote' by sitting out an election. Usually there is no real third party, so they simply don't vote ( or essentially pick "none of the above" )
Most of those who voted for Hussein in 2008 and do vote in 2012 will vote again for the same jerk, as you say. But significant numbers of those who voted for him two years ago will not vote at all in 2012
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, over the hills and far away at December 07, 2010 09:05 AM (UqKQV)
Posted by: Dan at December 07, 2010 09:05 AM (9L1z6)
Posted by: spongeworthy
----------
How can they possibly be opposed to something that will start us down the road to recovery and that should have been done a long time ago?
Posted by: BackwardsBoy-------------
Huh? Did you guys forget they are only extending tax cuts that were already in place? Nothing changes.. that's the point..
Posted by: ChiTown-Jerry at December 07, 2010 09:05 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: Truman North at December 07, 2010 09:06 AM (G5JPI)
I have a feeling this will not really benefit the economy much, if at all. Obama is still the president and with his thin-skinned nature, he will probably start listening to the hard left again.
Posted by: BeckoningChasm at December 07, 2010 09:06 AM (bvfVF)
Posted by: The World Government at December 07, 2010 09:06 AM (b5lnz)
Aside from the delicious schaudenfraude ... there's a world government? No one told me. Damn! When's the next election? I'm not even registered. Do I write to Brussels, or something?
Isn't it the Left that wants a one-world Socialist government?
Posted by: Pyrocles at December 07, 2010 09:06 AM (cv5Iw)
Posted by: Bomber at December 07, 2010 01:01 PM (qzoN5)
You're a funny guy, Bomber. You amuse me
Posted by: Tommy at December 07, 2010 09:07 AM (UqKQV)
Posted by: spongeworthy at December 07, 2010 09:07 AM (rplL3)
Posted by: nickless© at December 07, 2010 09:07 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: kefka at December 07, 2010 01:00 PM (VC56G)
Yeah, but they won't give him money and, here's the key, they won't volunteer for him, especially for GOTV efforts.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 07, 2010 09:07 AM (BvBKY)
Posted by: Dr Spank at December 07, 2010 09:07 AM (LLZiU)
Their take is incorrect.
The tax cuts are NOT a new stimulus. Raising taxes right now would be a disaster. The economy would tank completely like it did back in the '30s.
This at best will keep the status quo intact. I don't predict there will be any improvement from keeping tax rates where they are.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 07, 2010 09:08 AM (TpXEI)
I wish I could actually point at those HuffPo commenters and laugh at them while they wail.
Posted by: Annabelle at December 07, 2010 09:08 AM (Zeljq)
Posted by: Mallamutt at December 07, 2010 01:03 PM (OWjjx)
fixed.
Now, on to turning the NEA into a auction-based, profitable, self-funding machine...
Posted by: CAC at December 07, 2010 09:08 AM (lV4Fs)
Posted by: Dan at December 07, 2010 01:05 PM (9L1z6)
You're not a funny guy, Dan. You do not amuse me.
and Mittens is not Reagan; not even close
Posted by: Tommy at December 07, 2010 09:09 AM (UqKQV)
Did you guys forget they are only extending tax cuts that were already in place?
Should have been done last year. And don't forget the payroll tax holiday.
Posted by: spongeworthy at December 07, 2010 09:10 AM (rplL3)
Sorry to keep reminding all y'all, but it ain't over 'til the fatcats vote. And Osama Obama is enough of a treacherous fuckweasel that he will torpedo any "deal" if he possibly can.
You like the whining of the lib dildos? Fine, enjoy. But they still have a certain amount of power, and if their can keep getting their rape-the-wealthy message out (and they will, with the active connivance of the MFM), they can count on enough support in Congress to blow the whole thing out of the water.
The Mohammedan Mouthpiece lies. That's nothing new. I wouldn't put it past him to be lying his treasonous ass off right now. Trusting the enemy is almost always a fatal mistake. Remember "Poppin' Fresh" telling us all the Traitor-in-Chief's HealthScare plan was dead?
Posted by: MrScribbler© at December 07, 2010 09:11 AM (Ulu3i)
They just can't stand seeing a black man in the White House.
They're racist nutjobs
Pure and simple.
Man, that's fun.
