It’s the spending! Romney muddles the message on non-taxpayers

I see a little merit to some of this thinking. However, given the vast amount of explanation, context shifting, revisionist history, and “it sure sounds likes this, but it’s really, really meant to be that” interpretation, you’ve lost the audience and a lot of credibility. Which begs the question: is this guy– or his team — anywhere near prepared or competent to lead the United States of America. And that answer requires no vetting, apologists or spin doctors.

• Link
• Report this comment

I pay my son $20.00 a week for chores around the house. That he can’t afford the $40.00 a week I charge for room and board proves what a slacker he is.

• Link
• Report this comment

Romney and Ryan have “spilt the beans” during the election campaign, and may lose the election by their “tactlessness”.

It is apparent to anyone who hasn’t been brainwashed by FoxNews that the Romney/Ryan priorities are: 1. shower the rich with more tax cuts, 2. spend trillions more on useless cold war military weapons, 3. liquidate the middle class by raising taxes and shrinking social institutions, 4. erode the fragmented, fragile social support for children and the poor, and, 5. balance the federal budget in 30-50 years or so, if we’re still around.

Ryan was naive enough to put the plan in writing, in the form of a laughable budget bill that contains no revenue. Romney divulged it to his fat cat supporters at a $10,000-a-plate campaign event in Boca Raton.

Still, the sorry team will win the electoral votes of the poor, dumb, ungrateful southern and middle western states that receive more from the federal government than they contribute. Their insults to the base Republican voters, those unthinking clingers to their religions of hate and collections of useless guns, won’t even register.

• Link
• Report this comment

Republican hypocrites like Paul Ryan acting as social conservatives have passed endless legislation redistributing wealth and creating the majority of the deficits. The Repubs passed the only socialist health care bill under Reagan giving the nonpaying and moochers free emergency room care at the expense of the insured and those who pay. Repubs gave away free Medicare drugs to get the ex drunk reelected in 2004. People who are not US citizens get welfare payments in the form of earned tax credits costing billions a year due to a conservative tax redistribution tax scheme engineered by Conservatives. Yet Obama reduced the number of federal workers
and is blamed for all these excesses and ballooning deficits.A bill designed to cure Reagan’s redistribution of health care responsibility and designed by Romney gets attacked daily as being socialism when it requires an individual mandate or a cure for health care moochers..
kYLE -It is refreshing to see a conservative man up to the fact that Repubs are equally responsible for this mess.So quit the redistribution tit for tat game- voters are not idiots.
As the big dog said – you are not going to solve the problem by doubling down on trickle down or kicking granny of of the nursing home.

• Link
• Report this comment

I know the Republicans always say that Bush is history now. Stop talking about Bush.

However, if Obama wins, the Republicans can chalk two democratic wins up to the failure of the Bush-Cheney Administrations.

People may not think Obama is great on the economy, but they know that Bush-Cheney was terrible. The Republicans may well pay a heavy price for their misguided support of Bush.

Of course, Romney doesn’t help anything with his inept campaign style.

• Link
• Report this comment

And the same one-note wonders continue . . . .

• Link
• Report this comment

the liberal claim that “the rich” don’t pay their fair share of taxes. In recent years, the top 1 percent of earners in America have paid more than a third of all income taxes. The top 5 percent, about three-fifths.

Kyle has his own telephone game problem. No one claims the wealthy doesn’t pay a fair share of total taxes paid by Americans. The issue is that, compared to the middle class and working Americans, they don’t pay a fair share of their income in taxes.

• Link
• Report this comment

buzzzy, in the words of Chris Rock:

“W makes it hard for a white man to get elected President.”

or, even better:

“Is America ready for a black President? Why not — we’ve already tried retarded!”

• Link
• Report this comment

You can buy votes but you cannot buy prosperity.

• Link
• Report this comment

is this guy– or his team — anywhere near prepared or competent to lead the United States of America.

Just because you run a business doesn’t mean you are a great person. Look at Chainsaw Al Dunlap and what he did to Sunbeam. Look at what those two guys did to Enron.

• Link
• Report this comment

Kyle, yes, it is the spending. But it’s the tax code, the regulatory burden, and the size and scope of a Federal government writ large that all contribute to our fiscal and economic woes.

Just under $500 billion in regulatory costs added to businesses since Obama went into office. Untold billions in giveaways to so-called “green” businesses that failed. The government can’t get out from under it’s purchase of GM because we’d lose our shirts due to the stock being so devalued.

If Bank of America and American Airlines consolidate functions to save money, why can’t the United States OF America do the same?

And to some of the usual suspects on here who will continue the “Romney is going to cut taxes on the rich” falsehood, remember that he will be cutting tax RATES, while removing tax loopholes and special interest deductions to balance the tax payments out. Revenues will remain neutral in most cases and may even rise slightly. And to you who will counter that he hasn’t specified which loopholes he’ll go after, he has already stated he’ll be looking at ALL of them. No specificity needed.

And before you go blaming or crediting any executive for a particular bill or policy implemented on his/her watch, take a bit of time to do the research on who was running the legislative branch before doing so.

You’d look a lot smarter if you did.

• Link
• Report this comment

it’s the tax code, the regulatory burden, and the size and scope of a Federal government writ large that all contribute to our fiscal and economic woes

And the two wars started and waged over a 10 year period with nada to show for it…oh, and giving out tax cuts while waging those wars.

And also bailouts to banks….

• Link
• Report this comment

“i notice that it has now been over 3 hours since kyle posted this essay, and so far none of the usual conservative suspects have posted.”

That’s because at 5:00 a.m. most conservatives are getting themselves ready for something you liberals don’t understand.

Work.

• Link
• Report this comment

Kyle – Paul Ryan voted with his party (and other Dems) on just about every spending increase put forward by George W Bush and his party. Heck, he even asked for stimulus fudning for his district. Does that make him a fiscal conservative?

• Link
• Report this comment

tiberius…..just because young mr. romney says he will be looking at all the tax loopholes doesn’t mean that he will actually be doing anything about them. even if he did, the k street lobbyists would spring into action and persuade congresspeople to revive those loopholes in future legislation. therefore, it is massively unlikely that the tax code could be simplified.

