Sunday, August 05, 2012

Harry Reid Puts Up

One of my main complaints in recent years with regard to the Democrats is their Senate Majority Leader. As I said in a posting a couple of years ago, any political party with a befuddled old Andy Gump like Harry Reid at the wheel is going to have...."issues" shall we say? So you can imagine how pleasantly surprised I was this week when the old guy started to show a little bit of long-overdue moxie. The senator from Nevada is an extremely cautious man. He says that a reliable source has informed him that Mitt Romney went for a decade without paying a dime of income tax. Given his well-earned reputation for timidity, if he's gone out on a limb to make a charge as serious as this, it must be true. Old Harry has never been the kind of pol to throw caution to the wind.

The Mitt Romney campaign has said that Harry Reid has either got to "put up or shut up". He already has. The ball is now in Romney's court. If we are to take him at his word when he tells us that he has paid what he was legally required to pay in taxes then he should prove it to the nation that he wants to lead. Senator Reid has made a pretty serious charge. Mitt has a golden opportunity here. If he really has nothing to hide he is in the position to make Reid - and the entire Democratic media machine - look really foolish. All he has to do is release his income tax returns for the last twelve years; just like his father George did during the Republican primary campaign of 1968. What the hell is he waiting for?

I'll tell you what he's waiting for: he's waiting for the story to go away. Only this is a story that's not going to die of natural causes. It needs to be killed like a rabid wolverine. Watch in the next couple of weeks while Campaign Romney (along with FOX Noise) goes on a desperate hunt for as many mole hills as they can find to make mountains out of. This should be quite interesting.

Der Mittster
was considered for the Number Two spot on the ticket during John McCain's 2008 presidential run. While he was undergoing the vetting process, he handed over to the campaign his income tax returns going back over two decades. Call it a silly hunch on my part but I've got a sneaking suspicion that the McCain people were absolutely horrified by what they saw. How can I be so sure of this this you may ask? Because they went running to Sarah Palin as a preferable VP candidate! Talk about desperation. If a relatively sane and intelligent human being like Mitt Romney can't outshine a half-witted extremist like Fascist Barbie, that very fact speaks untold volumes. Mitt's tax history must be pretty embarrassing. That is the reason - and the only reason - they refuse to make it public. I was born very early in the morning, but it wasn't this morning.

If it ever got out that Romney paid less in income tax (even in one year) than your average blue collar worker, it wouldn't bode too well for him come November the sixth. My guess is that if his sordid past regarding taxes ever became public it would mean a landslide for President Obama similar to Richard Nixon's in 1972. Tricky Dick won every state in the union that year with the exception of Massachusetts and the District of Columbia. Less than two years later he would be forced to resign in complete disgrace. My irony meter goes into the red zone just thinking about that one. Aren't politics strange?

The "Bain" of his Existence

Mitt is try
ing to portray himself as a tireless champion of the working class masses. It really is an amusing thing to behold, isn't it? Remember that this is the same guy who put thousands of his fellow Americans out of work as the chief of Bain Capital back in the nineties, sending their jobs to China and Lord knows where else. There is no longer a Republican in Washington who gives a damn about hard-working people. Jacob Javits and Milicent Fenwick (photo left) are dead and they're not coming back. This is a party whose sole purpose is to concentrate as much wealth into as few bank accounts as possible. This is a party whose ultimate goal is the utter destruction of the middle class. They'd love nothing weirder than to bring us back to the Gilded Age. You think I'm being paranoid? You think the disintegrating middle class in this country is merely a coincidence? You think it's the fault of all those evil-doin' Liberals? Fine. Keep voting Republican, folks.

It's hard not to feel a little pity for poor old Mitt. I sure as hell don't envy him. He has managed - inside of two months - to take that plate of exquisite caviar that was handed to him whe
n he became the presumptive nominee and turn it into a pile of elephant shit. All of this on top of his disastrous performance overseas during his 2012 Foot In Mouth Tour. The poor schmuck just can't get a break. As each hour ticks by, it is becoming more and more apparent to the GOP "base" that handing the nomination over to this "Massachusetts liberal" will be a huge mistake. Be sure to tune in to their convention later on this month. This is gonna be a riot - and I mean that literally.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net

SUGGESTED READING:

Who Let the Dogs In?
by Molly Ivins.

I miss Molly something fierce. We could sure use her now. God rest her witty soul.

BREAKING NEWS:

There was a mass shooting today at a Sikh Temple in Wisconsin. Seven human beings are dead. That's okay. They were only a bunch of Muslims or Hindus or something or other. Ain't American gun laws a scream?

106 Comments:

At 4:23 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You libs are freaking idiots. You think the way Reid made his fortune was more respectable than Romney? This guy is an insider hack and he must be suffering some serious dementia. Why the hell is it your business how much mitt pays in his tax returns? IT'S PROBRABLY NOTHING . Mitt has all his money in dividends which you cannot tax if you lose money. It's a tax on capital gains not capital losses! Oh my god it's so simple but you retards won't even consider this. "we want to see his tax returns!!!!!!" is this our presidents campaign? Attack one business man for maximizing his profits? What a Marxist punk. All of you are no different.

You libs don't give a shit about the fact that we can't close our budget gap by taxing all these people. You're all just interested in money. Not jobs, freedom, economic or individual rights. It's sickening. So please offer some real world solutions. To our problems not bitch and moan about a real job creators success. It's funny how you libs ignore how your despised "trickle Down" economics actually worked in the 80's you're ignorant and you can't get passed that damn name! Name me one business that was'nt started by an entrepreneur! A business that actually trickled up! You won't change. You know all these businesses are sitting on capital they don't want to spend? (you're all thinking "TAX THERE ASSETS") that's money that'll make jobs. New products. Growth. Revenue. They just like mitt Romney though. They want to avoid this presidents anti business taxes.

 
At 4:28 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There, their, they're...
I was just thinking they're asses.
~geezermom

 
At 4:33 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You dems just HATE HATE HATE success. You know what I hate? Working for other people. Not my employer because he pays me money. Welfare recipients. They make babies to receive money from my checks and you libs think it's a moral imperative to take what's mine and give it to them. Think of it though really when did other peoples problems become mine? When was the last time one of you dems went to an health insurance company. Saw someone who was denied coverage. And then emptied out your wallet for them." Ohhhhhhh it's so sad some people can't get healthcare!" let's rob working civilians at gun point to give them coverage. We' ll call it charity and anyone who opposes us is a fascist, nazi, rascist. Did it ever occur to you there was a time before welfare? Were there people starving in the streets? Maybe some. Very few in fact. $16 trillion worth? NO WAY

 
At 4:37 PM, Blogger Steven said...

Wow! You sure get some incredibly impolite commenters to your posts. And they always seem to be named Anonymous? I guess if I wrote that diatribe I would keep my name hidden as well.

By the way, I loved the post. Keep it up.

 
At 4:43 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@steven

You can't even argue with my "diatribe"

Blogspot gives me the right to privacy

 
At 5:18 PM, Blogger charles moore said...

Tom, I agree with you 100%. And it will be fun to see the name calling and foaming at the mouth from all of the anonymouses who don't have the balls to put their names to what the write. Don't you find it interesting that they while they are getting themselves worked up over this, they never questioned the legitimacy of the birthers?

One simple solution to this whole brouhaha; show the tax returns.

 
At 5:47 PM, Blogger Peter Fegan said...

I think I know Anonymous' name. It's Dick.

On a more serious note, I hope you're right about Reid, Tom. If not, then Der Mittster will be taking up residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave next year.

 
At 5:57 PM, Blogger Pep talk said...

There may be a lot of screaming at the convention, however, I believe it will be well stage managed. The same way they were able to push Ron Paul off to the side, they'll keep the media from seeing too much drama. Thats what theyre good at. Do I care? Well possibly,but only in the sense of wantint to see where they go if they lose. Further right? Is that indeed possible? The real theatre for me is watching Mitt trying to discredit his own health care bill and appear really "base" looney. His body english clearly shows how uncomfortable he is with his role. What is for me more important is when the Democrats are going to see that this country is in terrible shape and that big structural changes are required. I doubt they can grasp this and if they can sell it to the voters.