Posted by: Good Lt. at December 07, 2010 09:11 AM (jH17H)
Obamacare, the EPA, the Dream Act, huge deficits and their effects on interest rates and our ability to borrow., increased regulations (see the new Food Act), no offshore drilling. It's a clusterfuck. It's sex by surprise!
Begging your pardon, but I think this might work better.
Posted by: Palinisto! at December 07, 2010 09:11 AM (XyX1Y)
I think it may have a modest impact, if only because those people expecting a hit this year know they won't possibly get one (on income taxes) until His Emptiness is on his way out.
Posted by: nickless© at December 07, 2010 09:12 AM (MMC8r)
-----------------------------------
You're kidding, right?
Only about 15% of the electorate is composed of politically engaged and knowledgeable people like poli-bloggers and their readers. The rest is composed of a fairly equal split of party voters, and the substantial number of brain-dead independents who end up deciding elections.
When they vote in 2012, these people will not be reviewing 2010 economic policy shifts and who proposed them. They have no fucking clue. The Dems will vote Dem, the GOPers will vote GOP, and the Indies will vote for Obama if the economy improves and if the GOP candidate gets made fun of a lot with memorable catch phrases on SNL.
Don't fall into the trap of overanalyzing.
Posted by: The Democratic Party at December 07, 2010 09:13 AM (M+lbD)
Posted by: nickless© at December 07, 2010 09:13 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: MJ at December 07, 2010 09:14 AM (BKOsZ)
Posted by: joeindc44 at December 07, 2010 09:15 AM (QxSug)
Posted by: nickless© at December 07, 2010 01:13 PM
Why not?
After all, "Dan" is suggesting we buy a lot of used ideas from him.
Posted by: MrScribbler© at December 07, 2010 09:16 AM (Ulu3i)
They just can't stand seeing a black man in the White House.
They're racist nutjobs
Projection. Libs are very much racists. They feel so guilty about it, they express it in a paternalistic noblesse oblige kind of way, but they are racist to the core.
People with such prejudices about class and education and background not being racist too? Not likely.
They are prejudicial to the core, but they think if they fist-bump the black guy, then all of those racist thoughts they have will be forgiven.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 07, 2010 09:17 AM (BvBKY)
Posted by: Drumwaster at December 07, 2010 09:17 AM (dWFSK)
Me, I say Howard Dean is the only "true progressive" left in the party. *snicker*
Posted by: Warden at December 07, 2010 09:17 AM (V6HDd)
Liberals don't understand the difference between tax rates and changes in tax rates.
We were told there would be no math. Ever.
Posted by: HuffPo Posters at December 07, 2010 09:18 AM (BvBKY)
Mitt Romney is the TRUE CONSERVATIVE!
Posted by: Rush, Sean, Mark and Laura, circa 2008 at December 07, 2010 01:13 PM (OWjjx)
"There was one candidate who did not display any moderateness or
liberalism or have any of his past forays into those areas displayed,
and that candidate was Fred Thompson. Â… Â…we have a campaign now where
most of the candidates are not genuine conservatives." - Rush Limbaugh
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 07, 2010 09:20 AM (TpXEI)
Mea25—In 2 words: hope shattering. Remember “HOPE”? Was $arah right? I think she was. I feel sick and violated.
From an NPR report on Palin's TEA Party Convention speech in Nashville on Ronald Reagan's birthday, February 6th 2010:
"Now, a year later, I gotta ask the supporters of all that, 'How's that hopey, changey stuff working out?'"
Posted by: DanO at December 07, 2010 09:21 AM (FPtHm)
Posted by: cali grump at December 07, 2010 09:22 AM (hL0k8)
Roman Polanski?
Posted by: The Mega Indepedent at December 07, 2010 09:22 AM (b5lnz)
Well, he has the hair to be a used car salesman.
Posted by: Mallamutt at December 07, 2010 01:21 PM (OWjjx)
You'd think he would poll better, given that he looks like Mr. Fantastic.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 07, 2010 09:23 AM (BvBKY)
Posted by: SurferDoc at December 07, 2010 09:23 AM (o3bYL)
and from earlier today:
Vermont Independent Senator Sanders is already threatening to filibuster the tax deal.
Damn, tough call... I mean yes I'd like to get the economy back on track; that'd be the best option. But watching the dips force a double-dip recession through clear use of liberal idiocy? If it wasn't so dangerous, that would be well worth watching too.