• Link
• Report this comment

According to studies by the Tax Policy Center, six in 10 households that pay no income taxes are working families having a tough year or two. The authors note, “most of these working households… pay federal income tax in other years, when their incomes are higher.” Many take advantage of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), originally a Republican policy that offers a tax break to low-income working parents. According to the authors, “the majority of households that receive the EITC get it for only one or two years at a time, such as when their income drops due to a temporary layoff, and pay federal income tax in most other years.” We have a social safety net, albeit one of the flimsiest in the developed world, and it is doing what it is designed to do – keeping people’s heads above water (before the crash, 39.9 percent of households paid no federal income taxes).

The Big, Fat Lie Behind Romney’s Absurd 47% Argument
http://www.alternet.org/election-2012/big-fat-lie-behind-romneys-absurd-47-argument

• Link
• Report this comment

spaceman @ 8:42.

With that kind of attitude, we’d still be a British colony.

Fortunately, we Americans actually believe we can accomplish things every now and again.

• Link
• Report this comment

I want to pass along kudos to Kyle for a fact based argument that does not seek to assign blame to President Obama for the current 47% figure. The President has not passed new legislation that has caused a material increase in this figure and as Kyle stated, much of it is a result of previous across the board tax cuts by the GOP. Now I wish I could say the same for Governor Romney in the tape, who was clearly insinuating what Kyle and those that deal in facts know is not the case, Obama did not create this dependency.

• Link
• Report this comment

Let me see if I’m getting this: The GOP helped create the “47%”, and now use that as a symbol of the shiftless.

Smart politics.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Let me see if I’m getting this: ”

You’re not.

• Link
• Report this comment

Once again you miss the point. At the bottom income level there’s hardly any money to tax. At the top, there is. If you look at the gap between rich and poor and you will see it is widening. I do not shed tears for the wealthiest. They can and should pay more. If not, then let’s start cutting. And we’ll start with defense spending, social security, and medicare. Those things that your granny supports. Repubs aren’t for reform. If they were, there would be no talk of how Obama took money aware from Medicare. So Kyle, let’s start there and stop the nonsense.

• Link
• Report this comment

No, he just exacerbates and encourages it.

Any specific examples of policies that have increased and encouraged a material increase in the 47% that you care to provide or will you just blow through this like you did in not citing a single loophole you claim were provided in detail?

• Link
• Report this comment

So let’s just stop trying, spaceman? THAT’S your solution?

Welcome to the age of “It’s too hard”, ladies and gentlemen.

• Link
• Report this comment

tiberius…where did you get the idea that i think we should stop trying? methinks your imagination is working overtime. you and i can try. with our own effort we can make our lives better. we just need congress to actually do something constructive instead of engaging in constant partisan bickering. that may be expecting too much since congress has not passed spending bills on time for many years now.

• Link
• Report this comment

“or will you just blow through this like you did in not citing a single loophole you claim were provided in detail?”

When one says “all of them”, one doesn’t have to provide specifics, as “all” are covered in the statement.

Is English your primary language, Pennypacker?

• Link
• Report this comment

“When one says “all of them”, one doesn’t have to provide specifics, as “all” are covered in the statement.”

Anyone who believes that is possible needs a quarter under their pillow.

• Link
• Report this comment

The fat lady of the Republican has sung this week.

Tiberius, turn out the lights when you are done please.

• Link
• Report this comment

When one says “all of them”, one doesn’t have to provide specifics, as “all” are covered in the statement.

Is English your primary language, Pennypacker?

I have yet to see a source to you claim. Just to show you how it is done, here is a quote from his recent appearance on NBC’s Meet the Press with a link following.

Asked on the NBC program “Meet the Press” on Sunday which tax deductions he would eliminate, he said only that he would target “some of the loopholes and deductions at the high end” while lowering the “burden on middle-income people.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/10/us/politics/romneys-tax-plan-leaves-key-variables-blank.html?pagewanted=all

Notice how he did not say all of them.

Feel free to ignore the facts and respond with more juvenile insults, I will take that as your surrender.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Anyone who believes that is possible needs a quarter under their pillow.”

I never said it was “possible”, Just Saying. I merely stated the target. As we know, in Washington, we always get less.

But Romney’s the only one that is willing to try.

• Link
• Report this comment

tiberius….anyone can say they will look at all the tax loopholes. those who have a spine are the ones who specify what loopholes they will eliminate. i noted you have also avoided any response to my point about lobbyists getting those loopholes restored in future legislation.

i would bet that if all corporate loopholes (a.k.a corporate welfare) were eliminated, the dow would lose at least 20 percent of its value in the short term. that would eventually be recovered through higher prices for everything.

• Link
• Report this comment

Finn @ 8:24,

“Kyle has his own telephone game problem. No one claims the wealthy doesn’t pay a fair share of total taxes paid by Americans. The issue is that, compared to the middle class and working Americans, they don’t pay a fair share of their income in taxes.”

I have asked this before, and have never got a straight answer. I’ll ask it again:

In your opinion, Finn, what percentage of one’s income is “fair” for the government to take if you gross:

$30K/yr?
$50K?
$100K?
$250K?
$500K?
1M?

Inquiring minds want to know what the “FAIR” percentages are. This is percent of income for
ALL taxes, not just federal, and not just income tax. For the sake of simplicity, you can choose whether or not to include sales tax since that is variable depending on the individual’s behavior.

Maybe it is easier to answer this way: Same income levels as above, what is the minimum percentage of one’s income that one can KEEP and spend/save how they want, below which you would concede that it would be unfair to have ANY government take ANY more?

Really interested in knowing your thoughts here.

• Link
• Report this comment

The conservative meme, “soak the rich” just doesn’t have the same impact after Romney was heard disparaging those 47% who “don’t pay taxes” and are “dependent victims and he’s not worried about them” Let Romney and his peers prove that THEY pay taxes! Romney won’t release his taxes, now, will he? No–because he knows that when we find out that he didn’t pay taxes, he will automatically lose the election. So, Romney hides his tax returns. As far as these rich…oh, excuse me, “job creators” keep getting their Bush tax cuts but fail to invest their tax savings in American jobs instead of overseas workers and tax havens–they have no business lecturing to the rest of us about what “parasites” (See Ayn Rand) we are.