 
At 6:16 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Say this about U.S. Sen. Harry Reid: He really believes in renewable energy.

Reid has beat up NV Energy pretty good in recent years. In the closing days of the George W. Bush administration, Reid blocked plans to build coal-fired power plants in Nevada. He said in April on the "Nevada Newsmakers" show, "I don't think NV Energy has done enough to allow renewable energy to thrive."

But that same month, NV Energy reported it had exceeded its state-imposed green-energy requirement of 15 percent by purchasing 16.7 percent of its power from renewable sources. And that was in spite of the Public Utilities Commission rejecting a handful of renewable contracts in July 2011, saying the company hadn't justified the purchases were necessary to meet its quota.

Now Reid is pushing for a Chinese company he played a key role in recruiting to Nevada, ENN Mojave Energy LLC. The company plans a billion-dollar solar energy manufacturing and generating plant near Laughlin, but an ambitious development schedule is being threatened by a lack of green power customers.

Steve Tetreault quoted Reid in Tuesday's Review-Journal saying the project "would start tomorrow if NV Energy would purchase the power," but the company "has not been willing to work on this and that's such a shame."

Reid added: "NV Energy is a regulated monopoly. They control 95 percent of all the electricity that is produced in Nevada and they should go along with this."

They're not, at least not yet.

And there are some legitimate reasons: Power costs are passed directly to consumers, and green energy currently costs more than power generated by coal-fired or natural-gas burning plants. State law mandates NV Energy buy power as cheaply as possible, except when it's required to buy more-expensive green energy to meet state-mandated quotas. But the more green energy you buy, the higher bills climb.

NV Energy has already met its quota, and the PUC has already turned the company down when it proposed contracts that would have exceeded quotas. And when the company does buy power - which it plans to do next in 2014 - it does so by analyzing competitive bids.

Reid says those weak excuses. He said in that April interview that if "NV Energy wanted to do more with renewable energy, they could."

There's another factor, however, one more personal to Reid: His son, Rory Reid, is one of the attorneys for the ENN Mojave Energy project. A Reid spokeswoman said the senator did not suggest Reid's firm - Lionel, Sawyer & Collins - to ENN, nor has the elder Reid spoken to this son about the deal. (Reid imposed a strict ban on family members lobbying his office in 2003 after the Los Angeles Times asked him about lobbying by three of his four sons.)

But success for ENN in finding customers helps Rory Reid, and its failure could cost him a client. It's an undeniable conflict that Harry Reid should keep in mind as he twists arms at the PUC and NV Energy, lest he earn himself an ethics complaint.

Reid's office points out developing more renewable power will create jobs in Nevada that can't be outsourced and reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil. (It's also good for the environment.)

And while Reid said in that April interview that "Every day that goes by, the ability to produce solar [energy] is cheaper," the fact is, it's more expensive than coal and natural gas right now. Someday, green power may be cheaper than anything else. But that day isn't here yet, and until it arrives, Reid must mind the costs and the conflicts.

 
At 6:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Obama campaign is refusing to denounce Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s bizarre, below-the-belt claim that Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney failed to pay taxes for ten years. Without a shred of evidence, save for a mysterious phone call he claims to have received, Reid is accusing Romney of a serious crime, saying he is guilty until he proves himself innocent. The Obama campaign is using Reid’s dirty tactic to renew the distraction of Romney’s tax returns and overseas investments.

But Reid himself once faced charges of serious criminal wrongdoing that, he claims, were made “without a shred of substantiating evidence”--namely, that he was the Las Vegas mob’s man on the Nevada Gaming Control Board. Mobster Joe Agosto was caught on tape by the FBI boasting that “I gotta Clean Face in my pocket”--and “Clean Face,” it was suggested at the time, was none other than Harry Reid himself.

The charges caused immense damage to Reid, for whom the job at the Gaming Control Board was a springboard to higher office. Locals still remember the scandal. Columnist Jane Ann Morrison of the Las Vegas Review-Journal protested in February when a new local mob museum opened--and Harry Reid was portrayed as a savior, not a sinner.

Reid has always maintained his innocence, and a subsequent investigation found that Agosto’s boast was not true. But he felt that the federal government had tarnished him and his family merely by making the unsubstantiated charge public. He was still bitter about the episode thirty years later, and described it in detail in his 2008 autobiography, The Good Fight: Hard Lessons from Searchlight to Washington:

Working on a full-time basis, the Cleanface investigators spent more than one thousands man-hours over five months reviewing every vote I cast as commissioner and interviewing my colleagues, clients, and friends to prepare a 77-page report for the Gaming Control Board chairman, Richard Bunker, who had replaced Hannifin. An outside accounting firm submitted all files related to my corporate and personal financial matters. Every rock they saw, they picked up and turned it over, twice. In February 1980, Bunker held an hour-long press conference to announce that the investigation had completely cleared me of any wrongdoing. But the ordeal had taken its toll. Terrible claims had been released by federal agents without a shred of substantiating evidence that created, in Bunker’s words, an “aura of distrust.” To me, the whole period was the worst time in my family’s life.

You’d think that Reid would have learned from that episode not to hurl serious criminal allegations without evidence. You’d think he would have learned about the tremendous effort it takes to clear one’s name once false charges have been made by government officials. You’d think he would have had some sympathy for the family of another man made to face McCarthyist tactics--accuse first, and leave the proof to the accused.

But Harry Reid has learned nothing, except that such tactics can be effective in causing maximum damage to political opponents. He may think he has nothing to lose: he was just re-elected in 2010, and has the state’s casino owners in his pocket and under his thumb. But Harry Reid has disgraced his office--and the Obama campaign. He should rename his autobiography: I Learned Nothing: Dirty Politics from Vegas to Washington.

 
At 6:27 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"(Reid)He says that a reliable source has informed him that Mitt Romney went for a decade without paying a dime of income tax. Given his well-earned reputation for timidity, if he's gone out on a limb to make a charge as serious as this, it must be true. Old Harry has never been the kind of pol to throw caution to the wind."

So Harry, put up or shut up, release your sources

 
At 6:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Annonymous you are a WINDBAG!!!

 
At 7:23 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@charles Moore

You can't even touch my argument. You don't even try. First I don't support Birthers. Has Romney demanded to see his birth certificate? No. The whole capital building would implode if he even brought it up. My anonymity has nothing to do with my argument. Quite honestly I don't give shit if you're Charles Moore or Charles Manson. Beat my argument

 
At 7:42 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@charles Moore

Look how educational this is. You are the heart of lib ideology. You're ideology is a complete failure so the only thing you can attack is the person arguing with you. (mitt Romney is too rich, anonymous doesn't put his name down!) what would you do with my name? Talk about my race? Make assumptions about my income? Come to my harras me? Really tell me what. If it so important to you you must have a use for it

 
At 11:25 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So Harry, put up or shut up, release your sources.

If Harry can site Anonymous sources, then I can post anonymous.

 
At 12:12 AM, Anonymous michelle said...

It always seems to be that the rabid right is more vociferously outraged than the weak kneed left. This is clearly demonstrated by the anonymous ravings in response to this brilliant article. The left needs more mad dog voices like you Tom, who aren't afraid to offend. I have been hoping to see a post on this blog about Romney's tax returns. He needs to be hounded and hounded. The story must not go away. The only reason he has made it this far is because the Republican pool of potential candidates was so paltry, there was no one else they could go with. It is just another example of Republican audacity that they thought they could get away with giving us a candidate who is the most egregious tax evader of them all. Even the tax returns he has released are reason enough for an indignant uproar. Last year Romney earned $20 million dollars and paid a 14% tax rate. That is disgusting. That visual at the top of your article should be on every billboard in this country. Maybe you can send it to the PR firm that creates Obama's ads. I'm talking about the Mitt applies for the job and refuses the background check. Love that.

 
At 1:02 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@michelle

Once again. Romney paid 14% tax on dividends. You know? Money put in the economy? To create my job and millions of others? 14%. That's $2.8 million.What would you expect? Should he write a check giving extra money to the IRS so they can waste it? Do you do that? Lemme see your tax returns. Did you even read my post?

