The ice cream story was one of the big stories today on ABC Radio news.

Hard hitting journalism, stories that you need to know.

HERMAN CAIN IS A LYING TRAITOR!!!

“We need more bold ideas like this because it is specific and credible,” Ryan said. “I’m more of a flat-tax kind of a guy.”

The more bold ideas on the table, the more it helps Ryan and his plan. Makes it less taboo to discuss this stuff.

.... but when you turn it upside down ....

SCOAMF accuses capitalist right of being anti-capitalist to people who look likeÂ… ehÂ… peopleÂ… orÂ… otherÂ… thingsÂ… ehÂ… that people look like? 

>>>So, why is he a dead end, especially since he has been consistently polling very strongly among the base?

No money, no support structure, no experience campaigning, gaffe prone, no knowledge of the most basic foreign policy issues, never been vetted, you know, minor stuff

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 13, 2011 04:19 PM (UlUS4)

I think you already know the answer(s).  He is "none of the above" :  People are choosing him in polls because they want a conservative, not Romney

and there is *cough* race, also.   Would make for an interesting race, though

Cain was adamant in his support for TARP (he later repudiated the implementation of TARP but not the underlying reasoning for it).  He has defended the Federal Reserve and even praised Alan Greenspan, one of the key architects of the housing bubble, in the debates.  No thank you.

No money, no support structure, no experience campaigning, gaffe prone, no knowledge of the most basic foreign policy issues, never been vetted, you know, minor stuff

 Posted by: Ben at October 13, 2011 04:21 PM (wuv1c)

yeah, and that, too

>>>Yeah I agree, but it didn't stop obama

heh, that's a high bar you're setting there.

This idiot hick rube pizza guy stupid businessman didn't know that Haagen Dasz Black Walnut was only a seasonal special offering.

Friggin moron. How stupid that he didn't know this.

Stupid.

Posted by: James at October 13, 2011 04:23 PM (Y5Ri0)

Unless there is something more to Cains plan than is on his website it's a business killer. It taxes total receipts of a corp less deductions for purchases from other companies, investments and dividends paid.

That means you could lose money and still owe massive income tax, there is no dedcution for labor or labor costs, there is no deduction for interest, no deduction for property tax.

If you were a labor intensive corporation you could lose $1 Million on $10 Million in receipts and still owe $900,000 in taxes.

Because dude is off. But...what the hell.

'12 is lost if Perry can't get his shit together. So if it looks like he can't, let's get the Cain show rollin'.

DOOM needs laughs.

finally i've been asking for this post

where's the "shit just got real" video?

>>>No. 9-9-9 still have an income tax component. So it could easily become the 9/15/30-9-9 plan with 3 levels of income taxation. Then, we (meaning Congress) can start picking winners and losers again with exemptions, credits, deductions so you wind up with.....the current system plus a sales tax (or consumption tax or Fair tax or as I snarkily said...the Bestest, Smartest, Greatest Most Wonderful Tax evah know to man).

>>>You can even then make the corporate tax rates progressive so you have the 9/15/30-9-9/15/30 plan.

This.  The ONLY thing 9-9-9 would guarantee *for sure* were it to be implemented is a brand new revenue stream for the federal government to tax.  (Also, remember, STATE level taxation isn't going away under this plan.)  Everything else would be subject to change by subsequent Congresses, and would almost certainly rapidly return to Democrats pulling soak-the-rich tactics with tax increases.

9-9-9 is a disaster.  I don't care what sorts of positive noises Paul Ryan is making in its direction, the man has the right to be wrong. 

Posted by: R. Perry at October 13, 2011 04:31 PM (nvOW+)

Sorry Rick, you made a single gaffe and did poorly in terribly-formatted 'debates'.  If only you'd been more of a RINO people would have given you a pass.

>>Cain has no record to vet so it can't be done. But all that said he is second on my list

has he ever shipped jobs overseas when he was a VP? Did he ever conduct mass layoffs?

This stuff will come out and be an issue. Just because he has no public sector career doesn't mean he has no skeletons or perceived skeletons

IÂ’m guessing from this that the squinty eyes, the finger wagging and the furrowed brow escalation of harsh measures toward Iran didnÂ’t have the desired effect.  Next step – “big fat poopie head” name calling. 

Posted by: soothie at October 13, 2011 04:36 PM (sqkOB)

I sold like 48 books today. So I got like $500.

Obama will run on one thing against Cain. He wants to lower the tax on Millionaires and Billionairs from 35% to 9% the same amount a jewish janitor will have to pay.

No way does Cain survive that.

Cain is polling well now because the majority of likely primary voters don't want Mittens. It's why Bachmann had great numbers until she went off the deep end, it's why Perry had great numbers until he fumbled through the debates, it's why Mittens continues to poll around 20%. People are moving around to and from different candidates not named Mitt Romney. With the way things are going I wouldn't be surprised if Cain and Perry were both to flame out with Gingrich taking over as the main challenger.

Guy, Rick Perry the best Non-Romney candidate in the race.

He's got the money, experience, and record.

So what if he's flubbed the debates. In the generals it will be a one on one with the SCOAMF and the economy will be so bad that Perry will just need to hold his own the the debates.

He's a great campaigner, fundraiser and speech giver.

He's conservative on almost every issue. Romney is conservative on none.

If we split out vote between Cain, Bachmann, Santorum, Gingrich and Perry then we will get Romney.

It'll be a replay of 2008 when our vote was split between Huckabee, Fred Thompson, Giuliani and Romney. We ended up with McCain.

Let's learn from our mistakes and not repeat them. Perry is the best candidate in the field.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 13, 2011 04:35 PM (bbxN5)

Vic has an obsession w/ the idea that Mitt will lose the GOP south which I see NO evidence of. recent polling has him doing the best against Obama in Virginia & North Carolina.

Posted by: Ghost of Lee Atwater at October 13, 2011 04:38 PM (JxMoP)

This is kind of my prediction at the moment.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at October 13, 2011 04:36 PM (8y9MW)

>>This front load shit is just that shit. 

The primaries are getting closer. The early states of moving them up. If Romney sweeps them or wins 3 of 4, it's probably over.

It's a shitty system, but whoever wins the early primaries tends to win the nomination, especially if it isn't a two person race.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 13, 2011 04:40 PM (bbxN5)

heh

"House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan says he glovesh presidential candidate Herman Cainfs signature g9-9-9 tax plan."

--(Paul Ryan)

"Herman Cainfs 9-9-9 plan would be a vast improvement over the current tax system and a boon to the U.S. economy," Laffer told HUMAN EVENTS in a statement.

--(Art Laffer)

"Almost a year ago Mitch Daniels suggested the adoption of a value-added tax. I was not in favor of the VAT when Daniels proposed it and I'm not any more in favor of it now that Herman Cain is proposing one."

--Gabriel Malor

*****

Well, I guess Ryan and Laffer just don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.

98 >>>I would not guarantee that for Romney if his record in MA ever gets published.

It's almost as if you WANT Mitt Romney to lose the South in order to prove you right.

JeffB - Romney will lose the South and MA, which is why we want someone else. Get it? Unless you can show me how Romney picks up an entire new region of support to offset losing the base he is a dead man walking electorally. Just sayin. He will bravely defend the ticket with his country club backers while totally turning off the TEA party. Do you see it now? Finally, even if he wins, the party loses, because its all about how to fine tune the machine with him, not how to replace it. At best he is a Ford, at worst a Nixon. Notice there is no mention of a Reagan or a Roosevelt made here. He is a place holder with money and credentials.  

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 13, 2011 04:35 PM (bbxN5)

No, I want him to crawl his scummy liberal gun grabbin' ass back to Taxatusettes. I do not want liberal MA politicians telling the rest of the country what to do after they have totally fucked up their own State.

>>>You know why no one confronts Perry on those 'flip flops' ? Because they would get a logical, in context , sans misinformation answer and that would ruin this meme.

The best part about Mitt Romney is he "believe and supports" every position you happen to have at any given time

I don't know what Perry's deal is. He did very very well, I thought, in the first half of those first two debates.

But if you take him more than an hour into one he falls apart.

Posted by: Ben at October 13, 2011 04:44 PM (wuv1c)

lol

Posted by: tasker at October 13, 2011 04:42 PM (rJVPU)

It's worse than a VAT, you could lose money and still be responsible for the 9% tax.

Posted by: Soothsayer at October 13, 2011 04:43 PM (sqkOB)

support = money.  you can't say cain won't raise the money, yet.  It's too early to call.  and I'm not convinced the richest guy wins this one.

This thing will be wrapped up before Christmas.

So you're saying it'll be all wrapped up a month after the first primary?

Probably...