• Link
• Report this comment

america has to come to terms with who is actually paying for all this spending. 47 per cent not paying income tax should be an unacceptable level of people not paying it. at least half of those should have some skin in the game. 2 years of unemployment benefits is far too much. it encourages people to not actively (or actually) seek employment. we need to be encouraging people to seek and take employment rather than increase the unemployment, disability, food stamps, earned income tax credits,etc, etc. Absolutely we should take care of our sick and elderly but our able bodied people should be working or actively seeking work. kyle if you don’t think we have a problem with all of this then you are wrong. I’m all for a tax increase on the wealthy providing that for each $1 increase there is a corresponding $3 to $4 spending cut and the cuts must be made before the increase takes effect (otherwise history shows the cuts will not be made).

• Link
• Report this comment

“Loyalists weren’t traitors. They supported the government that was in power – the British government.”

Finn proving once again he supports oppressive governments who tax without representation.

• Link
• Report this comment

It is sufficient enough that I dismiss your claims.

Take your “facts” and go home. They aren’t wanted in my political world. Where is my pacifier?

• Link
• Report this comment

tiberius….yes, and the dow was severely overinflated before the 2008 crash, which occured after some 15 years of irrational exuberance.

And why do you think government policy should determine the value of private industry?

actually, gommint policy should not determine the value of private industry. private industry should be able to stand or fall on its own without help from tax loopholes (a.k.a. corporate welfare).

it really is quite amusing that you keep making such massively wrong assumptions about what i think, keep it up and i will send you out on the stand-up comedy circuit! B-)

• Link
• Report this comment

Boag, what is it worth – what am I willing to pay to ensure the federal government protects the system that allows me to make the wage I make in 2012?

If i make $100k by working in 2012, I would be willing to pay 25% of my income to ensure I can make at least that $100k in 2013.

If I make $100k through investments in 2012, I would be willing to pay 25% of tht income to ensure I will have the opportunity to make that same amount or more in 2013.

• Link
• Report this comment

arguing with Tiberius is like arguing with a 2 year old.

• Link
• Report this comment

So are you revising and extending your reply to Dr. David, Finn?

“Cause that’s what your wrote, sonny.

• Link
• Report this comment

But this is not necessarily an argument for raising taxes on the 47 percent. In fact, conservative policy created much of the 47 percent.

The child tax credit is a social-conservative initiative. The refundable Earned Income Tax Credit is largely based on the “negative income tax” proposed almost 50 years ago by conservative economist Milton Friedman.

I can honestly say that I have seen very few Conservative writers who have owned up to that point. You deserve a tip of the hat for being honest about that. My only question is why would people make it a point of contention about the 47% when the current GOP candidate is talking about instituting more tax cuts?

If I remember correctly, the zero percent tax liability group was around 35% when Clinton left office. With the additional tax cut packages passed since in combination with the economic collapse, that group swelled to the now infamous 47% point. Wouldn’t it be a possibility that cutting rates even more could potentially push the 47% even higher? There is a significant number of households with income exceeding $100,000 a year that belong to the 47%. Cutting their liabilities even more could potentially add to that number. How could the GOP square the possibility of them pushing that percentage higher after hammering Obama about almost half of American households paying no tax?

• Link
• Report this comment

spaceman, I KNOW what you’re thinking, because you typed it out.

To summarize, let’s not try it, because it’s too hard. The deck is too stacked against us. He (Romney and we can’t possibly make any significant changes because there will be opposition to them.

Thanks for surrendering, spaceman, and giving up on your country.

• Link
• Report this comment

Republican Meme, Nov 7: We’re right, we just nominated the wrong candidate…

• Link
• Report this comment

“don’t worry; the man trailing Barack Obama by less than 3 percentage points on average has been similarly pronounced “dead” many times before”

True, Kyle.
But he was only running against Republicans then…

• Link
• Report this comment

“It’s the spending, stupid.”

Kyle, in your counsel above, who’s the first “stupid”?

• Link
• Report this comment

yeah, ok, I can revise it. I would be williing to pay 99% of every dollar if it ensures I will have the opportunity to make a dollar in 2013.

Keeping 100% of $0 isn’t much of a goal, ya know?

• Link
• Report this comment

Kyle: “So, the point of this “47 percent” statistic is to refute the “fair share” claim. After all, if 47 percent pay nothing and the top 5 percent pay a majority, how can we say “the rich” aren’t paying a “fair share”?”

This is just another repeating of what the conservatives pretend to be an argument, by implying that it is “obvious” that those numbers show that “the rich” pay a fair share or more. They just never make a cogent argument why it is obvious.

• Link
• Report this comment

Tell me this, cons, why should a hedge fund manager only have to pay 15% of his earnings when a carpenter has to pay 20%?

The carpenter isn’t creating jobs? The carpenter isn’t building an investment?

• Link
• Report this comment

“They just never make a cogent argument why it is obvious.”

They do, but you just can’t recognize the obvious, and don’t know what fair means.

• Link
• Report this comment

“The carpenter isn’t creating jobs?”

No, the carpenter is DOING a job.

“The carpenter isn’t building an investment?”

No.

• Link
• Report this comment

Kyle

9/20/2008: Obama up 2.4

9/20/2012: Obama up 3.3

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/obama_vs_romney_compared_to_obama_vs_mccain.html

Long way to go, but doesn’t look good if all else stays even. Of course we have the debates which could prove to be a game changer.

• Link
• Report this comment

It’s the spending, stupid.

I agree. Military spending is way out of control.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

• Link
• Report this comment

Kyle, it’s not the spending…it’s the buying, and although it maybe semantics, the semantics are important. The reason it is important is that spending denotes, spend like a drunk sailor and buying is the wise utilization of resources to purchase needed goods and services. Is purchasing unneeded military aircraft from Lockheed in Marietta spending or buying. Depends on your perspective. Is providing assistance to struggling families in America spending or buying? Now that we know that Romney’s dad was on welfare when he was young, does that change the view of welfare? Is welfare for Romney’s ancestors good and welfare for today’s struggling families bad? To use Romney’s 47%, do you agree that military personnel in a war zone should pay taxes and that the elderly on Social Security didn’t take responsibility of their own lives? Once you get outside the sound bites, the questions get a little more difficult. One person’s spending is another person’s buying.