What blows my mind is how dems believe people like mitt magically receive money. NO that doesn't happen in
Private sector. You think the shareholders of Bain capital gave him a high salary out of goodwill? Why would they do that? No the only people receiving money that doesn't belong to them get it from the government. Bailed out wall street bankers, GM Bosses. Union bosses. You know? Fat corpratist Obama cronys like Jeffery immelt. Libs worship Obama because they think he the polar opposite to mitt. Because he released his tax returns? The guys all political. Never earned a private sector dollar in his whole life. None of this will get through to you. Amazing

 
At 3:55 AM, Anonymous Ron Baldwin said...

Harry Reid is hardly a bomb-throwing radical. He said he learned from a credible source that Romney paid no income taxes for ten years. According to Tom’s post, Romney has shared many years of his income tax information with the 2008 McCain campaign. Had Romney been the VP nominee in 2008 his income tax information would likely have been made public.

Seems the Conservative Playbook dictates that whenever a difficult issue is raised against one of their candidates, change the subject and/or attack the messenger.

Anon 4:23 PM – Harry Reid “is an insider hack and he must be suffering some serious dementia.” That is a serious but totally baseless attack

Also, “Mitt has all his money in dividends which you cannot tax if you lose money.” Does this mean he has negative dividends?

Also, “It's a tax on capital gains not capital losses! Oh my god it's so simple but you retards won't even consider this.” The maximum deductible net taxable [capital] loss is $3,000 per year, period. This would not be even a pimple on Romney’s income.

Also, “You libs don't give a shit about the fact that we can't close our budget gap by taxing all these people.” How about Clinton’s $200 plus Billion surplus before the Bush tax cuts, two unfunded wars, an unfunded prescription drug plan, plus a narrow but costly escape from a September 2008 global financial meltdown that would have made the Great Depression seem like a walk in the park (my take on what happened).

As to dividends and capital gains providing money for ”job creators” I observe the following. Dividends take money from “job creators” (existing businesses) and sends it to shareholders. Anyone with enough dividends to be a significant “job creator” likely invests the money in additional stock holdings, which transfers the money to other shareholders. As to capital gains I agree that selling an asset at a large capital gain provides money that can be put into the economy, perhaps even to create jobs. But capital gains are a zero-sum game. For every seller there is a buyer who takes money out of the economy to buy the asset from the seller.

Anon 4:33 PM on welfare. “Did it ever occur to you there was a time before welfare? Were there people starving in the streets? Maybe some. Very few in fact.” This is the same philosophy that led to more than one million Irish who starved to death from 1840 to 1850. Look at the photographs of the people of the Great Depression. . This may be acceptable in Anon’s world but not in my world. Disclosure – my dirt-poor maternal grandparents emigrated from Ireland a little more than a generation after “The Great Shame” as it is often called.

Anon 6:16 PM. This is a long screed that completely changes the subject and attacks Harry Reid’s efforts on renewable energy and Reid’s alleged conflict of interests. More "change the subject."

Anon 6:22 PM. This is another long screed that states, ”Without a shred of evidence, save for a mysterious phone call he claims to have received, Reid is accusing Romney of a serious crime, saying he is guilty until he proves himself innocent.” Nowhere has Harry Reid implied any criminal activity such as tax evasion. He has said the information was “credible.”

And so on and so forth. Be it ever thus.

 
At 7:56 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

”Without a shred of evidence, save for a mysterious phone call he claims to have received, Reid is accusing Romney of a serious crime, saying he is guilty until he proves himself innocent.” Nowhere has Harry Reid implied any criminal activity such as tax evasion. He has said the information was “credible.”

From the same crew that said "we wont know what's in it until we read it"

So Harry, put up or shut up, release your sources.

 
At 10:06 AM, Blogger charles moore said...

Two questions here. One person who has seen Romney's tax returns is John McCain. Why has he not defended Romney or called Reid a liar?

Second, Romney could completely destroy Reid if he would show his tax returns. What is he waiting for>

 
At 10:23 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@charles moore

Reid wants romney to show his tax returns because he knew romney isnt releasing him for a reason. The reason is because marxist propaganda floating around will make romney a demon for maximizing profits. You know. The stuff most taxpayers try to do. Seriously none of these flimsy politicians want to show there tax returns for good reason. Oh big brother barry obama did but he doesnt know a thing about making money in the first place

 
At 10:31 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Barack obama has created a narrative that we must hate business men. He is a marxist. Ive never heard such radical left rhetoric against people who work in provate sector. The people who really built the roads with there hard earned tax dollars. His entire campaign is divide and conquer . Divide hard working americans from the rest.

 
At 11:25 AM, Anonymous Liberals Are Sexy said...

Anonymous said...
Barack obama has created a narrative that we must hate business men. He is a marxist. Ive never heard such radical left rhetoric against people who work in provate sector. The people who really built the roads with there hard earned tax dollars. His entire campaign is divide and conquer . Divide hard working americans from the rest.

10:31 AM

Rush, It's really you, isn't it? You just have have to get off those drugs. They're really not doing you any good.

 
At 12:15 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Tom,
Funny how the same ducks quacking for Obama's birth certificate and college grades are all protective of an aristocrat's desire to hide his tax records.

You really struck a nerve with this one.

Of course, how much nerve does it take to anonymously spew fascist dogma? As with the low level of intellect, very little. As we have learned, everybody who disagrees with a fascist is a no-good "Marxist" liberal, illustrated so passionately by the koolade drinker. It’s a tradition going back to the pre-WWII Germany and Italy.

The hateful hypocrites can't help themselves. They are Mammon worshipping drones, incapable of questioning the power of wealth and the privilege of the elites.

What's that I hear? (Glug, glug, glug.)

 
At 1:27 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@dave Dubya

This is why I detest leftism

I recall you claiming the republicans were fascist nazis. Fascist force people to do things with a strong authoritarian government! They ignore the constitution! You would not only secede your rights to a central government but my rights as well! Does a bureaucrat know how to handle yours or my life better than ourselves? You call the tea party radicals because they espouse decentralized government, constitutional liberties, and fiscal responsibilities. Look at your blue states. They're bankrupt. California's signing on to drop $60 billion on a train! Just to line those union bosses deep pockets. Is it really time to do that when they're so bankrupt. Will this really stimulate their economy out of debt? Of Course not that simply absurd. A project that large will take years to pay off. Where's the logic? And you dare call me a nazi? I want to leave people alone. I want to be left alone. I want to earn a wage and raise a family. Not pay for someone elses irresponsible choices. The party that stood for slavery, segregation, and the abortion of millions of unborn babies. (yeah I think it's murder to kill an unborn child don't give me that women's choice crap) . You'll acuse me of ignoring a womens right when im looking out for the fetus. You people fall in line with the media so well. Europes being torn apart by these PIGS. None of them can pay there bills and the whole continent is screwed because of it. France has excepted full blown insanity by electing Hollande. These countries don't even allow for freedom of speech. Only when it's deemed "not hateful" or " beneficial to society" how broadly can that be applied? You dems are just unbelievable. You hate the tea party. Love the rabble rousing renta mob OWS when half of them ARE MARXIST and ANARCHIST we even saw NAZIS there! The other half are mal contents with nothing better to do. Surely we all benefit from corporations. Look at this society around us. Everything. Has come from a corporation. There are THOUSANDS of them. Some are small. Some large. They benefit because they provide us a service. Now when Government gets involved in corporate America I get ticked off. Barack Obama gives tax payer money to the failing GM automaker. Barack Obama is everything you accuse the republicans of being. A corporatist power consumed individual. Don't start calling bush a fascist because Id agree. He bailed out those fat bankers when they shouldve failed. Maybe it was best for us. Does that justify his actions? No. So keep calling me the nazi fascist right wing loon. The tea party doesn't want to force anyone to their will. They value individualism, not authority.

 
At 1:30 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Pssss, I just saw this on this weeks edition of the National Enquirer, quoting unnamed but creditable sources, the Enquirer said, Harry Reid is an escaped alien from area 51!