Posted by: gekkobear at December 07, 2010 09:23 AM (X0NX1)
If I am Boehner and McConnell, I almost double dog dare Pelosi to throw the monkey wrench into the deal.
Exactly. You can't walk through the internet today without the squish of lib brains underfoot. They're not taking this well at all. And this is all before the new congress is sworn in.
Posted by: ¤§EZB§¤ at December 07, 2010 09:24 AM (Ty06w)
Picture this for just a moment:
Comrade Zero wakes up from a sound sleep with a life changing epiphany. In one fell swoop, he comes to see, with perfect clarity, the total senselessness of socialism and liberalism.
Goes on national television to deliver his "I had a dream and I see the light" speech. Turns a tight radius hard starboard and goes all Glen Beck and takes up quoting the Founding Fathers. Switches parties and speaks at TEA party rallies and takes Sarah Palin as his running mate in 2012.
Leftard Jonestown on an unimaginable scale. And It would be wildly entertaining.
/I won't hold my breath......
Posted by: maddogg at December 07, 2010 09:24 AM (OlN4e)
now, where's Reagan 2.0?"
Dude, if you can't see her yet, I don't think you're ever going to see her.
Posted by: Kensington at December 07, 2010 09:24 AM (mEyVv)
"I never endorse candidates, but this one time I will....Mitt Romney"
If you remember, the only three viable candidates at the time were McCain, Huckabee and Romney.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 07, 2010 09:25 AM (BvBKY)
Do the lefties want the US to contain no businesses and only have government?
Fucking communists...they never "went away" they merely changed their names...
Assholes
Posted by: Rev Dr David McCumber at December 07, 2010 09:25 AM (tcSZb)
Posted by: Lincolntf at December 07, 2010 09:25 AM (Z6Mgb)
Mitt Romney is the TRUE CONSERVATIVE! Compared to John McCain.
Fixed to more accurately represent the statements of the above listed.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at December 07, 2010 09:26 AM (8y9MW)
I don't see 'true conservative' in that statement anywhere.
What I do see is John McCain as the front runner and Rush picking the lesser of two evils.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 07, 2010 09:26 AM (TpXEI)
Posted by: iknowtheleft®© at December 07, 2010 01:19 PM
Mutt didn't have anything to do with AMC. That was his daddy, George (do we need another president with a daddy named George?).
But someone gives you an AMC, I'll take it. Even a Pacer or Gremlin. Ugly? Yeah...but also reliable.
Thanks to the Economic Miracle begun by Dubya and boosted to unbelievable heights by Osama Obama, I need wheels, and I can't afford to be picky.
Posted by: MrScribbler© at December 07, 2010 09:26 AM (Ulu3i)
I'd be happier with Mitt right now than the Jug-eared Jester.
Posted by: low bar, sure at December 07, 2010 09:26 AM (S5YRY)
It's ridiculous; he's a clown, and they're having orgasms over him.
Posted by: Kensington at December 07, 2010 09:26 AM (mEyVv)
Play the "What has big business ever done for me?" game. Sit in your house and look around. And I love the new Donk meme: "rich people don't spend money or create jobs." Anyone ever been hired by someone receiving unemployment benefits?
After the failed millionaire taxes and yacht taxes reduced revenues and killed private sector jobs in boat manufacturing, it's time to double down! The great thing about being a leftist is never paying attention to or learning a damn thing from the real world. Social justice even if it kills us, and it will.
Posted by: Beagle at December 07, 2010 09:27 AM (sOtz/)
Posted by: blaster at December 07, 2010 09:28 AM (MrMxG)
Shame on us (the GOP) for not vetting Bernie Sanders.
What's his net worth?
What are his investments?
This is why we're the asshole party.
Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 07, 2010 09:29 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: Mitt Romney's Dog at December 07, 2010 09:29 AM (mEyVv)
Posted by: Dan at December 07, 2010 09:29 AM (1jzSs)
Romney is not unpopular because of anything Huckabee did. Huckabee became popular because people thought Romney was unpalatable.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 07, 2010 09:30 AM (TpXEI)
Why, too, do the people on unemployment (food stamps, housing assist., etc) have much more food/stuff/new clothes than I do? They can afford to order pizza while I feed $0.25/box mac-n-cheese (3rd time this week) for dinner tonight?!
If it weren't for the unions we could have all of the people on unemployment donating 20 hours/week to 'earn' their check by working for the city/state gov't. They could be cleaning streets, painting eyesores, cleaning the schools, etc.