• Link
• Report this comment

“how does it feel to get carpet bombed by that adulterer ex-president and the kin of Jimmy Carter?”

Yet to see it, “independent” “thinker”.

Just because the fawning sycophants in the media go all ga-ga about this stuff, I’m not seeing it resonate in the actual people who are going to decide this election.

• Link
• Report this comment

tiberius…

spaceman, I KNOW what you’re thinking, because you typed it out.

To summarize, let’s not try it, because it’s too hard. The deck is too stacked against us. He (Romney and we can’t possibly make any significant changes because there will be opposition to them.

Thanks for surrendering, spaceman, and giving up on your country.

well, tiberius, you have your underwear all in a knot because i am not agreeing with you. so be it. since your only apparent “debate tactic” is personal attacks, (”giving up on your country”, which i have never done and never will) i shall contact the punch line comedy club in sandy springs so your “comedy” tour can get started. you might want to dress in very casual clothes since the audience will have rotten tomatos available!

• Link
• Report this comment

“The electoral map is really not looking good for Romney.”

And if this were October 20th, and we had sate polls from just a week previous, you might have a case, Cheesy.

But alas, you do not have a case at all.

• Link
• Report this comment

No, spaceman, I just don’t like defeatists.

• Link
• Report this comment

The only way for taxes to ever be equal is we all pay the same % on what we make. Till then it will never be equal because the “rich” can buy any deduction they want.

BWT: Since the top 1% pay one third of the taxes and the top 5% pay two thirds doesn’t that mean they make one third and two thirds of all the income respectively? If we all paid the same %, every man, woman, child and corporation, revenue would increase and tax % could be decreases.

Won’t ever happen though. Too many politicians are already bought and paid for.

• Link
• Report this comment

Finn McCool (The System isn’t Broken; It’s Fixed)

September 20th, 2012
9:27 am

“If I make $100k through investments in 2012, I would be willing to pay 25% of tht income to ensure I will have the opportunity to make that same amount or more in 2013.”

So you are OK with paying 25% additional taxes on the money you have already made and invested?

Let us say you have worked hard all your life and saved $250,000 to live on. You invested this money and you receive a 10% (capital gain) return on your investment ($25,000) each year to live on since you have to keep the original amount invested to keep money coming in every year.

At the current rate the cap gains tax is 15% or $3,750
You want it to be 25% and this retired couple to pay $6,250

Do you really thank this FAIR to all of our seniors that have worked hard, saved took the personal responsibility to take care of themselves at retirement so that you libs can have extra money to redistribute to the people that are working age and refuse to be responsible?

• Link
• Report this comment

“If we all paid the same %, every man, woman, child and corporation, revenue would increase and tax % could be decreases. ”

Except it’s still the spending . . .

• Link
• Report this comment

Just Saying..

September 20th, 2012
10:45 am

“… but spending is the biggest problem.”

And the bigger problem, when in power, the Republicans just followed the Democrat model they complained about:

-Medicare Part D
-Iraq war
-Yearly budget deficits
-Smoke and mirror accounting

Plus tax cuts.

Past behavior is no guarantee of future results. But it’s what most people go on…

Yes, let us talk about “past behavior” where is the Obama spending cuts? What does Obama’s budget have to say about spending (or like you libs put it investing)?

You are guessing is to what a Republican administration may or may not do but we know exactly what 4 more years is going to get us.

• Link
• Report this comment

Here is a question for you Democratic supporters. How much money should it take for the government to give the services you all expect from them? In other words how much of the total wealth produced each year in this country go to the government?

20%?, 25%, 50%? Please give us a number.

• Link
• Report this comment

td–obviously you are talking about the 10% of seniors who rely primarily on their own private retirement plans for most of their incomes. You say nothing about the 90% who receive all or a significant part of their retirement income from Social Security. I appreciate your concern for wealthy retirees but I think they will do just fine. As to the others, since your wife works for the Welfare Dept., surely you know that 85% of nursing home revenues come from Medicaid and nursing home Medicaid is the single biggest part of Medicaid? The residents are among the parasites in the 47% to which Romney referred. Do you agree with him?

• Link
• Report this comment

“As for current spending, isn’t the House still approving appropriations bills? i.e…………… signing the checks”

So you’d rather have a shutdown of government, TBS? Why give the fawning sycophants in the media yet another thing to harp about?

Why do you insist the GOP should feed the trolls?

• Link
• Report this comment

“What happens when President Romney muddles the message to Israel about Iran? Maybe we can get bogged down in another 10 year war with zip to show for it?”

Never happen.

Israel would wipe them out before they’d get bogged down in a 10 year war. There is a HUGE difference between “nation building” and survival.

• Link
• Report this comment

td:

The consensus seems to be that Obama put entitlements on the table, Pelosi & Reid had conniptions but went along, but the House Speaker couldn’t get his side to agree.

And the debates told us $10 in tax cuts (for the 47%?) couldn’t get $1 in tax increases (for the 47%?) with any Republican candidate.

So to me, I’m not guessing. I’m listening.

• Link
• Report this comment

While it didn’t do much for his political career, Gingrich’s move sure woke up Clinton.

Newt took the political hit, but he did get the results.

I am no Newt fan, but must give him those kudos

• Link
• Report this comment

“I pay my son $20.00 a week for chores around the house. That he can’t afford the $40.00 a week I charge for room and board proves what a slacker he is.”

Actually, it does. If he knows the rent is 40 and he does nothing to make the other 20, then by definition he is a slacker………

• Link
• Report this comment

“The consensus seems to be that Obama put entitlements on the table, Pelosi & Reid had conniptions but went along, but the House Speaker couldn’t get his side to agree.”

Guess you haven’t read Woodward’s book yet, have you, Just Saying?