Prove you aren't Harry.

 
At 1:51 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"They'd love nothing weirder than to bring us back to the Gilded Age."

The feudal Middle Ages, more like. His is the real road to serfdom.

 
At 1:53 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"They'd love nothing weirder than to bring us back to the Gilded Age."

The feudal Middle Ages, more like. His is the real road to serfdom.

 
At 1:57 PM, Anonymous Robert C Freeman said...

"They'd love nothing weirder than to bring us back to the Gilded Age."

The feudal Middle Ages, more like. His is the real road to serfdom.

 
At 2:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@freeman

Yep the feudal age. Only now you can't chose your lord. And if one serf doesn't feel like working we'll take your food and give it to him. And when the non working serf decides to have kids, you can give them your food as well. You know, because he can't help himself but make kids he can't feed.

 
At 4:21 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

aristocrat:
1. A member of a ruling class or of the nobility. NOT ROMNEY
2. A person having the tastes, manners, or other characteristics of the aristocracy: a natural aristocrat who insists on the best accommodations. MAYBE ROMNEY
3. A person who advocates government by an aristocracy. NOT ROMNEY
4. One considered the best of its kind: the aristocrat of cars. NOT ROMNEY
5. A member of the aristocracy; a noble. THERE ARE NONE IN THE USA
6. A person who has the manners or qualities of a member of a privileged or superior class. AND THAT'S A BAD THING?

 
At 4:58 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/aristocrat

Aristocrat:

2a : one who has the bearing and viewpoint typical of the aristocracy b : one who favors aristocracy (Romney)

3: one believed to be superior of its kind (“Job Creator”/Romney)


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aristocracy

Aristocracy:

5. any class or group considered to be superior, as through education, ability, wealth, or social prestige. (Romney)


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/aristocracy

1: government by the best individuals or by a small privileged class

2a : a government in which power is vested in a minority consisting of those believed to be best qualified b : a state with such a government

3: a governing body or upper class usually made up of a hereditary nobility

4: the aggregate of those believed to be superior

(Romney 3 out of 4)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aristocratic

Aristocratic:

3. characteristic of an aristocrat; having the manners, values, or qualities associated with the aristocracy: aristocratic bearing; aristocratic snobbishness.

(Romney)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aristocracy

aristocracy:


1. a class of persons holding exceptional rank and privileges, especially the hereditary nobility. (Romney)

2. a government or state ruled by an aristocracy, elite, or privileged upper class. (Romney)

3. government by those considered to be the best or most able people in the state. (Romney)

4. a governing body composed of those considered to be the best or most able people in the state. (Romney)

5. any class or group considered to be superior, as through education, ability, wealth, or social prestige. (Romney)

 
At 5:13 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@dave Dubya

All those qualities can be attributed to . The founding fathers, the Roosevelt's, and the Kennedy's what's the point? Is Elitist Obama much different?

 
At 7:38 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Anonymous,
I'll answer your question this one time, knowing well that you would never return the gesture. Do unto others and all...

The point is Romney and Bush Jr., unlike Obama, are upper class aristocrats, born into wealthy, politically connected families.

Romney is also unlike Obama and the Roosevelts and the Kennedys, in that his policies are taylor fitted to exclusively further enriching the elite class.

He admitted he's not concerned about the poor. His party is actively stripping public services and safety nets, as if the poor have too much and the rich too little.

The other point is Romney whines about paying too much in taxes, but refuses to disclose what he paid. That's like saying "Drugs are bad for you, but don't test MY urine".

Time for him to put up or shut up.

Also, if I hate somebody or something, I will say so. I hate lies and corruption and the hi-jacking of our democracy. I hate injustice, greed and the worship of Mammon. I do not hate success, rich people or even corporations. I was raised to hate the sin but love the sinner.

Hate only makes a person humorless, bitter and angry. It consumes the soul from within. Perhaps you should think about that for a second.

You said Obama, "Never earned a private sector dollar in his whole life. None of this will get through to you. Amazing."

What's amazing is your ignorance of the fact Obama made a fortune in the private sector the old fashioned way. He created products, (yes, books are products) and sold them on the "free market".

Unlike the aristocratic Romney and Bushes, Obama wasn't born rich enough to start out on the upper rungs of the ladder to success.

 
At 8:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@dave Dubya

Mitt Romney has created wealth for you me and his family. Surely you've read Locke. This is not a bad thing.


I do not worship Mammon. Never even heard of him. Some god of Marxism? I admire individual liberty and economic liberty that go hand in hand. I was raised on American values and have genuine interest in my nations well being. Including its citizens, blacks, Hispanics, whites Asians and so forth. Government does not create wealth by redistribution. It destroys it. For everyone

This Obama guy. This Chicago politician. He grew up in Indonesia, associates with a domestic terrorist, ACORN brown shirts, even joined a far left socialist party in the 90's. His book is filled with people that don't exist. None of that really matters to me because i know his ideology. He wants to bring this country down the road of crushing debt and stagnant European like unemployment and I'm supposed to like him because mitt Romney is a rich guy? Envy is a poor political motivator for me. Who benefits from this in the long run? Do you really think the poor can be supported with this debt? I think he'll win reelection. And we'll be playing Greece in a few years.

 
At 10:19 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Kennedy's aren't aristocrats, they are not wealthy?? Define wealthy for me Dave.


LAS VEGAS — "Senate Majority Harry Reid again deflected questions Monday about releasing his tax returns, even as he continued to pound the demand for Mitt Romney to make more of his own public.

Instead, Reid pointed to the financial disclosure forms he files as a member of Congress, which provide different information."

Good for the goose but not the gander?

"I hate lies and corruption and the hi-jacking of our democracy." You forgot to add rich people that you hate, which now includes Obama and Harry Reid.

"I was raised to hate the sin" Dave claims it's a sin if you are wealthy, define wealth for us Dave, give us a dollar figure.

 
At 10:21 PM, Anonymous Picard said...

How about we make every politicians tax returns public knowledge. Reid and pelosi wont show theres either. Im sure most politicians returns look pretty nasty

 
At 10:24 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Picard,

Yeah sure, then let's require their physicals be public, and their college transcripts. And their report cards from first grade on up. Along with any applications for admissions into college and how they paid for their higher education. Let's start requiring that now.

 
At 12:34 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How could a bigger government possibly fix our problems. Whenever government gets bigger, liberties get smaller. FDR jailed the entire Japanese american population in an atrocious violation of civil liberties. This was not only a violation of these people's rights but it was done without the consent of congress. American citizens jailed for nothing. Government can't give you freedom. You're born with it. Government can only take it away with taxation, regulation and mandates, a soft tyranny that promises you everything by taking away what isn't there's. Can a bureaucrat spend your money more wisely than you? When has Government not been wasteful? Corrupt? It's in it's nature and it won't change.

 
At 7:00 PM, Blogger edwin_ said...

on eliteism ... yes it is not that important and both dems and repug have wealty politicians. But lets not forget who made this an issue . Remember how J Kerry was a phisically fit wind surfer and that made him an elieteist ? Meanwhile dubya was dopey & that proved that he could relate to the common man . This logic has seemed to backfire on the repugs as Rammoney is the uberwealthy candidate

 
At 8:29 PM, Anonymous Smokey Lagumski said...

"trickle Down" economics from the affirmative action Ivory tower 2008Pied Piper who has never had a real job doesn't look like it is working!

Harry Reid is a f*cking liar and hyprocrite just like all the other Limosine Liberals running the plantation while filling their pockets.

 
At 9:52 PM, Blogger edwin_ said...

Limosine Liberal is that something like a "chauffeured conservate"???

 
At 11:48 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

FRANCE PLANS 75% TAX RATE ON RICH!
(income of $1.24 million a year or more.)

edwin, Dave D and a host of other liberals seen ordering learn to speak French from Rosetta Stone.

Obama hopes France does this after November election as if done sooner, a large part of his "base" will move to France, to get their share of sharing the wealth.