Posted by: mamma at December 07, 2010 09:30 AM (penCf)
I haven't heard anyone say "'Romney is a commie'." I've heard them say that they don't want him as president, they don't think he's Reagan come back from the grave, and that they wouldn't buy a used car from him.
Oh, and Dan with today's Cut&Paste "Romney is teh AWESOME!!" post.
Mitt Romney is a moderately good Fiscal Conservative who makes the Social Cons' stomachs turn and who still hasn't had his Road To Damascus Moment on RomneyCare- or is choosing to sit around with fish-scales in his eyes. One of the two.
Until he really addresses RomneyCare and admits that he actually erred in supporting it- no matter his motives, I'm not interested in anything else he says.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at December 07, 2010 09:30 AM (8y9MW)
$arah........lol
What do these retards have against rich people anyway?
I've always worked for rich people. Whenever I've had a job it was because somebody rich hired me. See how that works?
All their retarded heroes are rich. Rich people that hate "the rich". It's all so fucking retarded.
Posted by: eleven at December 07, 2010 09:30 AM (7DB+a)
Posted by: blaster at December 07, 2010 01:28 PM (MrMxG)
Because they want to hold to the fantasy that he's actually somewhere in the middle of the Dems and GOP. They can keep that lie going as long as he's not opening his mouth and revealing that he's actually to the left of some of the democrats. I say some because I'm betting there are ones in the Senate that are bigger socialists than he is.
Posted by: buzzion at December 07, 2010 09:31 AM (oVQFe)
Sayin'.
Posted by: SurferDoc at December 07, 2010 09:32 AM (o3bYL)
A Republican came *very* closeat becoming VT's governor, in November.
Maybe there's hope left for VT.
Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 07, 2010 09:34 AM (uFokq)
This would be an explosive expose of Rush, except for the fact that he copped to all of it after Obama won, admitting that he had gotten into a bad habit of carrying water for undeserving Republicans.
He also said he wouldn't do that anymore, and I don't think he has.
So, well done, I guess, but you're beating on a horse that's been dead for two years now.
Posted by: Kensington at December 07, 2010 09:34 AM (mEyVv)
Posted by: Dr Spank at December 07, 2010 09:35 AM (LLZiU)
Posted by: t-bird at December 07, 2010 09:35 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: maddogg at December 07, 2010 09:35 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at December 07, 2010 09:35 AM (mEyVv)
I rag on "Dan" for his spam, he does the same thing at Althouse under a different name. He's a troll, what can I do about it?
As far as Romney making some sort of "amends" for Mass. Health Care, that's pretty much impossible. He vetoed it until his pen ran out of ink, then he compromised in order to prevent Obamacare-style budget killers and he did it all while battling a contentious hardcore Leftist Legislature. That's what really happened.
For him to apologize like the whole thing was his idea would be disingenuous and just plain stupid.
Posted by: Lincolntf at December 07, 2010 09:36 AM (Z6Mgb)
If we called him and almost all of the Democrats by their true calling it would be Commie.
Mitt Romney is a moderately good Fiscal Conservative who makes the Social Cons' stomachs turn...
His record in MA is far from a "fiscal conservative". How can anyone who passed Healthscam vol 1 be called anything but a raging liberal.
I am NOT a "social con" and he turns my stomach.
Posted by: Vic at December 07, 2010 09:36 AM (e4sSD)
(I'm just kidding)
Purple?
As long as I can find a store that sells spray paint, ain't gonna be no damn purple car in my driveway!
Used to have a friend who had a faded blue Gremlin. You couldn't kill that sunumbitch with a neutron bomb.
Posted by: MrScribbler© at December 07, 2010 09:36 AM (Ulu3i)
Posted by: t-bird at December 07, 2010 09:37 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: maddogg at December 07, 2010 09:37 AM (OlN4e)
I'm not exactly sure that he could cure his desire to effect a broad implementation of what he thought RomneyCare should have been.
It's simple. He cannot be seen to be wrong. Either it's personal or it's strategic, but it does not bode well for him.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 07, 2010 09:37 AM (BvBKY)
Someone who wasn't focused on false theories of "electability."