Posted by: Ghost of Lee Atwater at October 13, 2011 04:38 PM (JxMoP)

I can say without a doubt that I'd definitely prefer Gingrich over the SCOAMF.

Herman Cain has never.....I repeat, never.....had to deal with the legislative process.

That is what is "off" about him. ...Everything he has ever done, has been through business....which is not a democratic process.

In business, the CEO is a dictator. .....A dictator who can fire those who disagree with him, or who do not work diligently towards his stated goals.

You cannot fire legislators who do not work with you.

This 999 plan could never be passed. Not any time soon, anyway. ....No one in Congress would want to be on record as having voted to 'Tax the Poor' nearly 10% on their food, medicine and everything they buy.

Posted by: Vic at October 13, 2011 04:45 PM (M9Ie6)

anyone who stays home for the 2012 election better not bitch one word to me about Obama's 2nd term

Posted by: Soothsayer at October 13, 2011 04:43 PM (sqkOB)

The GOP is already unified behind Romney.

It's always been unified behind Romnney.

God forbid we get a Conservative in the mix.

Are you pro-life today polynikes? Then Mitt Romney is too.

Are you pro-second ammendent today? Then Mitt Romney is too.

Are you pro-TARP? Then Mitt Romney is too.

Are you anti-TARP? Then Mitt Romney thinks it was badly implemented.

Are you for a border fence? Then Mitt Romney will be too.

Posted by: SantaRosaStan, twinkling down at October 13, 2011 04:37 PM (UqKQV)

THIS.  I've been saying the same thing.  I firmly believe this is the play.

Posted by: Ben at October 13, 2011 04:48 PM (wuv1c)

lol

The South will go for anyone, EXCEPT Obama.

If you told me Indiana would go for Obama, I would not have believed you.

I don't credit Obama. I blaim McCain.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at October 13, 2011 04:45 PM (8y9MW)

Posted by: Soona - Tearorrist at October 13, 2011 04:50 PM (QZapb)

Well put.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 13, 2011 04:51 PM (FkKjr)

anyone who votes for a third party better not bitch one word to me about Obama's 2nd term

Posted by: Billy Bob, the guy who drinks in SC at October 13, 2011 04:44 PM (hXJOG)

My worry is that a significant part of the base will simply stay at home. That happened in 2008 with McCain. Didn't happen in SC because he got the support of all the military retirees and there was no "research triangle".

There is no Senate elections in SC this time and no gov election. if the only draw is Presidential and Romney is the candidate it will all depend on two things (1) Did his MA record get aired and (2) who did DeMint and Haley endorse in the primary. 

With 40% blacks in the State if a significant part of the Republican base sits it out Obama will win SC.

Look, almost any Republican will beat Obama in 2012. Let's at least elect a conservative one, let alone a Republican.

Ask yourselves this. Imagine it was Scott Brown, would you vote for him for president?

They're of the same cloth. They're both massachusetts Republicans.

Is this what you want?

Why not coalesce around an actual conservative?

Romney isn't inevitable. After 5 years of running and tens of millions of dollars, he still can't break 25% support.

That means 75% of the party doesn't want him, or is undecided. And if you're undecided on Romney after his 5 year campaign then I think it would be fair to say they're not sold on him.

Posted by: Dave at October 13, 2011 04:52 PM (Xm1aB)

+1

notice he still lead after 2 subpar debates, the "heartless" comment began the implosion

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 13, 2011 04:51 PM (FkKjr)

the political bent of the third party would decide it, and no one wants to go down that road, hippies included....well, hippies are more inclined to do it because they're stupid, but nonetheless.

The Mormon thing?  Mum's the Word until next October.  Then they'll make that South Park episode look like vanilla

I'm also convinced this will bite him, and hard, sooner or later. It hasn't yet largely because the powder has been kept try. He's yet to be really 'vetted' on the Mormon issue.

Most people don't know jack about Mormonism, and even if every religion has it's kooky bits, these aren't the conventional kooky bits that 80% of the public has signed on to and grown up with. It will become an issue, when people start to hear more about it.

Posted by: phoenixgirl at October 13, 2011 04:53 PM (eOXTH)

again anyone who sits out the 2012 election better not bitch one word to me about Obama's 2nd term

>>>You know why no one confronts Perry on those 'flip flops' ? Because they would get a logical, in context , sans misinformation answer and that would ruin this meme.

--------

The best part about Mitt Romney is he "believe and supports" every position you happen to have at any given time

Posted by: Ben at October 13, 2011 04:44 PM (wuv1c)

---

On the other thread someone brought up the homosexual partner/spouse in the military who wanted benefits.  I resisted the urge then because I didn't want to get in another fight, but since flip-flops came up again here...

In 1994 one of our candidates wrote the following to the Log Cabin Republicans: 

"One issue I want to clarify concerns President Clinton's "don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue" military policy.  I believe the Clinton compromise was a step in the right direction.  I am also convinced that it is the first of a number of steps that will ultimately lead to gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nation's military. That goal will only be reached when preventing discrimination against gays and lesbians is a mainstream concern which is a goal we all share."

Posted by: nevergiveup at October 13, 2011 04:48 PM (i6RpT)

Yeah, Cain.

He's not perfect, no one is but at least he has the balls to take on the fucking Commie retards protesting everywhere about their wishes to destroy the country.

I don't see Mitt or Perry or Bachmann mentioning anything about that. They're more concerned about attacking each other.

the conservative south may stay home and that is how obama gets reelected......i think many conservatives will just sit home and not vote if romney is the nomination.....

Posted by: phoenixgirl at October 13, 2011 04:53 PM (eOXTH)

It becomes the election of which candidate depresses his voters the least in a Romney vs. Obama competition.

160 I've got news for you, dude -- the section of the blogosphere that's desperately trying to deny the reality of Romney

The reality of Romney is that the GOP base has been letting you know loud and clear for four or five years now that we want no part of Mitt Romney and will have no part of Mitt Romney, whether you like the implications or not.

Thankyou Menthos. The Romneybots can never address how a man that has spent 6-7 years running for President can never get beyond 25-29% support within the party? It ain't a message thing (because no one believes a word he speaks). It very well may be a cultural thing (yankee socialist governor pretending to be conservative). But at the core its a trust thing - he doesn't seem trustworthy. He is weasily. Do you want to live with weasily for four years? If you do, what do you get? Like I said before - he has the charm of a Nixon without the resume of achievements. Give me Newt - Give me Cain - Give me a spittoon full of warm spit - but don't give me Romney.

Look, almost any Republican will beat Obama in 2012. Let's at least elect a conservative one, let alone a Republican.

Ask yourselves this. Imagine it was Scott Brown, would you vote for him for president?

They're of the same cloth. They're both massachusetts Republicans.

Is this what you want?

Why not coalesce around an actual conservative?

Romney isn't inevitable. After 5 years of running and tens of millions of dollars, he still can't break 25% support.

That means 75% of the party doesn't want him, or is undecided. And if you're undecided on Romney after his 5 year campaign then I think it would be fair to say they're not sold on him.

Posted by: Ben at October 13, 2011 04:52 PM (wuv1c)

I voted for mittens last primary because he was better than Mr. I Couldn't Avoid a Surface-to-Air Missile So That Means I'm Smart.  Not this time.

Posted by: Flounder at October 13, 2011 04:51 PM (Kkt/i)

Cain wants to add an entirely new taxing authority and he wants to stack it on top of an income tax.

once people understand that he's gonna be toast unless he changes it.

and he supports TARP and Stimulus and the Fed.

god damn, why are all of these canidates so horribly flawed in such Statist ways.... (rhetorical, i know the answer)

i know i will be attacked mercilessly for this, but Santorum and Bachmann are the only full-specturm conservs in the race, too bad they have been so roundly, regularly and completely unfairly trashed everywhere including this blog.

welcome to Amerkia comrades!

"One issue I want to clarify concerns President Clinton's "don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue" military policy.  I believe the Clinton compromise was a step in the right direction.  I am also convinced that it is the first of a number of steps that will ultimately lead to gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nation's military. That goal will only be reached when preventing discrimination against gays and lesbians is a mainstream concern which is a goal we all share."

well as a Liberterian GOPer I agree

anyone who votes for a third party better not bitch one word to me about Obama's 2nd term

Posted by: Team Mitt's AuthorLMendez (Ban k1rwm) at October 13, 2011 04:52 PM (yAor6)

And that prevents Obama's 2nd term how?

If you really are going to scream ELECTABILITY!1111 as the reason Mitt should be the nominee, shouldn't you consider that a split of the party because the base hates him might impact that slightly?

It amazes me how the 'victory uber alles' set never considers the actions of the base in their political machinations.  The base must always do lock-step what they want.  If they say they aren't going to, they'll shout at them.