• Link
• Report this comment

‘My budget has funded a responsible increase in our ongoing operations. It has funded our nation’s important priorities. It has protected Social Security and Medicare. And our surpluses are big enough that there is still money left over.

Many of you have talked about the need to pay down our national debt. I listened, and I agree.

We owe it to our children and grandchildren to act now, and I hope you will join me to pay down $2 trillion in debt during the next 10 years.

At the end of those 10 years, we will have paid down all the debt that is available to retire.

That is more debt repaid more quickly than has ever been repaid by any nation at any time in history.’

Just a quick reminder of the stew cons swallowed the last time we elected a GOP pres…

• Link
• Report this comment

MYTH ROBME ‘S dad was on welfare and a victim.

• Link
• Report this comment

Kyle says: In fact, conservative policy created much of the 47 percent.

and I repeat: In fact, conservative policy created much of the 47 percent.

and an ever repeatable quote from the movie Cold Mountain:
But they made the weather and then they stand in the rain and say ‘S***, it’s raining!’

• Link
• Report this comment

“i would bet that if all corporate loopholes (a.k.a corporate welfare) were eliminated, the dow would lose at least 20 percent of its value in the short term. that would eventually be recovered through higher prices for everything.”

I do believe the loophole elimination proposal is coupled with an overall tax rate decrease…….taking that into consideration, the net change would not be that great if any. More money in the pockets of the consumer is a good thing……….

• Link
• Report this comment

“We, uh, use Ann sparingly right now so that people don’t get tired of her,”

Thomas “Mittens” Jefferson

• Link
• Report this comment

“I wonder if the audio of the current resident of 1600 PA Ave. stating that he is in favor of the redistribution of wealth will have any impact on these polls?”

I doubt they will, cc. My understanding is the the mainstream media isn’t even reporting on that audio tape in many instances. Andrea Mitchell of MSNBC wouldn’t even play it because she claimed it hadn’t been “verified”. MSNBC later played it on another show.

Romney gets his “47%” speech played, replayed and attacked on every newscast. Obama’s “redistribution” tape?

(Crickets)

• Link
• Report this comment

budgets

• Link
• Report this comment

“Ryan and Obama both putting up bugets that they both knew were not going anywhere, was nothing less than a dog and pony show. ”

Big difference, TBS: Ryan’s budget passed an actual legislative body. Obama’s didn’t pass either one.

• Link
• Report this comment

Tib: I use the word “consensus” advisedly.

Do you know more, or the same, as the general electorate?

What % of the electorate will read Woodward’s book, or be informed by it’s revelations?

Do you feel you can inform the electorate by posting every 5 minutes on Kyle’s AJC blog?

“consensus” is the right word.

• Link
• Report this comment

” Is purchasing unneeded military aircraft from Lockheed in Marietta spending or buying. Depends on your perspective. Is providing assistance to struggling families in America spending or buying? ”

Considering we choose everything we do, one would be wise to also apply that “spend or buy” scenario to those struggling families” as they are not all the same. Are we responsible for your everyday street thug that has no desire or motivation to better himself?? Spend or buy?

• Link
• Report this comment

“This question comes from a person, who complains that I do not express my “opinions.”

Because going though your blogging life pointing out someone’s alleged grammar mistakes is simply wonkish and a waste of everyone’s time.

• Link
• Report this comment

@Kyle…”It’s the spending, stupid.”

And yet in spite of all those revenue enhancing tax cuts for the upper incomes collections remain near historic lows…it’s really the politics! Because anyone with half a brain knows its spending and collections.

• Link
• Report this comment

“What % of the electorate will read Woodward’s book, or be informed by it’s revelations?”

Whether they have or not does not detract from the reported accuracy of the book, Just Saying.

That your “consensus” flies in the face of recent reporting, does.

• Link
• Report this comment

Tiberius

I haven’t read the book or any reviews, so I can’t speak to it at all.

Who is reporting on its accuracy?

• Link
• Report this comment

So, we had a surplus a while back.
Then we gave it all away though tax cuts and a couple skirmishes.
And the only option is to cut spending?
And not let the tax cuts expire?

That’s the problem with short term memory.

• Link
• Report this comment

Finn

If Julian Assange has paid people to hack into or illegally access US government databases, he may not be a traitor because he isn’t a citizen, but he is scum.

Not here defending all of the actions of the US government, but what that guy is no one to hold up as any hero or anything close to it.

Of course since he is seeking asylum in efforts to avoid questioning, we may not ever know what he did exactly.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Because anyone with half a brain knows its spending and collections.”

Not to be snarky but you left yourself bare on this one……..for those with a full brain they would know that there would be no need for collections without the spending……….cause and effect.

• Link
• Report this comment

“And not let the tax cuts expire?”

And that is where politics come into play………NEITHER party wants that to happen. But one side does use this divisive gimmick about letting them expire for certain segments of society even though they know the resulting monetary outcome will not fix the problem…….but it sounds darn good on the stump.

• Link
• Report this comment

“the more you insist the electorate knows as much as you do,”

And yet, I have never done so, Just Saying.

Go figure.

• Link
• Report this comment

Tiberius

From what I have read about Woodward, I would say he is known to be fairly accurate and consistent, unlike some of the blabbermouths on both sides who write fiction stories about any given President.

But you mentioned the reported accuracy, that is what I was asking.

In my opinion, these type books range from mole hills made into mountains (hyperbole and rhetoric, which I think they all to some degree for impact), the truth to outright lies or some combination.

To be honest, I tend to stay away from them regardless of who is the author or the President. I am sure I miss out on some good tid bits of knowledge, but I am also confident that I miss a bunch of crap as well.

Really got to run. Have a meeting at 1:00 in Duluth. I live downtown and need to crap a bite to eat.

later.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Of course since he is seeking asylum in efforts to avoid questioning, we may not ever know what he did exactly.”

I have faith in the Brits…….asylum has already been granted, but he either lives the rest of his life in their embassy or he tries to leave the country…….and the Brits are ticked to the point they will not let him slip out. I think it’s a matter of pride at this point………..

• Link
• Report this comment

grap

later I will crap

hahahaha

• Link
• Report this comment

“For those keeping score game over right here”

And yet, not a single vote has been cast, JDW.