If you're talking about the end of the primaries where the only three left in were McLame, Mittens, and the Huckster, then the only viable choice for Conservatives was Mittens: McLame was, well, McLame. Huckster was out, even if he didn't admit it. So that left Mittens. I remember for a couple of weeks that Limbaugh was trying to avoid "endorsing" anybody, but was also trying to convince Huckabee to get out of the race (since he mathematically couldn't win) and swing behind Romney (who, at that point, could have).
Before all the various fiascoes with other candidates, Rush's man was Fred Thompson followed closely by Rudy.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at December 07, 2010 09:37 AM (8y9MW)
Not having said Romney was a true conservative, that's for damn sure. The whole 'RINO' 'not a RINO' thing has never been my schtick.
Ask yourself this question Mallamutt - Why don't people go after Giuliani like they go after Romney? Because Giuliani never tried to sell himself as something he wasn't.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 07, 2010 09:39 AM (TpXEI)
Kinda funny, but I believe the basic theory is to go for the most conservative who can win. "Can win" has a malleable definition, because it involves the future.
Posted by: The Mega Indepedent at December 07, 2010 09:40 AM (b5lnz)
Posted by: cali grump at December 07, 2010 09:41 AM (hL0k8)
Bull crap. I heard plenty of interviews during the Primaries: he wasn't abashed in the least that it passed. "It's right for us..." he often said.
I'm not asking him to say "If I knew then what I know now, I would never have signed the bill." I wouldn't believe that, either. But he (to this day, as far as I know) continues to maintain that what he signed was good and in the best interests of his state- and if he believes that he doesn't hold closely enough to conservative principles for me.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at December 07, 2010 09:42 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: SurferDoc at December 07, 2010 09:43 AM (o3bYL)
For him to apologize like the whole thing was his idea would be disingenuous and just plain stupid.
But he defends it as a good workable system, not as a shit sandwich that prevented something worse.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 07, 2010 09:43 AM (BvBKY)
Actually as of the last Gallup pole Palin and Romney were the front runners. Hushajerk move up in the very last one but he is shown as in 3rd place.
Posted by: Vic at December 07, 2010 09:44 AM (e4sSD)
Congratulations to MJ.
Posted by: MCPO Airdale at December 07, 2010 09:44 AM (SsNRK)
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 07, 2010 09:44 AM (pLTLS)
Not having said Romney was a true conservative, that's for damn sure. The whole 'RINO' 'not a RINO' thing has never been my schtick.
Neither have the rest of us, but Mallamutt is tilting at strawmen here.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 07, 2010 09:46 AM (BvBKY)
Allow me to translate: Mean people suck.
Posted by: WalrusRex at December 07, 2010 09:46 AM (xxgag)
Currently all a poll is good for is name recognition and that depends on how much face time the MFM is giving them.
The MFM likes Romney and Huck so they get interview time on issues. The MFM hates Palin so she gets exposure through other people's air time attacking her.
Posted by: Vic at December 07, 2010 09:46 AM (e4sSD)
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 07, 2010 01:44 PM (pLTLS)
I'm trying to get my own spammers.
AmishDude for president. Ruthless but fair.
But ruthless.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 07, 2010 09:47 AM (BvBKY)
Posted by: Head Coach Barry "Wrong Way" Obama at December 07, 2010 09:47 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 07, 2010 01:44 PM (pLTLS)
Are you sure you want to use that now? We might really need it in about eighteen months.
Posted by: WalrusRex at December 07, 2010 09:47 AM (xxgag)
The left is apoplectic that their savior would turn around on them and adopt Bush’s most “draconian” tax policies that “only favor the rich.”
Apparently these people define 'rich' as 'anyone who pays more in income tax than they receive back from the federal government'.
Isn't it strange how prophetic some of us were in the 1990s when we recognized the ratcheting down of who was defined as 'the rich'?
Posted by: Joy Behar at December 07, 2010 09:48 AM (X1Y8q)
Eliminating uncertainity about tax rates will help the economy some, but merely approving the current tax rates for two years will not do much.
To test conservative economic theory, you'd also have to actually roll back taxes and regulation - something I've heard no possibility that Obama is going to compromise on.
Posted by: 18-1 at December 07, 2010 09:48 AM (7BU4a)
I'm trying to get my own spammers.
AmishDude for president. Ruthless but fair.
But ruthless.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 07, 2010 01:47 PM (BvBKY)
Amishdude for President - he may not BE Abe Lincoln, but he dresses like him!