Posted by: Heartless Janitors_4_Jesus at October 13, 2011 04:54 PM (tazG1)

yeah he would, Perot or not

149 .....I don't know what Perry's deal is. He did very very well, I thought, in the first half of those first two debates.

Yeah. And what did that get him in return.....arrows and hatchets from all directions.

But if you take him more than an hour into one he falls apart.

You should watch the post-debate videos that Moe Lane posted on RedState of Perry speaking to a crowd right afterward. It was classic Rick Perry....different than in the debate. 

Maybe Perry just hates these dumbass primary debates as much as some of the rest of us do. You can't rip off their heads and shit down their necks....because they're on your same team. Primary debates are media driven bullshit. 

Posted by: nevergiveup at October 13, 2011 04:48 PM (i6RpT)

Yeah, Cain.

He's not perfect, no one is but at least he has the balls to take on the fucking Commie retards protesting everywhere about their wishes to destroy the country.

I don't see Mitt or Perry or Bachmann mentioning anything about that. They're more concerned about attacking each other.

Posted by: ErikW at October 13, 2011 04:54 PM (+rD6F)

The main reason I like Cain, is you know what you're getting.  No lies, no bullshit.  Goes a long way with me.

Posted by: Dave at October 13, 2011 04:56 PM (Xm1aB)

i seem to remember the same thing being said in 2008.

how'd that work out?

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 13, 2011 04:56 PM (FkKjr)

if you dont sit out and Obama wins you can bitch, if you do sit out and he wins I dont wanna hear you bitch. If you sit out and Romney wins then you can bitch.

basically if you wont come out and vote against Obama by picking the alternative and make me suffer 4 more years of him, well to be frank then fuck you and your sense of idelogical purity

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 13, 2011 04:58 PM (UTq/I)

What if I'm not wearing underwear?

>>Guess the candidate. 

Indeed.

Consider this people, Mitt has taken both sides on almost ever major issue.

One in which he didn't take both sides? Healthcare.

That's right. He was willing to pretend to be pro-life, pro-gun, pro-whatever you stupid bible thumping conservatives like, but repudiate government mandated healthcare? That's a bridge too far your bitter clingers.

He's an opportunist. Do you think he's going to put a Scalia, Alito, Roberts, or Thomas on the bench? Or a Souter, Kennedy, O'Connor.

The next president is going to be naming at least 1 SC justice, in all likelihood it will be for Kennedy's seat.

Do you trust Mitt Romney?

He will dump conservatism as soon as he gets elected. At that point he doesn't need us. What are we going to do? Vote Democrat? Primary him in 2016 if he wins?

You can't vote for a man who doesn't know his Haagen Dasz.

You can't vote for a man who doesn't know his Haagen Dasz.

Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz Elitist at October 13, 2011 05:00 PM (D3uB9)

what'd you just call me?

Posted by: cherry ð at October 13, 2011 04:58 PM (OhYCU)

i LOL'ed

well as a Liberterian GOPer I agree

Posted by: Team Mitt's AuthorLMendez (Ban k1rwm) at October 13, 2011 04:56 PM (yAor6)

--

Well, too bad, because he no longer holds that position. 

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 13, 2011 04:58 PM (UTq/I)

+1

nobody`s mentioning that 999 would be a level 5 hard cheese impaction for retirees....i wish conservatives would address it beforehand.......

when the time comes,the libs sure will....

>> I am sure that is all true, but if Romney is the pick, how much of the base stays home?

Only the ones who really don't care if Barack Obama gets a second term, and those people aren't really the base, are they?

>> And is he really who we want?

I don't know. The primaries haven't started yet.

>> Why do we have to settle?

Because we don't always get what or whom we want. If the Republican Party, which is overwhelmingly made up people who aren't me, collectively decides to nominate someone who isn't my first choice, then I settle.

>>That's freaking weak Ben. I thought your argument was that Romney panders so why did you bring up Tarp? Why doesn't he say what you want him to say on MassCare?

That's a real moral victory Polynikes. The only thing he won't pander on is Romneycare.  He's willing to change his opinion to suit the electorate on every issue, but not his European Healthcare systen.

He's a man of principles!

Posted by: Y-not at October 13, 2011 05:02 PM (5H6zj)

I know, *sighs*

Posted by: FireHorse at October 13, 2011 05:02 PM (gyHyY)

+1

>>>Well, too bad, because he no longer holds that position. 

But he might be willing to change again if you'll vote for him!!!

basically if you wont come out and vote against Obama by picking the alternative and make me suffer 4 more years of him, well to be frank then fuck you and your sense of idelogical purity

Posted by: Team Mitt's AuthorLMendez (Ban k1rwm) at October 13, 2011 04:59 PM (yAor6)

Telling the base 'fuck you' doesn't prevent Obama's second term.  In spite of the fact that Mitt could split the party in our little hypothetical scenario, you still want him to be the nominee even though he's a guaranteed loss in that situation.  If priority 1 was getting rid of Obama, you would switch to a more acceptable candidate.  But it isn't.  It's get Mitt elected or damn the consequences.

THAT'S purity.

What if I'm not wearing underwear?

>>>Well, too bad, because he no longer holds that position.

But he might be willing to change again if you'll vote for him!!!

Posted by: Ben at October 13, 2011 05:04 PM (wuv1c)

If you don't like Romney's stated position on something just check 8 months before or in 8 months.  He'll probably have the position you like then.

>>>I'm not a romney fan but I'd damn sure vote for him in the general against Obama.

But the point is it doesn't have to be Romney. 75% of the party wants nothing to do with him. He isn't the default candidate. He only wins if the 75% splits their vote.

Posted by: phoenixgirl at October 13, 2011 05:03 PM (eOXTH)

Red Sox starting lineup = 18 arms.  Bob Dole = 1 arm.  That's a lotta viagra right there; but given enough Brazilian Women's Volleyball pr0n, anything is possible.

Chris "where is the waffle house" Christie ...

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 13, 2011 05:07 PM (FkKjr)

Also Brady bill.

At least Mitt Romney is good on Global Warming and Energy policy.
>>>That was sarc right?

Obviously.

He's a democrat on every issue, or at the very least was a democrat on every issue until he realized he had national aspirations in the republican party

McCain II: Romney Boogaloo

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at October 13, 2011 05:02 PM (8y9MW)

we don't always agree, but i respect that you actually find out about these people yourself instead of accepting the narrative the canidates want you to believe...

i wish more people here would do that.

What if I'm not wearing underwear?

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 13, 2011 05:05 PM (UTq/I)

I am wearing clown shoes tho!  and warpaint.

Posted by: tangonine at October 13, 2011 04:43 PM (x3YFz)

I have two dogs so that's a full ticket. They're definitely more conservative than Mitt too.

Posted by: Soothsayer at October 13, 2011 05:07 PM (sqkOB)

Union shill....

(one day i will be shot, but that's ok)

Romneycare

A Massachussetts program that I'm really really beginning not to give the slightest shit about.  It's a tenth amendment issue and if deep blue Mass wanted it, fine with me.  I don't like the program, but it will never affect me.

Now if Romney wants to implement it nationwide, that's a whole different universe.  But I've no indication he either wants to, or could even if he did.

Posted by: phoenixgirl at October 13, 2011 05:08 PM (eOXTH)

At least we haven't digressed yet to golf jokes (putter, ball washing, et al infinitum).

Posted by: cherry π at October 13, 2011 05:10 PM (OhYCU)

meh.  She got rid of herself.

Posted by: Yogi Berra at October 13, 2011 05:12 PM (IhHdM)

As has been stated, you could run the creepy Burger King mascot against Obama and there'd be a 90% turnout on the (R) side this election.  The hate for SCOAMF will get everyone to the polls.

Posted by: Reggie1971 at October 13, 2011 05:10 PM (b68Df)

****   ****
  IIII_  _IIII

Posted by: Buzzsaw at October 13, 2011 05:07 PM (tf9Ne)

It's much easier to hide a sales tax increase.  It's also fairly easy to convert it to a VAT.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at October 13, 2011 05:11 PM (l9zgN)

i'll drink it right down as soon as you take your dose of willfull ignorance.

****   ****
 IIII_  _IIII

(That's up twinkles, by the way.)

Posted by: supercore23 at October 13, 2011 05:13 PM (bwV72)

makes you want to play van halen in the background....

Iran is not a threat!!!!!

298 Romney is a liberal pretending to be a conservative

Cain is a self-promoting opportunist pretending to be a conservative

Perry is a former Aggie opportunist pretending to be a conservative

Newt is a conservative who talks Good, but a loose-dicked egomaniac

So its Newt. Okay, lets get to work. I really don't care if a man likes pussy as long as he conserves the Constitution. As a matter of fact I love both the Constitution and pussy. Add cold beer to the list and you have a trifecta. The great thing about Newt is he is a master at turning tables and filleting fish while chewing gum. Imagine the horror in Sparky's heart when he realizes he has to debate Newt sans Teleprompter on live TEEVEE?