 
At 12:01 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Boston Globe:
Elizabeth Warren demanded Monday that Senator Scott Brown release more of his tax returns. The only problem was that Brown, her Republican rival, had already released six years of tax returns while Warren has refused to release more than four years of her filings.

Asked to reconcile that apparent conflict, Warren backed off her demand, saying today that six years was enough. She did not, however, offer to release any more of her IRS filings.

DAMN IT LIZZY, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO LEAVE THESE STUPID DEMANDS TO HARRY REID!
FIRST YOU CLAIMED TO BE PART NATIVE AMERICAN, NOW THIS PILE OF CRAP. LEAVE THE LYING TO OUR PROS LIKE HARRY, NANCY AND SGT ED SCHULTZ.

 
At 12:47 AM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "FRANCE PLANS 75% TAX RATE ON RICH! (income of $1.24 million a year or more.)...Obama hopes France does this after November election as if done sooner…"
Who knew that not continuing the "temporary" Bush-era tax cuts on income over $250K equalled 75%?
Who knew that, as one of the least effective types of stimulus (between 0.1% and 0.0% effect on unemployment [and that's assuming they use the revenue for deficit cutting instead of, say, infrastructure or fighting contraction in the states), was more important than continuing the current versions of the Child Tax Credit, a tax break on college tuition, and a more generous Earned Income Tax Credit, which they're trying to get rid of? Who knew that the former is "class warfare" while the latter is, um, "fiscally conservative"?

 
At 3:55 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous: You said in rebuttal to Dave Dubya (time-stamp 8:14PM)...

"I think he'll win reelection. And we'll be playing Greece in a few years."

I agree. However, we'll be "playing Greece" a lot sooner if Romney is elected president...or if any republican is elected.

 
At 8:08 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Who knew that not continuing the "temporary" Bush-era tax cuts on income over $250K equalled(equaled?) 75%?"

Have come to expect stupid posts from MO, but this one takes the cake. Finds a way to bring Bush into his rant for God knows what reason, except he just will not face the failures of current President.

 
At 8:21 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff Guard,

Name the Greek conservative(s)and the policy's they enacted that brought about the current problems in Greece.

If you can.

 
At 9:37 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm glad to see people interested in vetting . Let's keep going and DEMAND Obama's school records. We will ask every day until the election. Let's compromise. Romney's taxes for Obama's records.Now that's fair. Of course liberals know that if those school records are ever shown, Obama will be in some serious trouble and so will the libs.

 
At 11:28 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous, isn't it obvious enough? What has brought Greece and several other European nations under dire straits, is exactly what's going to consume every other western nation in the world -- including the United States. It's just a matter of time...but it's inevitable.

Blame it on the international banking cabal. Once the gargantuan derivatives bubble pops, it'll make the tiny one in 2008 seem like a walk in the park. There are trillions of dollars of these time-bombs hidden in every plausible financial instrument worldwide. Once the implosion shakes enough economies, the financial tsunami will be felt globally.

In answer to your question:

"As in the American subprime crisis and the implosion of the American International Group, financial derivatives played a role in the run-up of Greek debt. Instruments developed by Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and a wide range of other banks enabled politicians to mask additional borrowing in Greece, Italy and possibly elsewhere."

Again, blame it on the banks. Until you understand and acknowledge the true scoundrels, you're just pissin' in the wind.

 
At 2:17 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

JG,

You are saying its the banks fault that socialist Greece couldnt stop their spending and that they were tricked or forced into buying instruments allowing the socialist politicians to hide from their people the true state of economy. Sure, makes perfect sense to me,but what have happened if the politicians had said no to the banks, no to their workers who demanded single payor health care, early retirement and free college? Do you think it ever occurred to the socialist running Greece, that the promises they made to get elected would one day be impossible to keep? And when that day came they would be forced to ask for help instead of being self reliant?

 
At 4:18 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous: "...what [would] have happened if the politicians had said no to the banks..."

Their lying would bitten them in the ass sooner. Cookin' the books is cookin' the books. It's the same in any language, and it's called graft and corruption -- not socialism.


"...[and what would have happened if the politicians had said] no to their workers who demanded single payor health care, early retirement and free college?"

I dunno...they would have, instead, used the people's money for a massive and unneeded military presence around the world, and started unprovoked and unilateral war against sovereign nations and then occupied their nations under the guise of national security and freedom for all? All the while, the military-industrial complex would make out like bandits?

Am I getting close?

 
At 4:36 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

" I dunno...they would have, instead, used the people's money for a massive and unneeded military presence around the world, and started unprovoked and unilateral war against sovereign nations and then occupied their nations under the guise of national security and freedom for all? All the while, the military-industrial complex would make out like bandits?"

But the fact and truth is Greece did not spend money on a massive and unneeded military.

"Their lying would bitten them in the ass sooner. Cookin' the books is cookin' the books. It's the same in any language, and it's called graft and corruption -- not socialism."

Odd, Italy, Spain, Ireland, and France must all have crooked book cooking politicians who just happen to favor socialist promises to get elected. Reminds me of the fact that close to 50% of Americans do not owe Federal Income tax each year, but are the largest percent of our population that receive federal moneys. Then we have this fact "Over 100 Million People in U.S. Now Receiving Some Form Of Federal Welfare." "The federal government administers nearly 80 different overlapping federal means-tested welfare programs," the Senate Budget Committee notes. However, the committee states, the figures used in the chart do not include those who are only benefiting from Social Security and/or Medicare.

Food stamps and Medicaid make up a large--and growing--chunk of the more than 100 million recipients. "Among the major means tested welfare programs, since 2000 Medicaid has increased from 34 million people to 54 million in 2011 and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or food stamps) from 17 million to 45 million in 2011," says the Senate Budget Committee. "Spending on food stamps alone is projected to reach $800 billion over the next decade."

The data come "from the U.S. Census’s Survey of Income and Program Participation shows that nearly 110,000 million individuals received a welfare benefit in 2011. (These figures do not include other means-tested benefits such as the Earned Income Tax Credit or the health insurance premium subsidies included in the President’s health care law. CBO estimates that the premium subsidies, scheduled to begin in 2014, will cover at least 25 million individuals by the end of the decade.)"

This is not just Americans, however. "These figures include not only citizens, but non-citizens as well," according to the committee.

Now include the number of federal employees who do not produce a product or service but instead administrate the spending of tax dollars, and how many people do we really have that are not in some way getting Federal money?
Sounds a lot like Greece to me!

 
At 5:03 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why doesns't Harry Reid do something about the IRS paying out as much as $5.2 billion in fraudulent tax refunds to immigrants, and ignored employees who tried to warn agency higher-ups of its mistakes, according to a new audit released Wednesday by the agency’s inspector general.

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration said identity theft fraud could cost the government $21 billion over the next five years unless the IRS takes steps to crack down on the bogus use of Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) which are issued to immigrants — legal and illegal — in lieu of Social Security numbers, so they can pay taxes.
Identity theft is rampant, particularly for illegal immigrants who need an identity to work in the U.S.

Auditors said one address in Lansing, Mich., was cited in 2,137 tax returns, with a total of $3.3 million in refunds issued to it in 2010.

Tampa, Fla., led the way as the city with the most potentially fraudulent tax returns, with 88,724 filed. A total of $468 million in refunds were issued to those filers.

Guess he'd be called a racist if he did.

 
At 5:57 PM, Anonymous John said...

Anon, you may be too brainwashed to grasp this, but I'll give it a try:

Neither the Republican or Democratic positions are going to help you get ahead in this nation.

The real distinction in this land is if a person is rich or poor. I'm not talking about someone who has a couple of million in assets - I'm talking really rich. If you are not one of them, they (through the state) have their boot on your neck. It is pretty much a guarantee that if you are not rich, you will remain that way. The combination of low income or, if you can escape that distinction, high taxes prevents one from obtaining financial independence. The people who built and maintain the system that keeps you from prosperity are your enemy. Why do you argue their position?