Posted by: Oldcat at December 07, 2010 09:49 AM (z1N6a)
The MFM likes Romney and Huck so they get interview time on issues. The MFM hates Palin so she gets exposure through other people's air time attacking her.
That's it in a nutshell. And we're idiots if we let the MFM pick our runners for 2012.
Posted by: ¤§EZB§¤ at December 07, 2010 09:49 AM (Ty06w)
We could talk about Christine O'Donnell...
Posted by: Bomber at December 07, 2010 09:49 AM (qzoN5)
Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 07, 2010 12:59 PM (uFokq)
We cannot let them get away with this. Once they get away with it, they will never stop until they take everything we own.
Posted by: Joy Behar at December 07, 2010 09:50 AM (X1Y8q)
Amishdude for President - he may not BE Abe Lincoln, but he dresses like him! sleeps in one!
Posted by: Oldcat at December 07, 2010 01:49 PM (z1N6a)
FTFY
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at December 07, 2010 09:50 AM (8y9MW)
Remember Obama's "taxes won't go up one penny" pledge during the campaign? (As if we couldn't forget; Obama's vistage ruined more than one sporting event). The income threshold he used there was $250k, but his minions were floating lower limits such as 200k, 150k, and even 85k.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at December 07, 2010 09:53 AM (9hSKh)
Because they want to define as "rich" anyone who is the least bit self sufficient. It won't stop with people "who pay more in taxes than they receive back." Eventually it will be anyone with an income that doesn't come directly from the Government or a Government approved entity.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at December 07, 2010 09:55 AM (8y9MW)
I've been trolling those liberal blogs telling the pwnees that the Rethuglicans called it during the fucking primaries: "The palpable apprehension is that the anointed is a stranger -- a deeply engaging, elegant, brilliant stranger with whom the Democrats had a torrid affair. Having slowly woken up, they see the ring and wonder who exactly they married last night."
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, AUGUST 2008
Posted by: arhooley, conflicted Californian at December 07, 2010 09:55 AM (7JBXw)
She makes Uncle Janet Napo look like Christie Brinkley.
Posted by: sifty at December 07, 2010 09:56 AM (MoA1d)
FTFY
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at December 07, 2010 01:50 PM (8y9MW)
FIFY
FIFY
Posted by: Oldcat at December 07, 2010 01:51 PM (z1N6a)
Uh-oh, we are in a recursive FIFY loop, reboot all Windows machines! Mac guys just surf midget tranny porn until the site is fixed....
Posted by: Radioactive Satellite Of LOVE at December 07, 2010 09:58 AM (LdYLm)
All of the little libturds are bitching and moaning about Barry now but come 2012 they'll all fall in line and do the whole Nuremberg rally, 'Yes we can' bullshit again
Posted by: TheQuietMan at December 07, 2010 09:59 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: dagny at December 07, 2010 10:00 AM (a4kWg)
Posted by: sifty at December 07, 2010 10:02 AM (MoA1d)
AmishDude for president.
Can I work with the WH Legal Counsel??
*runs like hell out of the room*
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 07, 2010 10:02 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: sifty at December 07, 2010 02:02 PM (MoA1d)
Arrest them all...
Posted by: Radioactive Satellite Of LOVE at December 07, 2010 10:03 AM (LdYLm)
Posted by: Lincolntf at December 07, 2010 10:03 AM (Z6Mgb)
I'm perfectly content to believe that he is the drunken, child abandoning, wife beating, bad driving, socialist failure that he is believed to be.
Posted by: WalrusRex at December 07, 2010 10:03 AM (xxgag)
This at best will keep the status quo intact. I don't predict there will be any improvement from keeping tax rates where they are.
I disagree. Business and investors look forward. They were looking ahead and saw increased costs (Obamacare and financial 'reform') and an increase in taxes. Now that last one may not happen. This may result in an improvement. We had already said that even the prospect of increased costs of Obamare resulted in pressure and waivers. This could be the start of an improvement, especially if the repeal effort and court challeneges succeed.
Posted by: Blue Hen at December 07, 2010 10:05 AM (R2fpr)
139 12mpg while giving me power that will straighten the hairs on my balls? Tough decision, that one.
Mine makes about 255 hp. In a 4300+ pound 4X4 truck that ain't too hair straightening, especially since the rear wheels break loose in any application over 100 hp due to lack of weight over the rear axle. My local offroad tuner told me I could get an EFI system for it. Said milage might go to 13...