AGAIN!  As was written in Ace's post about what congressman Ryan said about Cain's 9-9-9 plan.  It's a good STARTING POINT to discuss how to reform fed taxation.  I'm quite sure Cain realizes this also. 

Remember.  Cain is the only one who's presented any kind of solution to the tax burden that's killing this economy.  Where's Mitt's plan?  Where's Perry's plan?  Where's Gingrich's plan?

 Now if Romney wants to implement it nationwide, that's a whole different universe.  But I've no indication he either wants to, or could even if he did.

The beauty of that is the he doesn't have to implement it nationwide. All he has to do is nothing and the program implements itself, only it's called Obamacare. Sure, he says he'll issue an executive order on day one exempting every person and business from it, but what I haven't heard him say is that he'd have the program repealed.

The system that's been in place for the last eighty years is fundamentally flawed. We don't need a guy who will try to fix it, who will run on "putting the government back to work for the people," or whatever those bs slogans are, we need someone who will begin the long process of dismantling it. I don't think Mittens is that guy.

Posted by: nevergiveup at October 13, 2011 05:16 PM (i6RpT)

yes, everyone knows that.  We're all family, and at the end of the day (more accurately: in November 2012), we'll bring the hate to SCOAMF.  Trust me.

298 Romney is a liberal pretending to be a conservative

Cain is a self-promoting opportunist pretending to be a conservative

Perry is a former Aggie opportunist pretending to be a conservative

Newt is a conservative who talks Good, but a loose-dicked egomaniac

So its Newt. Okay, lets get to work. I really don't care if a man likes pussy as long as he conserves the Constitution. As a matter of fact I love both the Constitution and pussy. Add cold beer to the list and you have a trifecta. The great thing about Newt is he is a master at turning tables and filleting fish while chewing gum. Imagine the horror in Sparky's heart when he realizes he has to debate Newt sans Teleprompter on live TEEVEE?

Posted by: Sub-Tard at October 13, 2011 05:17 PM (0M3AQ)

yeah.  he sat on a couch with Pelosi spouting shit about global warming.  He was dead to me from that point forward.

 but what I haven't heard him say is that he'd have the program repealed.

Eh, he says that.  He even said that in the last debate.  "I'd have it repealed on day 2"  or something like that.  The thing is,  I don't believe his lying ass.  If he really wanted to repeal it why bullshit with the "I'll issue waivers to everyone on Day One."  Why not just lead in with that repeal is the goal?  Well you know besides what he actually says is "Repeal and Replace."  He also only seems to bring up repealing it when he's pressed heavily on it so it comes across to me as definitely one of the first campaign promises he'll break.

Posted by: polynikes - Texan for Romney at October 13, 2011 05:23 PM (i9cTu)

Is that the "59-point" plan?  could he have not just found another point?  or split one point into two and made it an even 60? 

59 points?  seriously.

"A plan is a list of things that aren't going to happen."

When you have a 59-point plan, well... that's just severe BS.

Yeah, see.....this is why I hate hearing that shit about how "anyone could beat Obama".

It's bullshit.....it's a trap. Just 'anyone' can not beat Obama. That is what the Obama team wants us to think.

Instead of flaming each other.....we should be figuring out what TeamObama will be using against the top candidates in the running, if they were the nominee next year.

Romney - tons of fertile ground there to demoralize the base with.

Cain - not as much, but there is still a lot. He wants to 'tax the poor'. And don't you think there are some disgruntled ex-employees out there?

Gingrich - quitter quitter, they forced him to quit in 98 and they will use it.

Perry - what? what will the left tear him up about? Not the things that conservatives are ripping him with.....they'll like those things.

298 Romney is a liberal pretending to be a conservative

Cain is a self-promoting opportunist pretending to be a conservative

Perry is a former Aggie opportunist pretending to be a conservative

Newt is a conservative who talks Good, but a loose-dicked egomaniac

So its Newt. Okay, lets get to work. I really don't care if a man likes pussy as long as he conserves the Constitution. As a matter of fact I love both the Constitution and pussy. Add cold beer to the list and you have a trifecta. The great thing about Newt is he is a master at turning tables and filleting fish while chewing gum. Imagine the horror in Sparky's heart when he realizes he has to debate Newt sans Teleprompter on live TEEVEE?

Posted by: Sub-Tard at October 13, 2011 05:17 PM (0M3AQ)

if only i could trust him, global warming was bad, but Dede Scofflaw broke that camels back.

Posted by: lu at October 13, 2011 05:24 PM (pLTLS)

What's wrong with Cain?  We all acknowledge the 999 plan is probably just a jumping off point, but beyond that, which of his policies are you so uncomfortable with?

Posted by: © Sponge at October 13, 2011 05:25 PM (UK9cE)

I smiled.

I don't trust Cain...yet. Plus he has been racking up the frequent flyer points on his race card when he went after Perry.

Still sticking with Texas Surplus Economy Perry x 17 million dollars.

Posted by: Beefy Meatball at October 13, 2011 05:27 PM (yn6XZ)

Up twinkle! 

What's wrong with Cain? We all acknowledge the 999 plan is probably just a jumping off point, but beyond that, which of his policies are you so uncomfortable with?

Posted by: tangonine at October 13, 2011 05:28 PM (x3YFz)

He has other policies?

Remember.  Cain is the only one who's presented any kind of solution to the tax burden that's killing this economy.  Where's Mitt's plan?  Where's Perry's plan?  Where's Gingrich's plan?

I'm sure Mitt's is buried somewhere in the 59-point plan of his. Perry's? Maybe in his book. Newt's? In some think-tank newsletter. Politicians know it is easier to attack the other candidate/party if you refuse to put something on the table.

Related, someone on Weasel Zippers claims to have called Ryan's office and asked whether Ryan specifically supports the 9-9-9 plan. The answer was "no". Unsure whether that's true or not.

I'm sure Romney's detractors would think it to be Obamacare-light. 

What it would almost certainly be is a very modest proposal acceptable to a GOP Congress and conservatives.  Something without individual mandates and starkly different that Obamacare.  But it would be something.  Also, when Romney says "replace" after he says "repeal", he is doing so in anticipation of the general election debate so as to avoid the label of "do-nothing".  He's thinking ahead to a back forth between Obama and himself.  This is one of the reasons I support the guy.

He was pretty clear at the debate this week that he'd repeal and replace. 

This is the first I've heard of him saying he'd replace it. He must have run some focus groups to see what sounded good.

He's a good government Republican, not a small government conservative, and history shows that good government Republicans support a brand of government that's a little smaller and less intrusive than what the Democrats want.

I don't trust Cain...yet. Plus he has been racking up the frequent flyer points on his race card when he went after Perry.

Still sticking with Texas Surplus Economy Perry x 17 million dollars.

Posted by: Max Power at October 13, 2011 05:29 PM (q177U)

He's not a career politician, ergo I trust him more than any of the others, if just on principle.

Cain's 9-9-9 plan is a good starting point. I think the status quo is a better starting point.

My personal status quo is earning in 15% tax bracket and living in an 8% sales tax jurisdiction. Let's also say that a pizza goes for $10. I have to earn $12.71 to buy a pizza.

If 9-9-9 were in effect, how much would I have to earn to buy a pizza?

Posted by: steevy at October 13, 2011 05:31 PM (fyOgS)

and Perry and Romney know more about foreign policy because...?

Posted by: nevergiveup at October 13, 2011 05:29 PM (i6RpT)

well, there's that whole illegal immigration thing, committed conservs have long memories.

>>>Perry - what? what will the left tear him up about? Not the things that conservatives are ripping him with.....they'll like those things.

What is Obama going to run to the right of Perry on Immigration?

Is Barack Obama going to say that the government has no place administering vaccines?

The things that hurt Perry in the generals will be non-issues in the generals.

For a man with a record as long as his, he has very very few skeletons or major problems.

This is the first I've heard of him saying he'd replace it. He must have run some focus groups to see what sounded good.

Like I said, he's said it before because this debate wasn't the first time I've heard him say it.  But he only says it when pressed heavily on it.

yeah.  he sat on a couch with Pelosi spouting shit about global warming.  He was dead to me from that point forward.

Posted by: tangonine at October 13, 2011 05:21 PM (x3YFz)

Ditto

Posted by: lu at October 13, 2011 05:31 PM (pLTLS)

He's never held office.  In my book, that's a plus.  And saying he "plays the race card" is disingenuous to the extreme.  He asked about a rock.  Hell, I'd have asked about the rock, am I playing the race card?