What are this week’s MegaMillions numbers again?

• Link
• Report this comment

“In the period from 1983 to 2009 The top 5% of the richest Americans accrued 81.7% of all of the wealth gained in America. (!!!)”

OMG…..you still operating on that closed economic snapshot theory?

In a global economy (like it or not that is now the reality), that snapshot means absolutely nothing………..how much income left our shores? How much came back?

For someone that uses terms like “simplistic tripe”, one should understand that simple way of looking at income/assets in the US is just that….tripe.

• Link
• Report this comment

“err, that was actually slate.com, not salon.com”

As if that mattered.

Crap is still crap, no matter the source.

• Link
• Report this comment

how much income left our shores? How much came back?

You tell me, economics guru.

Interesting that you never provide any data, facts or figures, but sure know what is wrong with any that is provided.

So please, none of your simplistic tripe…

• Link
• Report this comment

I see the hate-filled one-note wonder has escaped Bookman’s this afternoon.

• Link
• Report this comment

“I agree with you, then, the info in Woodward book will have no meaningful impact on the electorate.”

Nor have I said that, either, Just Saying.

How about this: You say what you believe, and stop trying to say what I believe.

Got it?

• Link
• Report this comment

Report: Never an Anti-American Protest in Benghazi, Only a Planned Attack

“CBS reports this morning that witnesses are saying “that there was never an anti-American protest outside of the consulate [in Benghazi, Libya]. Instead, they say, it came under planned attack. That is in direct contradiction to the administration’s account of the incident.”

“What’s clear,” the CBS reporter concludes, “is that the public won’t get a detailed account of what happened until after the election.”

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/report-never-anti-american-protest-benghazi-only-planned-attack_652761.html

• Link
• Report this comment

More Americans Than Forecast Filed Jobless Claims

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-20/more-americans-than-forecast-filed-jobless-claims-last-week.html

• Link
• Report this comment

Am…..those figures you provide as nothing more than a snapshot for that particular moment in time, and it has nothing to do with taxes.

You are trying to compare apples to oranges……taxes are wholly “within” our system (hence the reason 2T in corp profit is sitting offshore) while income/asset/wealth has a global component.

Trying to equate what one group has in comparison to what another group has without taking into consideration where all that money comes from is where you are going off the track.

It goes back to my simplistic tripe concerning the trade imbalance……when the middle class shops at walmart and buys all that foreign stuff, how much of their money is staying in China?……so in reality, they could be giving that money to some rich guy in china and our upper class is getting their extra wealth from Indonesians…………

• Link
• Report this comment

I see the hate-filled one-note wonder has escaped Bookman’s this afternoon.

Don’t be timid, tibby. Come on over to JB’s and name some names.

Oh that’s right, oh hateful one! You shat the bed so bad, so many times, you can’t! As in never, ever.

LOL at your expense…

• Link
• Report this comment

Oh, and since we’ve veered into Bob Woodward territory, what do you people think about the Obama Justice Dept. working in concert with the uber-liberal Media Matters on story lines and blogging subjects favorable to Obama and denigrating conservatives?

Rather Nixonian of the current office holder, isn’t it?

Even with a White House “enemies list”, everything old is new again . . .

• Link
• Report this comment

Totally off-topic but REALLY!!??!!

An attorney for Victor Hill argued Monday some of the charges against the once and possibly future Clayton County sheriff should be dropped because his personal use of county-issued cars and spending campaign money for non-election reasons was little more than stealing from himself and not crimes.

The federal government reminds me of a larger than life version of Victor, our own “Little Napoleon.”

“In politics, absurdity is not a handicap.”–Napoleon Bonaparte

• Link
• Report this comment

Apparently someone has no earthly idea what Nixon’s “hit list” was.

Because his analogy is absolutely silly…

The official purpose, as described by the White House Counsel’s Office, was to “screw” Nixon’s political enemies, by means of tax audits from the Internal Revenue Service, and by manipulating “grant availability, federal contracts, litigation, prosecution, etc.

• Link
• Report this comment

“judicial law, (ie: Citizens United decision)”

Ever since corps took over the media, CU was bound to happen………funny how so many have problems with CU but never seemed to have a problem with media corps being the only corps expressing an agenda/opinion.

• Link
• Report this comment

Tiberius:

Victor fancies himself a little Obama…he has the gift of gab.

• Link
• Report this comment

“That guy has gotta be a lib . . .”

Well of course he’s a lib and a Dem. How else could a politician facing 37 felony counts get elected? Can anyone imagine a Republican facing 37 felony counts getting elected???

• Link
• Report this comment

@@

How about Newt?, 3 adultry affairs, 30 page ethic violations as speaker, what form of Gov does that reminds you of? or Nathan Deal how many ethic violation did he have before he resigned as Sen?

• Link
• Report this comment

Can anyone imagine a Republican facing 37 felony counts getting elected???

Depending on the location and the office, yeah it could happen. Partisans are the same regardless of the party they support. There are many on both sides of the political spectrum that vote party over substance. To claim otherwise is a trip through fantasyland.

• Link
• Report this comment

“what about ssi, medicaide?”

gm, in case you missed it, the government takes money from you early in life, so that you can have it later in life. And you have no choice in the matter.

Now, if you’d like to stop taking it and give us a choice, I’d gladly give it up.

Otherwise, that is not redistribution. That is simply getting back what was taken by force.

• Link
• Report this comment

The stock market has about as much effect on the real economy as a trip to Vegas.

• Link
• Report this comment

Pawlenty jumps from the Romney Titanic voyage.

• Link
• Report this comment

gm:

Newt’s ethics violations?

It ended with a special counsel hired by the House Ethics Committee holding Gingrich to an astonishingly strict standard of behavior, after which Gingrich in essence pled guilty to two minor offenses. Afterwards, the case was referred to the Internal Revenue Service, which conducted an exhaustive investigation into the matter. And then, after it was all over and Gingrich was out of office, the IRS concluded that Gingrich did nothing wrong. After all the struggle, Gingrich was exonerated.