Posted by: maddogg at December 07, 2010 10:06 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Jeanette at December 07, 2010 10:06 AM (l0Kdn)
Posted by: kansas at December 07, 2010 10:07 AM (mka2b)
WHAT??? THE deficit is NOT our nations biggest problem...ÂÂINCOME inequity and poverty, and no jobs are our biggest problems. Yeesh. - abbeyrose86
So if we bankrupt the nation we will have better "income equality" as we all starve to death... is the problem with poverty that we don't have enough of it?
Repub Clowns. If you don't pay taxes would still have to purchase the same services (police, military, fire fighters, SS, Medicare, road constructi
ÂÂon and maintenancÂÂe etc.) over the private market. Now, I try to get something in that thick head of yours. - Silent Solidarity (marked community pundit, comment on all pages)
Yes, get something into that thick head of mine... the Federal Taxes control your police, fire, road maintenance, etc... that is how those services are funded. What are my state and local taxes for? he doesn't say; which is odd. I mean the State tells me I need to pay taxes for these same services... is the information he's trying to force into my thick head that he's an idiot; or that I'm being double-billed and should enjoy that?
I think we cannot dismiss the possiblity that he is and has been under physical threat and had made this "Deal" and other scared/bad decisions under that kind of duress. - jmzf
Someone is threatening the Presdient... he wouldn't do this on his own... BWAHAHAHAHAHA
Let us not forget the inhumanity of the GOP as regards extension of the Bush tax cuts. Holding millions of their fellow Americans hostage, as it were, so that they could secure tax cuts for a smidgen of the population that already gets 40% of every pizza pie that comes out of the oven. - americancolonyinhell
Ooh, can I get Pepperoni? Yes, they got 95 billion in cuts for the "rich" the bastards; and only gave 411 billion in cuts to everyone else... how dare they.
Ok, I'm going to have officially retire my "he's playing 3 dimensionaÂÂl chess" routine. - Shane - Ireland
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA
Ok, have to save some for later... although there are 528 new comments since I started reading.
Posted by: gekkobear at December 07, 2010 10:07 AM (X0NX1)
Posted by: Jeanette at December 07, 2010 02:06 PM (l0Kdn)
My goodness, do you think THIS site would attract the attention of the BEAST? Hah!
Posted by: Department of Department of Departments at December 07, 2010 10:08 AM (LdYLm)
He wins every debate with "because I said so."
Don't be so butt-hurt about it. There is no ignominy in facing defeat at the hands of your betters.
I would wholeheartedly support AmishDude's candidacy. I'd sell my heart, soul, and the Blade of Olympus to finance it. It isn't as if he could do any worse than the last President born in Pennsylvania, James Buchanan.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at December 07, 2010 10:09 AM (9hSKh)
AmishDude for president.
Can I work with the WH Legal Counsel??
We will, in fact, have a legal counsel. But we will also have civilian oversight of the legal profession.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 07, 2010 10:09 AM (BvBKY)
Posted by: kansas at December 07, 2010 02:07 PM (mka2b)
Wait until I hit the commercial markets! You ain't seen nothing, yet! Hey, fella, you ain't seen nothing, yet!
Posted by: Credit Default Swaps at December 07, 2010 10:09 AM (LdYLm)
Posted by: Meaghan McCain at December 07, 2010 10:11 AM (piR98)
176 AmishDude for president.
He wins every debate with "because I said so."
What? If I say so and somebody else says differently, I know who I'm going with.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 07, 2010 10:13 AM (BvBKY)
WHAT??? THE deficit is NOT our nations biggest problem...ÂINCOME inequity and poverty, and no jobs are our biggest problems. Yeesh. - abbeyrose86
These guys wouldn't know 'real' poverty if it bit them on the ass. They live in the world of imaginary poverty--- not the one where you can be poor and still have cable TV, AC, dishwashers, rims on your car, weekly salon visits and buy beer for the weekend. There are so many services out there now that unless you're, well, an independent, sane, law abiding, employeed conservative.... you'd be hardpressed to go hungry, without a roof over your head, without food or medical care.
Seriously, once 'we' have you in our system, we are mandated by law (aka DOJ) to make sure when you're discharged, you go someplace that will take care of you forever and ever--- AMEN.