>>>you need independents to win the general election and Perry has looked so bad in the debates that he is close to toast. Not with us "conservatives" but with the public at large.

the public at large isn't watching the debates. Heck 6 million people tuned into the last Fox debate.

Thems small potatoes. It's just die hards like us watching them.

Perry will do fine in a debate with SCOAMF when it's one on one. If George Bush could outdebate McCain, Gore and Kerry, then Perry will do fine with SCOAMF.

Besides, debates aren't the be all end all. Records and campaigning matter a whole lot.

Obama didn't really beat McCain in the 2008 debates but he ran a much better campaign, his helpers in the media overlooked his record volunatarily. Good luck overlooking it this time. Even if the media tries they can't hide it. We're living his record right now.

Perry is a good candidate. Perry can beat Obama. Perry is far more conservative than Mitt Romney.

Perry is far more conservative than Mitt Romney.

Posted by: Ben(team Perry) at October 13, 2011 05:35 PM (tEGzl)

On this, we agree.

>>>Well,Romney probably does because he has been running for president for 6 years or so.Did you read the rest?I don't think it matters that much.As for him not holding elected office,that's a bad thing Lacey?Really??

It's not his lack of public office experience that worries me. It's his lack of campaign experience. Campaigns are tough. Rreally tough. And he has no real experience. He has show himself to be gaffe prone. He's gotten a free pass from the media thus far. I don't think he'll hold up in first place for another month anyway.

Posted by: Unblinking tree rat of personal destruction at October 13, 2011 05:33 PM (OlN4e)

that's a good sock name, i'm just wondering who is the real instigator of said politics of personal destruction.

Tardasil anyone?

||||\  /||||

Posted by: DaveA at October 13, 2011 05:32 PM (0gVY6)

I'm really torn on gridlock.  Normally with a dem in the WH I'm a fan of it.  But we have a tyrant wannabe there now and a host of minions that want the constitution burned.  There's no telling what damage he'll manage to do to this nation by 2013.

>>>That immigration stance of Perry's seems to have deflated his support, yet the AGW and RomneyCare issues haven't touched Mittens numbers. Hmmmm

The Frum wing, including many of the conservative media have solidified around Romney.

Now it's up to us, the other 70% to solidify around someone.(i'd say 75% but 5% goes to Paul no matter what)

It's looking like Cain or Perry. I simply am saying that Perry is the better of the two.

>>>A damn national sales tax could very well be the foot in the door for a future Liberal government to get a VAT implemented.

Indeed. 9-9-9 is great if conservative republicans control the house, senate and whitehouse forever. Otherwise we'd just be implementing a new tax that the democrats could never get through on their own.

>>On the point consumers don't notice sales or VAT taxes. How much do they notice their withholding in the current system?

good point but I think people may notice the fact that their one dollar eggs are now a dollar twenty five, more so than they ever look at the taxes on their payroll check stub

>>As always, They're fucking idiots.

Andrew Carnegie's Revenge!

Posted by: Buzzsaw at October 13, 2011 05:40 PM (tf9Ne)

Trust me.  They're starting to notice now.

413...The things that hurt Perry in the generals primaries will be non-issues in the generals.

For a man with a record as long as his, he has very very few skeletons or major problems.

Ben,

I took the liberty of fixing that for you. .....And yeah, Perry is the guy who could give us a landslide. Unlike any of the others.

That thing about Romney's Mormonism being used against him in the general? It will, of course. ....But I also can't help but wonder what was behind that Reverend Jeffress thing, calling Mormon religion a "cult". ....Jeffress is a Baptist preacher. So is Herman Cain....and so is Mike Huckabee.  

Guy, Rick Perry the best Non-Romney candidate in the race.

I could prefer even the Mitt to Crony Capitalist, Open Borders, Can't Talk in Public Perry.  Sorry, right now its Cain for me.

And surely you didn't mean to call me Guy? 

why is Bachmann nuts?

please spare the insults and buffoonery

logic and reason please.

talk me off the ledge, i'm listening...

steevy. I can relate. I'm simply trying to point out that Cain has a lot of issues that haven't been discussed or the focus of the media because he's been a second banana for most of the race.

Think of what happened to Perry when he got in. Those first two debates were nothing but questions like, "Rick Perry is awful, you're thought Mr.Santorum?"

Let's see how Cain can weather that storm, before we all jump aboard his bandwagon.

The simply fact is that the field is set, Perry and Romney have the money, support and infrastructure for the long haul.

I would much much prefer Perry. And if we handicap Perry by splitting out vote between the also rans in the early primary states then we'll guarantee that Perry will be running from behind in the later primary states(or as I like to call them, the other 46 states).

It happened in 2008 and we ended up with McCain. By the time we realized McCain might actually win it was too late because we were splitting our votes between Mitt and Huckabee. I just want to avoid that.

Posted by: lu at October 13, 2011 05:24 PM (pLTLS) "

It's patently retarded we are sitting here talking about Perry who told me and all others with common sense that I didn't have a heart if I didn't support subsidizing illegal immigration.  It is patently retarded that we are talking about Mitt flip flop Romney who helped pass the forerunner to Obamacare.  I will take any and I mean any of them over Obama.  Let them fight it out and if Cain wins, get out there and volunteer or help him with structure instead of running your mouth about how he can't win.  That's the oppositions job!

Ben,

I took the liberty of fixing that for you. .....And yeah, Perry is the guy who could give us a landslide. Unlike any of the others.

thanks. I've decided in the past few days to go all out. I'm not sitting back and waiting for a repeat of 2008 when we have a candidate that 75 percent of our party isn't enthusiastic about.

And while Cain is likeable, people know nothing about him. He has face absolutely no scrutiny from the media or other republicans at the debates. We literally know nothing about the guy except he hasn't held office, he couldn't win a primary in Georgia(his home state), something about pizzas, he was in the private sector and 9-9-9. It's not enough for me to walk away from Perry who has an established record and who has been vetted by everyone, even Karl Rove when he ran KBH against Perry in the last governors race.

So i've been typing fast and not proofreading. Thanks for the correction!

^{But the point is it doesn't have to be Romney. 75% of the party wants nothing to do with him. He isn't the default candidate. He only wins if the 75% splits their vote.}

^{Posted by: Ben at October 13, 2011 05:07 PM (wuv1c)}

You do realize this is not a two way race right now. That 75% "against" him is people that prefer another candidate now. Once the other candidates start falling out, his vote percentage and the percentage of the other candidates starts to rise unitl it is left to 2 candidates, then one will get about 60-75 percent.

From the 2008 California Primary, McCain 36%, Romney 31%, Huckabee 13.5%, Ron Paul! 3.2%. Primary held 1/29.

From the 2008 Pennsylvannia Primary, McCain 73%, Huckabee 11%, Ron Paul! 16%. Primary held 4/22

Did the enthusiasm for McCain double in three months? No. Did the support for Ron Paul! quintuple in 3 months? No. Their vote totals went up because others dropped out. When the Bachmans, Gingrichs, and other secondary candidates drop out, then their supporters will move to one of the remaining 3. That is when we find out who is the second choice of the party faithful, and that is who will get the nomination. Right now, that appears to be Romney, Cain or Perry. But there is always room for an implosion like Rudy in 08.

*your not you're

sighh

His one weakness, immigration, is really not what people make it out to be, if you study his true position.

Yeah, it's worse, including support for amnesty.  He's said the same 'back of the line' stuff that Juan McCain did.

I figured out with George Bush that when Texas is doing awesome, its because Texas is awesome, not because its governor is.  Won't be fooled again.

Posted by: lu at October 13, 2011 05:39 PM (pLTLS)

Well, his experience is in the private sector where he's done exceedingly well.  To say that I don't think experience matters sort of colors your "race bait" comment, and illuminates your hate for him based on emotion and not facts.  I know you hate me, and you'd piss yourself before you actually had an honest debate, so we're done here.  have fun 2-letter name person.

@3: "Yes, but what about his mythical "black walnut ice cream""

Not to worry, our Illustrious President was kind enough to share some of his with me!

Posted by: Emperor of Icecream at October 13, 2011 05:57 PM (epBek)

me and my oranges do what we can.

Ben,

Cain won't get the same intensity of 'vetting' that Perry has been getting. ....No one want's to be seen as a racist or 'beating up on the charming black guy'. So it will be a miracle if he gets the same vetting.

The real dirt on Cain will not come out unless he gets the nomination.

Then, we will hear from disgruntled ex-employees, poor people who don't want their spending money taxed at nearly 10%. ---"My baby's diapers now cost almost a dollar more!".....and lord only knows what else is in his background that we don't know about now....that's when it will come out.

>>From the 2008 California Primary, McCain 36%, Romney 31%, Huckabee 13.5%, Ron Paul! 3.2%. Primary held 1/29.