 
At 7:57 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The real distinction in this land is if a person is rich or poor. I'm not talking about someone who has a couple of million in assets - I'm talking really rich. If you are not one of them, they (through the state) have their boot on your neck. It is pretty much a guarantee that if you are not rich, you will remain that way. The combination of low income or, if you can escape that distinction, high taxes prevents one from obtaining financial independence. The people who built and maintain the system that keeps you from prosperity are your enemy. Why do you argue their position?"

Spoken like a true Marxist.

 
At 8:40 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous: "Spoken like a true Marxist."

No, spoken like someone who knows what's going on -- and that "ain't you".

The millions of dollars wasted, that get your panties in a wad, are absolutely miniscule compared to the trillions the military-industrial complex steals, or the billions that the banking cartel has stolen (so far) from our U.S. treasure.

Your priorities are misplaced, not to mention irrational, and your grasp of basic math is challenged.

My advice: Complain about the big dollars! In the scope of things, the millions you cite are meaningless. That's why you have no credibility.

 
At 9:02 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous: "But the fact and truth is Greece did not spend money on a massive and unneeded military."

No, but this country has (and does), which was the implication I was attempting to show you. But, being a bit slow-witted, like most conservatives tend to be, you never picked-up on it. I'm sorry, I keep forgetting you're challenged in language skills also.


"Odd, Italy, Spain, Ireland, and France must all have crooked book cooking politicians..."

No, there was nothing odd at all. Each country got stung by the bursting of the massive real-estate bubble, just like here, where ground-zero in the caper was the unregulated derivatives market of the largest financial banking institutions in the world.

They're working on Collapse 2.0 as we speak.

 
At 9:19 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous ”But the fact and truth is Greece did not spend money on a massive and unneeded military.”
Well, it did have two unprofitable, unaccountable, state-owned defense companies.
Greece is what happens when nobody pays their taxes, the government doesn’t know who owns what and doesn’t keep track of what it spends (and when it does, ignores most of it). Note, too, that when Greece was trying to get into the Euro, Goldman-Sachs helped them cook their books. And, if memory serves, it was the socialist government that brought out the dirty laundry; it was their conservative predecessors who hid it.

"Reminds me of the fact that close to 50% of Americans do not owe Federal Income tax each year, but are the largest percent of our population that receive federal moneys."
(As usual): Yeah, take that, elderly, students, poor, working poor with children and the unemployed!
And why not apply that same logic to the states? I mean, why should Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming all get back more from the federal government than they put in?
How come revolution in modern America begins with punching down?

”Then we have this fact ‘Over 100 Million People in U.S. Now Receiving Some Form Of Federal Welfare.’”
Do you have any idea how brutally sociopathic “The poor have too much!” sounds?


”Food stamps and Medicaid make up a large--and growing--chunk of the more than 100 million recipients.”
Obviously. Did you know that some Walmarts hand out Medicaid application forms to new employees? Why is that, exactly; is it because the working poor are lazy and greedy or that Walmart has socialized one of its costs? Is that the poor or is it Walmart gaming the system?
As for Medicaid, did you know that in some states up to 64% of births are covered by it? 2/3rds of them. (And half of all Medicaid coverage goes to the elderly or disabled, and 20% goes to children)

This isn’t largesse for the poor (look at how far down the economic ladder in Texas, for example, you have to fall for coverage); it’s a symptom of a system that’s deeply flawed. Worse, while you’re busy punching the working poor, unemployed or elderly, chances are pretty good that if you’re not in those groups yourself, you’re a beneficiary of one of the big three tax expenditures; the retirement benefits exemption, the health insurance exemption, and the home mortgage interest deduction. Moocher! Parasite!

”Spoken like a true Marxist.”
The US has one of the lowest levels of class mobility in the Western world. That’s not [necessarily] Marxist; that’s a stone cold fact.
You want Marxist? “Capital won”.

 
At 10:28 PM, Anonymous Picard said...

@Modusoperandai

Greece doesn't spend money on a military because the United States and NATO give them all the protection.

. For how long can the US subsidize inactivity? Have we come close to winning the war on poverty after 40 years and trillions of dollars? They need to slow the entitlement society down soon not expand it. Just because you think not emptying the treasury for the poor sounds cruel means accepting fiscal suicide? Well let's say we do Obamas tax increase which won't even cover the interest payments on the debt. What domestic program do we cut to close the gap?

Me I'd cut entitlements in half and then have a field day with other Government departments.

 
At 11:08 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

JEff Guyard, ]

The only honest statement you made in your most recent pile of crap for a post was
" I'm sorry".

Thank you.

 
At 11:28 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yup , MO our Prez sure has been able to increase the number of unemployed in the good ole USA. That why idiots like Jeff Guard, erwin and Dave D will be voting for him again.
"The poor have too much!” The poor are getting exactly what they want when they vote in liberals to take care of their every need. Liberals thinks food stamps are a way to boost the economy, that unemployment is a badge of honor. And tell me MO are you gonna start again that big liberal lie that the old have to eat pet food in America to keep from starving because the 50% of Americans who are paying tax, don't pay enough?

Define "working poor" the income level that one needs to qualify to be a part of? And with all the stimulus money spent under the Prez, why would there be any poor, working poor or unemployed?

"The US has one of the lowest levels of class mobility in the Western world" Nice link to a two year old article about the Urban Institute, an Institute that was established in 1968 by the Lyndon B. Johnson administration to study the nation’s urban problems and evaluate the Great Society initiatives embodied in more than 400 laws passed in the prior four years.
Now 44 years later, with many more laws than 400 since passed, and trillions of dollars spent and the fucking problem is the same as it was in 1968. There are people in American who don't have as much money as others so it's govt job to spread the wealth around to make things "fair". Bull shit!
Move to France, no one is going to be rich there, you ought to love it.

 
At 11:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

But getting back to Harry Reid, who has finally finally put out, whats next weeks shit from the reelect Obama organization going to be?
Mitt's smokes cigarets? Please, get real just once libtards, just once.
Have you no shame?

 
At 12:49 AM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Picard "Greece doesn't spend money on a military because the United States and NATO give them all the protection."
Correct. The US should stop subsidizing other countries' defense with its military. It has plenty of bases where there's no longer any need for them (and it's real budget is far, far larger than what it says it is). And 11 carrier strike groups, in the absence of the kind of Cold War-scale threat that requires them (except for trade lane and oil port control), is lunacy. Good luck cutting any of that, besides maybe a token base or three. Defense is the only stimulus that both parties agree on (which is unfortunate, as Defense is awful stimulus).
Start, instead, at the Pentagon which is not only still planning for the wrong kind of war, its procurement process is fundamentally broken.

 
At 12:52 AM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

con't
"Just because you think not emptying the treasury for the poor sounds cruel means accepting fiscal suicide? Well let's say we do Obamas tax increase which won't even cover the interest payments on the debt. What domestic program do we cut to close the gap? Me I'd cut entitlements in half and then have a field day with other Government departments."
Wow. TANF is $154 a month and SNAP works. Who knew that the poor had it so good?

Start at seriously looking how to reign in healthcare costs. Any deficit reduction plan that does not is not a serious plan. Again, good luck. Obama "bent the cost curve", saving money primarily on Medicare Advantage (which is more expensive than regular Medicare and only 14c of every extra dollar actually goes to patient care). If you remember, there was somewhat of a hubbub over that. Something about "Obama's cutting $500B from Medicare!" Had an effect on the election, if memory serves.
The GOP plan, beyond repealing Obamacare (and, with no hint of shame, keeping most of the $500B of "cuts) is to do nothing. Oh, and they're fighting against the 80-20 medical loss ratio (which cuts waste) and, with the help of some Dems, the Independent Payment Advisory Board. So, in short, they're keeping the cuts they savaged Obama for and are fighting against saving money. In fact, Ryan's Medicare plan is 40% more expensive, and his plan to pay for it is to not pay for it.

Get the unemployed back to work. There's a bunch of infrastructure that needs maintentance and upgrading (one of many things that the GOP was for before Obama was for it. Now they're against it, no matter the price to the economy). And, since ten years Treasuries are going for less than the rate of inflation (meaning the rest of the world is aching to lend the US money even if they lose money in the process it's an ideal time to focus there. Infrastructure aids business, eases trade, raising revenues. And it puts people back to work, raising revenues. That's win-win-win, which you don't get very often.