As far as his three marriages…I wasn’t looking for a husband. I was voting for a nominee.

I didn’t vote for Deal. I voted for Monds (I).

Hillbilly:

He’s got his work cut out for him but you can never can tell what a jury will do.

‘Ya think??? I never thought the voters would elect him. He’ll be judged by a jury of his peers…the people who elected him.

WRITE-IN GARLAND WADKINS! That’s WADKINS with a “D” not a “T”.

(ISH)

• Link
• Report this comment

“Pawlenty jumps from the Romney Titanic voyage.”

Finn proves once again how little he knows about political campaigns. You have an honorary campaign co-chair (largely unpaid and with no strategy input) leaving to get a job that pays the bills.

Absolutely nothing to see here. But Finn will spin it nevertheless.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doom

There are websites devoted to the shenanigans of politicians from both parties. I’m not naive enough to make the claim that one party isn’t capable of electing someone facing charges. I’m also not naive enough to think that neither party has elected or re-elected someone who’s done something criminal, whether they’ve been convicted or not. I’m not just talking about ethics investigations either.

If you’ve watched every single election on every level in every state and feel that you can make such an assertion, then more power to you. I won’t defend either party as I think they’re both full of criminal behavior.

• Link
• Report this comment

Haven’t seen that Gallup poll yet, but if it was taken after the embassy attacks, Obama is in trouble.

• Link
• Report this comment

And another:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/322396/note-paul-krugman-here-s-real-elminationist-rhetoric-dennis-prager

• Link
• Report this comment

Brocephus,

Yes. There are shenanigans on both sides and websites devoted to both. What I am saying to you is that just in general observations of watching the news and reading the papers that corruption and felonious behavior seems to be much more widely accepted in the Dem party. I think you’re just fooling yourself if you don’t believe that. And I also believe that if we just look at the Congress alone that the shenanigans of the Dems far outweighs those of the Repubs.

Last I think its telling in the expectations and differences in the 2 parties as to standards of behavior of their politicians. Newt had the common decency to resign even though the charges and evidence against him were minor and pretty flimsy. Did Barney Frank have the common decency to resign when it was learned his lover was running a prostitution ring out of Frank’s townhouse? And again. Do you honestly think that Repubs in a major city run by Repubs are going to re-elect a Repub mayor caught smoking crack or a Repub sheriff facing 37 felony counts.

The Repubs generally have a standard of behavior and common decency which is to be adhered to. One more example that illustrates it. What happened when that NY R congressman was busted advertising on craigslist shirtless looking for an affair? He immediately resigned as he should have. So what happened with Anthony Weiner and his fiasco? The guy tried hanging on for weeks until it cooled down and almost got away with outlasting the scandal before he finally resigned.

• Link
• Report this comment

When you have to take that much time to explain something so simple, you’re losing.

• Link
• Report this comment

Thulsa

If you feel better about yourself because you think somehow a D or R makes the politician or voter a better person, have it at.

• Link
• Report this comment

Spin it whichever way boosts your self esteem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

• Link
• Report this comment

@@

Is someone making you live in Clayton Cty? You do have a choice. If it isn’t getting any better, whining because they are Democrat seems like an excuse. MOVE.

• Link
• Report this comment

“To my point, it makes your feel better”

So on top of being a mind reader you have the innate ability to feel people’s emotions. You’re quite a talented guy.

• Link
• Report this comment

Iowa St. Fair,

I can’t speak for @@ but I would assume that after the Clayton county school board fiasco and school accreditation issues that home values sank like a rock in Clayton. She probably would lose a pile of dough if she tried selling her home. Besides doesn’t Clayton have boatloads of those foreclosed homes already on the market which would make selling her home that much more difficult?

• Link
• Report this comment

“If it isn’t getting any better, whining because they are Democrat seems like an excuse. MOVE.”

Nice to know that somebody doesn’t have a home underwater in value due to mismanagement via liberal policies, Iowa.

• Link
• Report this comment

Thulsa

So which administration was it and was the VP of that administration voted in as President?

Doesn’t seem that the Rs are big on “cleaning house” anymore than the Ds.

They both area corrupt. Again, if your spin makes you feel good about yourself, spin away, but it will not change the facts.

• Link
• Report this comment

What I am saying to you is that just in general observations of watching the news and reading the papers that corruption and felonious behavior seems to be much more widely accepted in the Dem party.

When you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail. I’m not fooling myself at all when compared to your thinking. Trying to quantify who does what more is nothing more than a means of excusing the behavior of those with whom you agree with. I don’t excuse any behavior from either party. If they’ve done wrong, then they should admit as much and do what’s right. If there’s only accusations, then we live in a country where you are innocent until proven guilty.

To attempt to compare Newt against Frank is nothing more than an attempt to paint one as worse than the other. When you have a party that campaigns on the sanctity of marriage while entertaining Newt as a credible candidate for POTUS, there is no room to try to compare to someone else. Before casting a stone, it’s best to make sure you’re standing outside of your glass house.

I can’t sit here and debate this with you all day, because I already know that your slanted view will never allow you to see the two parties as equally liable in this aspect.

Y’all have fun…

• Link
• Report this comment

@Tiberius…”I get the two of you confused sometimes, as you post the same tripe so often”

And here I thought you were just confused all the time.

• Link
• Report this comment

And if I saw anything in his policies he’s been successful in enacting or tried to do so, I might have some sympathy for Obama.

But he’s tried none of the things left off of the audio, but has tried everything on it.

Tough noogies, Lying.

• Link
• Report this comment

“yes, i know some will say i am throwing away my vote,…”

One only throws away their vote when they vote for anyone but the winner.

• Link
• Report this comment

No corruption in Dem controlled DeKalb county either huh sir.

http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/19172045/dekalb-county-employees-accused-of-taking-bribes-extortion

• Link
• Report this comment

For those who think I’m being selective, read this:

For as long as I’ve lived in Clayton County, our leadership have always been Democrats and we’ve always had corruption, not to mention investigations, be it white leadership or black.

We had a Republican chairman once. He lasted one term. He was a man of impeccable character. Can’t recall why the voters didn’t like him. I did.