If Huckabee drops out. Romney beats McCain.

My point is that I don't think Cain can go for the long haul. He's never had a successful campaign before. And let's not pretend not having experience campaigning is some plus. It's not. It's a craft that takes time to perfect. He will implode. I simply hope it's before the first 6 primaries and not after, because by that time he will have done his damage to any other potential Not-Romney candidate, in this case Perry.

Guy, Rick Perry the best Non-Romney candidate in the race.

I could prefer even the Mitt to Crony Capitalist, Open Borders, Can't Talk in Public Perry. Sorry, right now its Cain for me.

And surely you didn't mean to call me Guy?

Posted by: Emperor of Icecream at October 13, 2011 05:45 PM (epBek)

If you think Mitt is better on the borders and immigration than Perry then you're a dumbass.  What you can say is that Mitt is better on in-state tuition for Illegals that the Federal government isn't doing anything about than Perry

Of course I think that's just because he doesn't want his lawncare crew to have college degrees.

And Perry can talk in public just fine.  It seems to be that his problem is speaking in a debate where they are only allowed a 30 second - 1 minute answers which is an area that Romney is very good at because he's been practicing it for the last 6 years.  Though if you can actually find out anything substantial during those answers you are probably high.

>>>Yeah, it's worse, including support for amnesty.  He's said the same 'back of the line' stuff that Juan McCain did. figured out with George Bush that when Texas is doing awesome, its because Texas is awesome, not because its governor is.  Won't be fooled again.

And what exactly is Cain's record or opinion on immigration? I'll be interested to know if any of the companies he's worked for or he himself has hired illegal workers. I'm guessing we'll find out should he get the nomination.

There is a lot we'll find out after he gets the nomination.

Has he ever shipped jobs overseas? Has he ever laid people off?

Not that those things matter too much to me, all businesses do, but they will matter to some of the voting public come general election time in a down economy.

I like Cain. Not a damn one of them is anywhere near perfect, and I have concerns about him in office. But I would totally and happily vote for him and the guy is a stand up conservative.

If anyone thinks nominating Cain is nuts, all I can say is, you didn't like the illiterate hillbilly cowboy we suggested, so now it's the black pizza dude. If you prefer, we can go back to the tardasil chick. Or Paul. Or Gingrich. Or just take solace in that at least it's not Palin.

But fuck Romney.

I'm flexible. I'm willing to compromise on candidates. I'm not that picky.

Anyone but Obama (except Romney).

Posted by: CoolCzech at October 13, 2011 05:59 PM (niZvt)

Let's be realistic.  the 999 bit is good for about a week.  It doesn't pass the reality of politics, and honestly, if I was a marxist hippie I'd be all over it because one day they'll control congress and 999 will become 151515/202020 etc. 

In a world of rational people, 999 makes sense.  We don't live in that world.  But it's a great starting point to open debate on killing the IRS and putting forth a flat tax proposal.

Cain didn't have the benefit of having 200,000 people worming through his 999 idea before he proposed it.  Now, they have.  It is what it is.  Have you NEVER had what you thought was a good idea only to realize later... not so much?  I'll be watching to see if he adjusts.  He should.

Results from Rasmussen poll released today of likely GOP primary voters: Herman Cain and Mitt Romney (29 percent), Newt Gingrich (10 percent), Rick Perry (9 percent), Ron Paul (5 percent), Michele Bachmann (4 percent), Rick Santorum and Jon Huntsman (2 percent). 

Rick Crony can't even beat out Newt Gingrich.  Any ABR folks who think the Cainiacs should jump on the Perry bandwagon, I mean the Perry small classical ensemble cart, I mean the Perry soloist scooter, are delusional.  9%.  That's Cain's tax plan, not a respectable polling number for an actual candidate.

If the small fringe of remaining Perry supporters insist on throwing this thing to Romney, don't blame us.

Posted by: lu at October 13, 2011 06:03 PM (pLTLS)

weren't you the one calling me all sorts of names the other night for being uncivil?  check yourself before you wreck yourself 2-letter name person.

Passing a national sales tax would be like passing a universal healthcare program in a state. The liberals would just take it and run with it once they are in power. oh wait.

Cain is a likable guy. Heck most conservative radio hosts are likable guys. That's why they are on the radio. People like to hear them talk, value their opinion, and enjoy their pleasant attitude and outlook.

However, my issue is that no one seems to know anything about him. He's all surface and no depth.

9-9-9. Fine. What else? Foreign policy? Domestic Policy? Supreme Court issues? Does he have anything in his past that might come back to bite him?

We simply don't know yet.

Where as with Perry, like Romney, his flaws are well know, well vetted and baked into the cake. That's part of the reason Cain is so appealing right now, no one knows his flaws.

Posted by: lu at October 13, 2011 06:01 PM (pLTLS)

for the record, I don't read the wapo, so I can't be accused of taking their side.  If they, in fact, took my side, well, that's on them.  And you seem to be the one need a Prozac refill.  Or less vodka.  Or both.

If you think Mitt is better on the borders and immigration than Perry then you're a dumbass. 

Go tell it to the dumbasses at Numbers USA, the biggest and best conservative immigration group.  They give Romney and Bachmann the best grades and give Perry a D-.

Don't blame me for your sucky candidate who's getting outpolled by Newt Gingrich.

And Perry can talk in public just fine.  It seems to be that his problem is speaking in a debate

Good thing we don't do debates in the general elections then.  Oh, wait . . .

Rick Crony can't even beat out Newt Gingrich.  Any ABR folks who think the Cainiacs should jump on the Perry bandwagon, I mean the Perry small classical ensemble cart, I mean the Perry soloist scooter, are delusional.  9%.  That's Cain's tax plan, not a respectable polling number for an actual candidate.

I'll make you a bet. Cain wasn't leading the polls 3 weeks ago and he won't be leading 3 weeks from now.

Posted by: H. Cain at October 13, 2011 06:10 PM (nvOW+)

It's a good starting point.

Where as with Perry, like Romney, his flaws are well know, well vetted and baked into the cake. That's part of the reason Cain is so appealing right now, no one knows his flaws.

So your rousing defense of 4th Place Perry is 'at least we KNOW he sucks?' Count me out.

Also, I wouldn't count on all the flaws being out yet.  We knew that Obama was a green-jobs crony capitalist too, but that didn't mean that Solyndra wasn't a scandal when it broke.

Posted by: lu at October 13, 2011 06:10 PM (pLTLS)

I get along with everyone.  Except you.  And that's awesome.

If Cain wants to first repeal the amendment authorizing the income tax, and THEN talk to me about a sales tax, I'll listen. But this "transition" plan is utter bullshit. Pass it, and I guarantee - we ALL know this is true - that within 10 years, 9-9-9 will morph into 20-20-20.

Think of it this way.

1) 9-9-9 is still better right now than what we have right now, and it might be fun for a bit.

2) Yes, 9-9-9 will morph into 20-20-20 in exactly the same circumstances in which 30% or whatever morphs into 70%. That's actually Cain's argument I think, and I think it's not the best argument to make, but it's basically true. Under the status quo just the same as this plan, tax rates are temporary. Republicans will cut them one year, democrats jack them the next, etc. etc. etc.

3) The plan will probably, almost certainly, never pass anyway. There will be a bill, and a media blitz, and then it will fail and he'll move on to something more realistic.

Most States already have a Sales Tax.....it's about 8% where I live. Plus we have a state Income Tax too.

I would be paying a combined Sales Tax of 17% on everything.

This 999 plan is a load of bent poles. ....People need to start thinking about what it will do to an already struggling economy, nationwide....and what a job killer it would be when businesses start laying off even more people, because people can't afford to buy things.

I'll make you a bet. Cain wasn't leading the polls 3 weeks ago and he won't be leading 3 weeks from now.

What's your track record on political predictions?  When Perry got in, did you predict he'd go from leading to 4th place, not even pulling 10%?

>>don't know maybe a guy who calls himself-"Beefy Meatballs" thinks Herman Cain can pass 9-9-9 like a kidney stone and do it all by himself-without the Senate....

it's going to go by the wayside as does every major tax related promise in the primaries save Reagan in the 1980s.

If it's being used as a starting point for a discussion, fine.  No sales tax. Ever. End of discussion.

People here are smart enough to know that if we add a sales tax it will simply go up along with income taxes when dems get in office.

Also, we'll be in a position where Obama is running adds saying Cain's sales tax will raise taxes on the poor and middle class, and technically he'll be right.

Personally I want every one to pay into it, especially the 47 percent who don't pay, but that's not a winning slogan when we have 9% unemployment and 14%real unemployment.

What's your track record on political predictions?  When Perry got in, did you predict he'd go from leading to 4th place, not even pulling 10%?