(Unless you go off your meds and throw chairs out the windows, then you come back to us and we do it all over again).
Come live in my world, where the 'cared for' live better and with fewer stressors than their caregivers.
Posted by: ¤§EZB§¤ at December 07, 2010 10:15 AM (Ty06w)
Posted by: Jean at December 07, 2010 10:16 AM (lnUW/)
What? If I say so and somebody else says differently, I know who I'm going with.
My Granny says "because I said so" too, but she always has a switch in her hand when she says it. Makes it have a WHOLE different meaning
Posted by: ¤§EZB§¤ at December 07, 2010 10:17 AM (Ty06w)
I prefer Empire of Jeff's Support me and I will kill you last platform.
Posted by: toby928™ at December 07, 2010 10:22 AM (S5YRY)
It depends on the mistakes would be my provision for elected officials. When a pundit gets something wrong it isn't usually a big deal. Dick Morris has made a career out of being wrong.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 07, 2010 10:40 AM (TpXEI)
Posted by: busdriver at December 07, 2010 10:46 AM (mvkJd)
2. The Republicans have yet to offer someone who could win a general against a moderately-liked Obama. Palin cannot win. Sorry. Love the gal. But she can't win.
3. That's important because the Republican Party machine is like a room full of retarded sloths with really bad haircuts. They're terrible about messaging and even worse about finding people who can rally. One reason why we talk about Reagan so much is that we have had such awful little men by comparison - not just in the White House, but as majority leaders, minority leaders and so on.
4. . If the economy improves well enough - I think it will IN SPITE of the Democrats - the Democrats and the Media will give themselves credit. There are far and away enough ignorant people to believe it. The Republicans RIGHT NOW should be hammering away on this stuff, but are not. If, for example, it's the "Bush Policies" - meaning conservative ideas - that have got us into this mess, why then are the Europeans facing the same kinds of issues? Are they all secretly Bush minions? Or was it the Progressive policies of the Bush and Clinton administrations and their Congresses that got us into this and which persist - cranked up to eleventy - in making matters worse? Because those policies are the kinds of things that Europe did, that China tries to avoid and that Dems run right for.
These arguments must be made now, often and clearly. What we get from the Republicans is the wind whistling and tumbleweeds. Or some farghin' jackass saying, "Great! Now let's fight about abortion, Hispanics and gays!"
So I don't know that this spells doom for the former Junior Senator from Illinois. Viet Nam tells me that a bunch of motivated Communists with stupid ideas in their heads can get away with a lot if their principle political adversaries are corrupt, lazy and incompetent. In fact, they can win.
Posted by: Amos at December 07, 2010 11:50 AM (gDWoG)
How can any recovery or non-recovery be either credited or blamed on republicans when all that has been done is keep the status quo. It's a lot like jobs "saved". I believe that raising taxes - even on the "wealth" - would hurt any potential recovery, but I don't think keeping taxes the same will cause a recovery. It will just keep things from getting worse.
In order to claim that republican ideas are being put into effect vis a vis the recovery, we would need to see deragulation, cuts in spending, and repealing Obamacare as well as keeping taxes the same (or reducing them on corporations).
Posted by: Monkeytoe at December 07, 2010 11:56 AM (sOx93)
All elections hinge on who turns out their base. There really are very few true independents who switch back and forth between the Parties. The winner will be the Party that gets their voters to the polls on election day. That requires a candidate that the "lazy voters" are willing to go stand in line for.
As long as the Republicans nominate someone who will get support from the base they will win because their people will turn out.
The same goes for the Dems. We were expected a low turnout this last election by the Dems because of this so-called enthusiasm gap". Well, probably due to the unions, the Dems got their voters out too.
The net result was large Republican gains in the swing States and traditional red States while the Dems held on to the blue states and the purple states like NV.
If the Republicans nominate another McCain the base will stay at home and Obama will win (or his primary winner).
Posted by: Vic at December 07, 2010 11:59 AM (e4sSD)
Posted by: Rapist-Face Ewok at December 07, 2010 12:02 PM (GgXZc)
Posted by: TimothyJ at December 07, 2010 12:18 PM (G5+tV)
Posted by: Sabba Hillel at December 07, 2010 01:09 PM (u3r63)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.3752 seconds, 307 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








And we had to twist his arm to do it.
Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 07, 2010 08:48 AM (uFokq)