 
At 12:56 AM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

con't 2
Bring back HAMP and put some political muscle behind it. That was the little part of TARP that, thanks to Santelli's "unscripted" rant, helped fuel the rise of the Teabaggers. People who are underwater on their mortgages aren't spending (it's a demand recession, not a supply one).

When you get programs, fund them. When you start wars, pay for them. Stop subsidizing already profitable industries.


The problem isn't just that the government spends too much, it's that a lot of what it spends it on provides poor value (Pentagon) and that unemployment (and under-employment) is both is killing revenues and requires more spending.



Anonymous "The poor are getting exactly what they want when they vote in liberals to take care of their every need."
Now you're just being ridiculous. The poor don't vote.

"And tell me MO are you gonna start again that big liberal lie that the old have to eat pet food in America to keep from starving because the 50% of Americans who are paying tax, don't pay enough?"
Go on and take that $1,200 a month from your grandfather. Go ahead and try.


"Define 'working poor' the income level that one needs to qualify to be a part of?"
22K a year for a two parents, two kids family is the poverty threshold.

"And with all the stimulus money spent under the Prez, why would there be any poor, working poor or unemployed?"
Because the Stimulus turned out to be based on a what turned out to be hopeless optimistic estimates of the crash?
Because the 14T that evaporated with the popping of the bubble can't be fixed overnight? (or, for that matter, in a decade)
Because the Fed, whose responsibilities are to balance unemployment and inflation, has chosen to focus entirely on inflation?
Because he's not a unicorn?
Because you seem to be attributing Utopian views on us that we don't have?

"Nice link to a two year old article…"
And it's improved in the last two years? If anything, it's gotten worse.

"Now 44 years later, with many more laws than 400 since passed, and trillions of dollars spent and the fucking problem is the same as it was in 1968."
Actually, it got better up to the mid-70s, plateued, and has been falling fairly consistently ever since.

"There are people in American who don't have as much money as others so it's govt job to spread the wealth around to make things 'fair'. Bull shit!"
Wow. The "us" that exist only in your head must be terrifying. I'm not "spread the wealth". I'm "Hello, top 20%. You're the only decile that has benefited from Supply-Side Economics. How about you pitch in and help dig your country out of the hole that the last few decades of tax cuts and deregulation have made, hmm?"

"Move to France, no one is going to be rich there, you ought to love it."
Well, here in Canada we pay more in taxes, have more regulation (and that regulation has more teeth) and the only reason our economy is slowing is because our loud neigbours to the South partied for three decades, ruining the place, and now that the bill has arrived they're debating on how badly to screw the poor, sick and old to pay for it (exempt: GOP, who is debating on how badly to screw them in order to pay for more tax cuts).

"Have you no shame?"
Said with no hint of self-awareness or irony.

 
At 1:02 AM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Here, you can fix the budget and stabilize the debt. Sometimes in life, there are no good choices, only ones between "bad" and "also bad, but in a different way". This is one of those times. "Eat the poor" and "Screw grandma" aren't deficit cutting plans. Those are plans to end up, deservingly, with your head on a pike.

 
At 7:36 AM, Anonymous Picard said...

Thank you for the response Modus. Some interestin points

 
At 8:25 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The US should stop subsidizing other countries' defense with its military"

I agree, starting with Canada, then Haiti, all of Europe, Nato, UN Peace Keeping. Only place to have our military would be Japan (limited) and S. Korea, and there only because of that bat shit crazy socialist leader in N. Korea.

" There's a bunch of infrastructure that needs maintentance and upgrading (one of many things that the GOP was for before Obama was for it."
DUH, remember all those shovel ready jobs, which weren't so shovel ready?

"How about you pitch in and help dig your country out of the hole that the last few decades of tax cuts and deregulation have made, hmm?"
Pure liberal b.s., govt. revenues go up when taxes are cut, the problem has been the govt cant stop spending.

" the ONLY reason our economy is slowing is because our loud neigbours to the South partied for three decades"
Now that is some of the best self-awareness or irony spin you have ever tried to foster as truth.

 
At 8:27 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"And it's improved in the last two years? If anything, it's gotten worse"

Thank you for agreeing with me on the performance level of President Obama, it is not getting any better, why should he be given four more years to prove what a failure liberalism is?

 
At 11:28 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous: "Thank you for agreeing with me on the performance level of President Obama..."

Yeah, he hasn't been what I expected either, but electing Romney would only accelerate our nation down the road to perdition. I prefer the person who, intentionally or unintentionally, delays the inevitable collapse.

They're obviously both corporatist candidates, doing the bidding for multinationals and the banking cabal.


"...why should he be given four more years to prove what a failure liberalism is?"

Well, he's not a liberal, that's for sure. (See the previous answer as to why.)

You ask why he should be given four more years? Because they'll give him four more years, that's why. He's a known entity, and he's doing an admirable job through the eyes of his handlers. As far as Romney, they realize he's socially clumsy, unpolished, awkward, and prone to gaffes and errors that would ultimately prove to be too embarrassing. In other words, he's a klutz.

 
At 12:00 PM, Anonymous Picard said...

@Jefferson's Guardian

How could the international banks control obama? I think a guy who spent 20 years of his life getting high with marxists professors would object to that.

 
At 12:52 PM, Anonymous Harry from Mass said...

The progressive, central planning welfare states all over the world are collapsing.

And here in the USA, California is falling off the cliff.

It's a frightening time and a joyous time, all at the same time.

 
At 1:27 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff's guard see lots of black helecopters every night following him.

 
At 3:21 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Harry from Mass "And here in the USA, California is falling off the cliff."
In California, via Proposition, it only takes 50+1% of voters to get a program, but it takes 66% of both house of the Legislative to pay for them. California shows how well that works out.

 
At 6:20 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes Mo, and as we all know, getting the evil rich to pay more for new programs has been a bitch. I say we just take all the wealth from anyone whose worth is more than $250,000, divide it up equally between those whose wealth is less that $250,000, give it to them in one check and just shut down all the goofy entitlement plans, and govt departments that effect or manage social welfare and call it a day.

What say you?

 
At 6:59 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous, the "us" that live in your imagination must be terrifying.

 
At 7:46 PM, Anonymous James of Houston said...

Goodly fucking God, the word is "their" - their wealth, their tax returns, whatever. Not "there wealth", "there tax returns", etc. I know you anonymous morons don't give a shit and normally I let it go, but this thread is so full of this kind of shit that I have wonder if the the ignorance and stupidity are especially contagious this season.

Hint to the devout rabid: learn at least the basics of how to write in the English language. Maybe your points will be taken more seriously. You're welcome.

And thanks Tom for the column.

 
At 8:14 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Picard: "How could the international banks control obama?"

You're kidding, right?


"I think a guy who spent 20 years of his life getting high with marxists [sic] professors would object to that."

If only it were true. Sadly, it's just another one of your frequent imaginings.


Anonymous: "Jeff's guard see lots of black helecopters every night following him."

Hey, you're the one who sees a communist around every corner; a Marxist behind every bush.

Not me.

 
At 8:41 PM, Anonymous James said...

What is with all these lazy ass people that keep on posting as Anonymous, take 3 seconds to type John or Bob so we can tell one person from the next.

 
At 9:36 PM, Anonymous Picard said...

President Barack Obama on GM bailout

“Now I want to do the same thing with manufacturing jobs, not just in the auto industry, but in every industry."

WHAT!?

Seriously, my liberal friends, who's the real fascist? Not only did this guy purchase an automaker but he plans on buying up all the other industries in the country.

You know in the SovietUnion factories never went out of business either. Let's vote this guy out before he nationalizes any more of our economy.

 
At 9:37 PM, Anonymous John said...

>>Anonymous said...
Jeff's guard see lots of black helecopters every night following him.

Don't you? You have probably been to Wallmart, use a cell phone - or a computer. If you don't know what I'm hinting at, research rfid chips and just imagine everything that can be done, some good, some bad and some downright ugly - and then realize that they are doing much, much more.