So, I'll take that as a no. You wouldn't bet that cain will be leading in three weeks.

I would be paying a combined Sales Tax of 17% on everything.

This 999 plan is a load of bent poles. ....People need to start thinking about what it will do to an already struggling economy, nationwide....and what a job killer it would be when businesses start laying off even more people, because people can't afford to buy things.

yeah, its not a 9% sales tax plan.  Its a 9-9-9 plan.  Sales tax will go up but prices will drop, because the 30% corporate income tax charge will be reduced.  Businesses won't lay off because all of a sudden they're more profitable with the lower income tax--that means more jobs, not less.

Look, I don't think the plan will pass, and I'm pretty sure Cain knows that.  But your criticisms are dumb.

Most States already have a Sales Tax.....it's about 8% where I live. Plus we have a state Income Tax too.

I would be paying a combined Sales Tax of 17% on everything.

This 999 plan is a load of bent poles. ....People need to start thinking about what it will do to an already struggling economy, nationwide....and what a job killer it would be when businesses start laying off even more people, because people can't afford to buy things.

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 13, 2011 06:13 PM (AtOcq)

It's a mess.  States have the right to their income/sales taxes, but your federal tax is the big pole in your tent of bent poles.  I don't know about you, but my federal income tax + medicare + fica is killing my paycheck.  I'm unfortunate enough to earn just enough to pay a boatload and qualify for nothing in credits.

Sure, for the 70-year old on social security, who pays no income tax, 999 would suck.  But ANY plan is going to hurt someone somewhere.  You can't make un-fair fair without kicking the people benefiting from the un-fair side in the cajones.

And you didn't answer the Second question-how is Herman Cain going to make sure it all stays at-

9-9-9?

Put it in the Constitution?

Herman Cain has answered that question. I don't remember who was interviewing him. He said basically, he can't control what other future administrations do, but he would keep it at 9, and if you don't want it higher, don't elect people who will raise it.

Posted by: steevy at October 13, 2011 06:18 PM (fyOgS)

I'll buy the pudding cups!

Posted by: SantaRosaStan, twinkling down at October 13, 2011 04:37 PM (UqKQV)

I keep saying this and saying this, but some people still keep pushing Romney. You all have got to educate yourself about what can be whispered about Mormons. Worse, you are going to put a lot of very conservative Republicans in a very, very tough spot because they will have to support him if he is the nominee but such support will be near-deadly poison for his base. That's why I keep saying Romney is going to kill the down-ticket vote. With Romney at the top there is no fucking way we are going to increase conservatives in the House and Senate. So drop the pipe dream that we can keep him in line.

I know for a fact I'd never want Rush anywhere near office--years and years of soundbites to twist, never having to take a punch (just mute them)? Remember how bad they jumped on him around the purchase of the Rams? Why in the hell would we wanna nominate a mini-Limbaugh? Great for motivating the base, great for kicking around ideas--death blow if you want to win independents.

Oh, and numbers USA is about is reputable as Wiki.

A lot more reputable than you and the other Perry voters(all 9% of you), in other words.

Only someone who was for open borders would slam Numbers USA like that.  Its like a 'conservative' slamming the NRA or GOA on gun control.

Because I'm "authentic" and not "magic" I will, be able to repeal the minimum wage, where no one else could.

That's different than Perry claiming he will part the seas reform entitlements?

So what. At least he's pushing for it. It would be awesome. More power to them for raising the issue.

Different than anyone saying they'll cut the Dept. of Education?

Or Mitt claiming he'll increase subsidies for ethanol... oh wait, that's totally different because he'll actually do that. Mitt doesn't even try to hide it.

What's your track record on political predictions?  When Perry got in, did you predict he'd go from leading to 4th place, not even pulling 10%?

So, I'll take that as a no. You wouldn't bet that cain will be leading in three weeks.

I'll take that as a 'no.'  You didn't predict that Perry would crater, so your track record on predictions sucks.

I'll be happy to bet you that Cain will still be leading Perry in 3 weeks, btw.

Immigration is an incredibly complex issue.

No, it isn't.  People only say that when they're squishes or shilling for squishes.

Mitt Romney thinks healthcare is an incredibly complex issue.

Mitt Romney thinks entitlement reform is an incredibly complex issue.

Rick Perry thinks immigration is an incredibly complex issue.

Capisce?

We elected Carter and Obama.....

Oh, I know.

And Cain probably does too.

But the point is the point - that's the thing about Cain, he keeps thing simple.

Democracy is the belief that the people know what they want, and deserve to get it, good and hard.

Anyway - there's no fucking system in the world that would prevent future Americans from creating higher taxes if they all wanted to create higher taxes.

In the same sense Cain has no plan to stop a future 20-20-20, neither do you. If Cain is at all even able to attempt 9-9-9, even if we elect Gary Johnson, there is nothing in the status quo that prevents a future government from going to 20-20-20 directly, as their own plan. They don't need to pass 9-9-9 as a step to get there.

Although, again I know. I do agree that 9-9-9, or any form that sets precedent for combining sales taxes with income taxes, will make much higher taxation rates much more feasible politicallly, probably over a decade or two. I'm not a huge fan of the plan.

I meant to #536, why do you think Romney or Cain would be better on immigration? And if it's so easy to seal the border, why are there basically no politicians who have done it on either side?

Cain has supported a fence and E-verify, and opposed amnesty.  So has Romney, and he has actual actions to back it up when he was Governor.  Romney sucks for other reasons, sure, and Cain is unvetted, yadda yadda yadda, but none of that changes the fact that your governor sucks squish on immigration and your defense of his immigration record sucks squish too.

Vic,

Numbers USA and CIS are the gold standards on immigration.   Both think Perry bites on the immigration issue. 

You can either deal or you can form your own Occupy Numbers USA group and shrilly demand that reality adjust to suit you.

Can just see it now. Herman Haagen Dazs Black Walnut Cain vs. Barack Ben & Jerry's Schweddy Balls Obama.

_{^{If Huckabee drops out. Romney beats McCain.}}

_{^{My point is that I don't think Cain can go for the long haul. He's never had a successful campaign before. And let's not pretend not having experience campaigning is some plus. It's not. It's a craft that takes time to perfect. He will implode. I simply hope it's before the first 6 primaries and not after, because by that time he will have done his damage to any other potential Not-Romney candidate, in this case Perry.}}

_{^{Posted by: Ben(team Perry) at October 13, 2011 05:59 PM (tEGzl)}}

Have to disagree with Romney beating McCain if Huck had dropped out. I think that of all the candidates running in 08, McCain was probably the second choice of most of them. So when Fred, Rudy, and the others starting dropping out, their supporters went to McCain. If Huck had dropped out earlier, most of his support would have probably been split between Mittens and Meghan's daddy. What that split would have been is anyone's guess, but I don't think it would have been 90-10 to Mittens, maybe 60-40, but by that point, Juan had taken a large lead and would have been hard to beat.

I agree with you on the campaigns and Cain being able to be in it for the long haul. McCain was experienced in Presidential campaigns, W. Bush was experienced in Presidential campaigns, "Poppy" Bush was experienced in Presidential campaigns, Reagan had the experience, as did Dole. These campaigns are a marathon, not a sprint, and the candidates that understand this are the ones that will be successful. Romney has the experience, and the fundraising base. Perry doesn't have the experience, but has the fundraising base. Cain has neither. I like Herman Cain, but think he may be this election's Howard Dean, the candidate out of nowhere that pops up, but doesn't have the funds to stay on top, then disappears by the middle of February.

Romney has spent the last 4+ years traveling the country and meeting with local GOP activists. This means a lot. These are the people that will come out and volunteer and make phone calls. Some of the locals that may be for one of the others remembers Mitt coming to their local convention and speaking to them in a non Presidential election year. Is this a negative for the other candidates, no, but it is a positive for Romney. That is why his support stays the same while others go up and down.

That is why I hate all of this doom and gloom a year before the general election, and at least 2 months from the first ballot being cast. The whole process needs to be slowed down to let the candidates time to craft their message. They will all be better candidates for it.

Is Romney the perfect candidate, no. Is Perry, no. Cain, no. But one of them will in all probability be the nominee. Will I support which one is the nominee, hell yes. At this point I would vote for the kittens that lost their Mittens, Katy Perry, or even the pro wrestler Kain. That is how much I hate the SCOAMF.

It seems to me that the best thing we can do is get the most conservative leaders in place that we can

Duh.  On immigration, that isn't Rick Perry.

Posted by: SantaRosaStan, twinkling down at October 13, 2011 04:37 PM (UqKQV)

I keep saying this and saying this, but some people still keep pushing Romney. You all have got to educate yourself about what can be whispered about Mormons.