My first job was with a lame-duck administration here in Clayton County. They were under investigation on their way out.

It’s been endless…ENDLESS, I tells ‘ya!!!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

Iowa:

Time to look in the mirror, stop blaming Hill, Democrats, etc and ask why am I still here?

Because until recently the road has always been a two-lane? Now it’s gonna be a four-lane?

Is that good enuff fer ‘ya or are you looking for something more sinister in my decision?

• Link
• Report this comment

@@

Corruption know no party. You are stuck in Democrat corruption, so that hits home, however it permeates both parties.

Again, the writing has been on the wall for years.

Why did you not see it?

• Link
• Report this comment

Iowa:

I had HOPE!

schnirt

• Link
• Report this comment

Thulsa, I’m kinda with Brosephus on this one. I don’t see a big difference between the two parties and their miscreants EXCEPT for this:

Republicans generally resign when their misdeeds are discovered. Democrats generally run for, and get reelected.

• Link
• Report this comment

Wow! Iowa State admitting that Hope & Change is dead in Clayton County.

Wonder when he’ll catch up with the rest of the nation . . .

• Link
• Report this comment

Tiberius

That county was “dead” long before Obama ever came on the scene, but nice try.

Swing again

Were those Democrats or Republicans on the Gwinnett County commission who were indicted for bribes?

• Link
• Report this comment

This just in!

Obama and Michelle are scheduled for visit ‘The View’ next Tuesday.

Wonder if Benjamin Netanyahu will have a seat saved for him . . . .

Letterman – check!

Beyonce and Jay-Z – check!

Vegas fundraiser – check!

‘The View’ – check!

A sit down with our most important Middle East ally . . . er, can I give you a call, Benny?

• Link
• Report this comment

Iowa St. fair provided a link showing Gwinnett corruption.

I then provided a link showing Fulton county corruption and Bill Campbell going to jail. I then provided a link showing DeKalb county corruption and numerous Dekalb county officials taking bribes. So far the count is 3-1 locally of Dem corruption vs Rep corruption.

Corruption nevertheless is everywhere but as I stated to begin all this its more accepted in Dem controlled areas and hence the continued re-election of Dem officials despite being under felony indictment. You don’t see Republicans with 37 standing felony counts being re-elected.

• Link
• Report this comment

Towncrier

September 20th, 2012
2:44 pm

“Obama and Michelle are scheduled for visit ‘The View’ next Tuesday.”

Too funny and, sadly, predictable. Letterman and then The View. I guess they really want to get challenged.

They want to make sure all those entitlement voters get out and vote for them.

• Link
• Report this comment

Romney’s scheduled to appear on “The View” in October. He’ll be fine.

It will, however, be interesting to compare the receptions offered both candidates.

• Link
• Report this comment

spending is still most of the problem —in particular wasteful spending. this is not just a democrat problem it happened under bush as well—only when we had a legislature controlled by republicans and democratic president have we reduced the deficit (even then it’s debatable). We can’t continue to spend a trillion a year more than we take in and we can’t make up a trillion by taxing the rich (even if we take all they make). the math is simple– we must get entitlement spending and exorbitant benefits (be they welfare/unemployment/what have you) back under control and reasonable. we can’t give free everything to everybody. we can’t allow illegals a free pass because you think if your party does this then they will vote for your party. common sense must return —balance the budget, stop spending like crazy, reduce the free stuff used to buy elections, then and only then consider raising taxes but do it in a fair and balanced manner (flat tax/etc exempt the first 15,000 of all income and then tax anything above that regardless of where the income comes from.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mitt is the Captain of a vastly sinking ship!

OBAMA 2012!

• Link
• Report this comment

Towncrier @ 2:44

“Too funny and, sadly, predictable. Letterman and then The View. I guess they really want to get challenged.”

No, the real challenge would be Rachel Maddow on MSNBC! ;-P

• Link
• Report this comment

Also, looks like Linda is not as all powerful as she thinks she is. LOL. I’m still here, lady. Feel the burn…LOL again

• Link
• Report this comment

Slow business day, Boag? That mythical dentist practice sure is busy, huh? You’re still here instead of tending to all those supposed customers who just can’t get enough of you? Shocking.

• Link
• Report this comment

Where are all of the “jobs” our beloved and oppressed “creators” are making? It’s too bad that I’ll need a passport and a Chinese Visa to find out! Yet, there they are crying for even more tax breaks. Guess what? Even if their rate was .00000001% they would still say it’s too high. Real patriots don’t hide their money in other countries. The real patriots built this nation to be free of British corporate controls. Apparently, wing nuts are cool with giving our country away to multi-national global conglomerates because according to them, that’s what the founding fathers envisioned. Stupid is as stupid does. How does it feel to be Willard’s pawn?

• Link
• Report this comment

Thulsa

Which administration was I referring to earlier?

• Link
• Report this comment

Mark,

Mitt is the Captain of a vastly sTinking ship.

Many make the analogy that his campaign is that of the Titanic voyage. Which is accurate in that the iceberg is a date called November 6, 2012. Notwithstanding that this is Mitt’s second “maiden voyage”. (LOL.)

More arguably he is Ahab aboard the Pequod, a man who attributes malignant and evil intentions to the “whale”, when in fact it is not the whale the American people but the crippled Ahab alone who possesses these characteristics.

• Link
• Report this comment

The next “best seller” among wing nuts: “Two-time Loser: The true story of the fleecing of middle class America” by Willard Romney. With a forward by the modern day prophet of the LDS entitled: “Is it too late to talk to you about converting to the LDS?”

• Link
• Report this comment

“How can a Mormon have four thumbs,” you may ask. Well, to understand that you need to know about a Mormon character named “The God Head.” Sadly, I wish I was making this stuff up.

• Link
• Report this comment

Romney appearing on Maddow or Matthews would make about as much sense as a thinking person responding to Trashman.

• Link
• Report this comment

“(Consider that people who live on $12.70 an hour do not earn enough in income to build retirement portfolios, within the financial framework of our society, but they can contribute to Social Security.) ”

Then consider why people live on that 12.70 an hour through to retirement and one may see the problem…………

• Link
• Report this comment