Still don't know what I'm talking about? Go to spy chips.org

Oh yea, read 1984 too. It is that fucked up...

 
At 9:47 PM, Anonymous John said...

>>>Picard said...
Seriously, my liberal friends, who's the real fascist?

Do you think any major presidential candidate in recent years has represented anyone else?

 
At 9:56 PM, Anonymous Picard said...

@John

I don't think there's ever been a president who's campaigned on the wholesale buying of private industries.

 
At 11:41 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look a Canadian black helicopter, being flow by a communist (from around the corner), with a cell phone up to their ear, hovering over "WALLMART"!
I BETTER TURN MY COMPUTER ON AND GO TO SPY CHIPS.ORG!!! Rats that address doesn't work, wonder if there should be a space between words "spy" and "chips"? Must be because "John" would never do something that stupid in a post!

Then I to will read 1984,again, for the 800 time, John, you dim wit.

James, I'll type a name in my post when Harry Reid discloses his sources. Until then, suffer.

 
At 11:43 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Ah, Picard,

Not only did this guy purchase an automaker but he plans on buying up all the other industries in the country.

Auto bailouts were in the works under Bush, you know. And Obama doesn't own or manage GM.

This is the mystery to me:

but he plans on buying up all the other industries

Wow! Did he say that? Or did he suggest, as Politico paraphrased:

"bragged about the success of his decision to provide government assistance and said he now wants to see every manufacturing industry come roaring back."

Did you read the sentence after the one you copy and pasted for us?

He wanted jobs to come roaring back in the US, not going to China.

There. You see he's not urging us into Communism after all. What makes you believe he is actually campaigning on the "wholesale buying of private industries"?

Where exactly did he say "buy" anyway?

Somebody really, really wants you to believe that though...

Do you know why?

 
At 12:27 AM, Anonymous Picard said...

@dave Dubya

I don't care what bush had in plan he also bailed out the financial sector. He's not up for election this year. The fact that the us government owns shares in own company, nationalizes another, is a problem. You dont think BHO would make another "investment" with taxpayer dollars?

 
At 1:40 AM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Picard "The fact that the us government owns shares in own company, nationalizes another, is a problem. You dont think BHO would make another 'investment' with taxpayer dollars?"?
Yes! Yes! Yes! Then he just needs St James Place and he can start putting up hotels!

 
At 2:00 AM, Anonymous Ron Baldwin said...

Tom,

Please come up with another rant. By the time you get about 30 or 40 comments the same tired old gang start name calling and posting ridiculous comments.

 
At 3:35 AM, Blogger Tom Degan said...

I'll have something up a little later on today, I promise. I've been taken to task by some for tolerating the extremist trolls who tend to migrate to this site like bent little myna birds. I'm always asked, "Why do you not delete them?" There are two reasons for this:

1. I am a First Amendment purist.

2. They're so damned funny - unintentionally so of course. How could you not love 'em?

 
At 10:00 AM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Picard,
You didn't answer my question.

Neither have you shown why the auto bailouts are a problem worse than the loss of industry and jobs.

All tax dollars ideally go to some kind of investment, not for profit, but benefits such as public services, infrastructure, military, law enforcement, health care, etc.

And since the "job creators" are failing to create jobs, and the Republicans are obstructing government jobs programs, then safety nets are required. Those are benefits we invest in for those in need.

 
At 12:51 PM, Anonymous Harry from Mass said...

" James said...
What is with all these lazy ass people that keep on posting as Anonymous, take 3 seconds to type John or Bob so we can tell one person from the next."

Good point James.

Tom Degan, makes it too easy to enter a post by just hitting the Anonymous button. In general he is following the welfare state model where people get lazy receiving benefits from the gubmint. Why start out with a minimum wage job and work up the ladder when you can have your rent and food paid for by the gubmint? These lazy people have a "no skin off my ass" attitude to those pulling the wagon paying for the endless war on poverty.

 
At 12:53 PM, Anonymous Picard said...

If general motors fails because of bad business models they shouldnt be saved by the federal government. Either they do chapter 11 and restricture or they close down. Bailing them out just kicks the can down the road. Ford was in a similar predicament as GM and they saved themself without government help. Why should the government pick gm as a winner while other companies are losers. It is beyond any bureaucrats abilities to know a bailout like this is good in the long term. A situation like the one they were in shouldve prompted the factory unions to reconsider there demands big time if they want to keep their job.

 
At 1:06 PM, Anonymous Picard said...

Look we have two different ways of looking at this and thats fine. I see creative destruction or crony capitalism. You guys see whatever it is you believe in.


MO, up for a game of monopoly? I call the shoe

 
At 1:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

James,

If I don't have to show a photo I'd to vote, why should I prevented from posting as anonymous?

Anonoymous III

 
At 1:27 PM, Anonymous Picard said...

The fact is that if BHO wants to pump his chest for violating A.) the enumaerated powers to the federal government in the constitution. B.) Classical free marke capitalism and for bragging about a deal that cant even be called a sucess. Yet. If you throw billions of dollars at a company, theyre clearly going to grt some work done. Im just not buying it. Doesnt matter who he bails out for whatever reason. The financial sector gets to line there pockets for making the worst business practices EVER. but when BO bails someone out for the same its all good
Sorry for repetitive commenting im trying to push the thread to 100

 
At 2:32 PM, Anonymous John said...

Most 'Anonymous' posts are properly credited. The poster is generally regurgitating partisan tripe that originates within teams of (anonymous) propagandists funded by wall street tycoons. This has been going on for at least a century. Since the arguments presented rarely link together logically, these posts usually are incoherent rambles. This is what happens when society places a higher value on repetition rather than rational thought and imagination. I'm sure a few of you fellow Americans will recognize this as a big part of your education experience - or most any time you turn on the television...

 
At 4:08 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Picard "Ford was in a similar predicament as GM and they saved themself without government help."
Ford fell too, when the price of gas spiked and truck sales stalled. Ford got a bailout, back before such things were political. You know, way back in 2006. And While Chrysler and General Motors had to go to Congress to beg for cash in 2008, every other automaker's finance arm was having trouble as well.

"MO, up for a game of monopoly? I call the shoe"
Has anybody ever actually finished a game of Monopoly?

 
At 4:47 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The poster is generally regurgitating partisan tripe that originates within teams of (anonymous) propagandists funded by wall street tycoons. This has been going on for at least a century." John

Watch out for the black helicopters, they want your alum. foil hat.

anonymous IV

 
At 5:26 PM, Anonymous John said...

If only foil would help. No they don't want our hats, they want subservience. Unfortunately, their method of achieving that involves the destruction of motivation, imagination and independent thought. Clearly you're a great success...

 
At 7:21 PM, Blogger Tom Degan said...

"Between the numerous black gangs attacking white people in every city of America."

Some examples, please....

I'm waiting.

 
At 10:46 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogger Tom Degan said...

"Between the numerous black gangs attacking white people in every city of America."

Where was that posted?

 
At 1:16 PM, Blogger edwin_ said...

Ryan "Mr Death Panel" is the new VP. Should be alot of fun with this one

 
At 3:28 PM, Anonymous john doe said...

hey john, mo, jefferson's guardian, dave w and tom degan,

i want government run free health care, free college education (liberal arts degree preferably), food stamps, and free housing. i don't want to really work.

i want my cannabis as cheap as possible which i know would only be higher priced if run by the government.

my math is real bad when it comes to accounting like those who spend other peoples money like drunken sailors.

which party should i vote for?

 
At 7:25 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

John Doe: "which party should i vote for?"

How 'bout the one in your schizophrenic imaginings?

 
At 5:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The TRUE effects of liberal policy!

WASHINGTON (AP) — Unemployment rates rose in 44 U.S. states in July, the most states to show a monthly increase in more than three years and a reflection of weak hiring nationwide.

The Labor Department said Friday that unemployment rates fell in only two states and were unchanged in four.

Unemployment rates rose in nine states that are considered battlegrounds in the presidential election. That trend, if it continued, could pose a threat to President Barack Obama’s re-election bid in less than three months


 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home