---------

Yup. I keep saying this too. ....And it won't just be whispered. They will be re-running episodes of 'Sister Wives' on Discovery, 'Big Love' on HBO and re-running that Mormon masacre movie every day.

The liberal pundits will be doing 'in depth' coverage of their 'concerns' about the way that Mormons combine their religion with business. .....It will be nauseating and relentless.  Conservatives will want to curl up in fetal position.

I have seen Numbers USA trashed by a lot of conservative sites over the years.

Name one.  Daily Kos doesn't count.

_{^{If the small fringe of remaining Perry supporters insist on throwing this thing to Romney, don't blame us.}}

_{^{Posted by: Emperor of Icecream at October 13, 2011 06:06 PM (epBek)}}

Please cease and desist from using the term "Caniac" to describe fans of Herman Cain. "Caniac" is a term that has long been used to describe fans of the 2006 Stanley Cup Champion Carolina Hurricanes.

God DAMN, I love me some Herman Cain.  He pisses off all the right people.

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at October 13, 2011 06:23 PM (27B+h)

Yo.  I gave you two pretty solid left hooks in response to you marginalizing my dying dog and insulting my wife.

Willing to call it even?

Perry is the real deal, I will stick with him to the end.

I don't know if he's the real deal or not, I don't know if he's done or not, I don't really care so long as we don't nominate Romney.

But he's still my preferance. Whatever flaws he's got, the man won me when he started off his campaign promising to make Washington DC inconsequential, and then took Social Security head on, as well as his advocation for the 10th ammendment and his history of standing up to DC as a governor.

I can't say I know he's legit, and not some oily politician blowing smoke up our asses, but I believe him. He's not perfect, I think he's squishy on immigration and some other things too, I think the vaccine mandate was wrong, I worry about how he thinks government is suppose to interact with business, that he's corporatist or crony-capitalist or whatever you may call it.

But I'm still favoring him because although I can't be certain, he has as much credibility and authenticity as anyone could possibly hope any candidate to ever  have on the 1 issue that is most critical right now, the 1 issue that has always mattered the most to me, and frankly so far as I'm concerned their only fucking issue there is or ever was that mattered (all other matters of importance being subsets of The One True Issue), the limitation of government.

for god`s sake...it`s over for perry.....can`t articulate his thoughts..then zones out with that stan laurel-esque look of pathos/confusion on his face....the cameras will be focusing on him...that look will be plastered in every media outlet 24-7...

i wanted to like him...but it ain`t happening...

Despite all the fussing over Romney, his haters still cant point to anything he'll do differently than his opponents. With the exception of 999, his platform is exactly the same as Perry and Cain's.

Will someone please tell me WTF is it with Romney supporters and bizzaro-world?

Are there 2 people named Romney in this race????

Does stuff that comes out of his own mouth not count?

Posted by: cackfinger at October 13, 2011 07:25 PM (a9mQu)

so you're just kinda Mr. Hate Everyone.  Nice.  That's really helpful.

“I support the subsidy of ethanol” is no different from any other candidate in the race? All the candidates support that?

"I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that", that is something all the candidates have in common, eh?

According to Mitt, is there any difference between him and Perry on Social Security? He seems to think so.

Or, again, does stuff Mitt Romney says not count as an accurate source of information about Mitt Romney?

Vetted? Didn't stop Obama... if anyone opposes him...

RAAAAAAACCCCCCIIIIISSSSTTTTTT!!!!!

Cackfinger, Entropy,

you guys are bringing it.  Keep it coming.

But other than those retarded jackasses, people who know Mitt will tell you that he is a solid conservative.

 Here's the thing.

What the fuck does that even mean?

Lots of people haev different thoughts about what a 'conservative' is, in canse you haven't noticed.

It's like when they said that about Kennedy or Souter or Harriet Myers.

Or when every single candidate is "like Reagan" and wants to appoint judges "like Scalia". Like Reagan how, in that you hope to be a successful politician? Like Scalia how, like another Italian? Why not "like Thomas"?

Someone like Bill Kristol has a radically different vision of what 'conservative' means than Rush Limbaugh. Was George Bush conservative?? Personally, I'd say not really! But it depends on what the hell you mean by conservative.

Personally, I'm a libertarian.

Posted by: cackfinger at October 13, 2011 07:31 PM (a9mQu)

I'm not going to tell you who you should like.  I'm a firm believer in individual liberty and freedom from government.  The candidate that comes the closest to that is my choice.  Obama is certainly at the other end of the spectrum, so we could run my neighbor's dog against him and the dog gets my vote.  But in the primaries, my vote goes to the guy who has beliefs that align the closest to mine.  simple, really, and if your beliefs lead you in another direction so be it.

"Winning", you shmuck - that is an excellent name for your hyperactive shilling though - even if you won the argument, so what?

You're argument is that all the candidates are exactly the same.

OK fine. They're all the same and it makes no difference.

So... Perry or Cain it is then. Glad we got that sorted out.

Resorting to an argument that there are no policy differences among any of the candidates. Seriously, Romney's fans amaze me.

Mark the date, if you haven't already. Mitt 2012= Obama 2008. You must vote for him to prove you're not a hater. No alternative explanation is possible.

Hi, my name is Entropy, and I have a hate problem.

I've been hating blue-blooded northeastern technocrats and liberal socialists for like 20 years now, and I'm not even sorry about it really. Fuck blue-blooded northeastern technocrats and liberal socialists.

Hi, my name is Entropy, and I have a hate problem.

Denounced. Of course.

I've been hating blue-blooded northeastern technocrats and liberal socialists for like 20 years now, and I'm not even sorry about it really. Fuck blue-blooded northeastern technocrats and liberal socialists.

Glad you concede the point there isn't any real policy differences between the three.

Well there's some more of that WINNING! type of winning that makes your moniker so perfect for you.

So vote for the one who polls best against Obama, the same one who is the most accomplished executive, the same one who is the most intelligent and the best debater of the lot

No.

Next issue. So give me all your money.

The Banksters have the 2 Top Candidates Right Now. Crony Capitalism is alive and well with Herman Cain.

http://www.tomwoods.com/cain/

Man I really don't care, it isn't worth the argument, but I so want to respond to this.

So vote for the one who polls best against Obama,

OK! Which poll, on which date? They keep changing. Different pollsters disagree. I think it turns out only 1 is important actually, and I can't just vote for whatever guy wins that one because apparently I'm suppose to participate in it real time by voting.

So... so much for the polls shit.

(This is the point where you whip out some random cherry-picked poll and go "blah blah blah aggregate blah moving average blah blah your source sucks worse! blah blah, and I do the same shit just to show you that I can, but with different polls, but you learn nothing and we waste everyone's time.)

Here's the thing about polls: IF they actually could predict the outcome of full elections, THEN they'd be even less trustworthy, because everyone who wanted to effect the outcome of the election would be trying to game the damn polls.

And regardless of whather they/you are right about that (and thus, WINNING! this argument, hardcore pwn3ed! OMG Mittens may hire you!), as you can plainly see, half of everyone believes just that. Which is why they aren't remotely worth bullshit at all.

Remember last week Perry was anally raping Mittens in the polls, with a whole pineapple, inside a cuisinart blender, getting 43% with him dropping to 11%?

The way you're hard-on for his ascendancy, I'm suprised you didn't kill yourself.

Remember the other time Herman Cain was credible as a candidate, before it turned out he wasn't, before it turned out he might be now?

Hey...

Remember when that fucker McCain polled like 11% throughout the whole goddamn primary, and everyone thought he dropped out, and then he won the fucking thing somehow!? And then slept through the fucking campaign the same way he slept through the primary, but nobody elected him just because it was his turn and he served in vietnam and he married a rich broad, so he lost Indiana?

And that's pretty mutch Mitt Romney's campaign model. And he's been polling a consistent plural minority of republicans at 20ish for 6 and half years and going. So yeah, unfortunately, your guy has a good shot at being Bob Dole 3.0.

 the same one who is the most accomplished executive,

Oh. You mean you were talking about Rick Perry?

the same one who is the most intelligent and the best debater of the lot

Wait, you're talking about Herman Cain?

Assertion monkey asserts.

Consider it asserted. Thusly.

Question: How is Cain's business tax a VAT, exactly?

It isn't.

Herman Cain's National Sales Tax is a VAT.

That would be the 2nd 9 in 9-9-9. 9% federal sales tax with collection costs pushed onto vendors.

I shudder to think what effect this scenario will have on the whole 'government's ability to regulate the internet so they can ban whatever they can't tax online' fight...

Question: How is Cain's business tax a VAT, exactly?

It isn't.

Surface treatment

Polishing

zinc plating

nickel plating

chrome plating

powder coating

e-coating

dip coating

phosphate coating

anodize

PVC powder coating

dichromate plating

decrement plating