Hump Day Link-Around – Reagan Would Have Loathed The Buffett Ruse

Needed: A Marxist-Style Analysis to Understand and Combat the Extreme Left’s Hegemony

Good God – yes, it’s true – Marxist Obama shamelessly invoked Reagan this morning, suggesting Ronaldus Magnus would support his  nonsensical, election year  Buffett *Ruse:

“If it will help convince folks in Congress to make the right choice, we could call it the Reagan rule instead of the Buffett rule,” Obama said in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building.

“I’m not the first president to call for this idea that everyone has to do their fair share,” he said, quoting one speech in which Reagan said it was “crazy” for the rich to be able to use loopholes to get out of paying taxes. “He thought that in America the wealthiest should pay their fair share and he said so.”

In case you’re confused about the Buffet Rule, let Sean Hackbarth of the Free Enterprise Blog set you straight: Buffett Rule is a Tax on Job Creation:

It isn’t part of a comprehensive plan to reduce the deficit, it has nothing to do with helping the millions of unemployed Americans find a job, Deborah Solomon of the Bloomberg View editorial board writes that the rule is “a distraction that further mucks up an already complicated tax code,” and the Christian Science Moniter warns that the big White House push could backfire on Democrats.

So what is this really about?

Bloomberg tells us it’s about the White House targeting 400 people, since most high-income earners already pay a higher tax rate than middle and low-income earners without the Buffett Rule. It’s class warfare.

More along these lines via Washington Free Beacon video: Steve Hayes Rips Buffett Rule - He also ripped reporters for “not doing their jobs” by “putting this into perspective.”

And Rick Santelli weighs in:  BEASTMODE: Santelli Slams Obama Debtbomb.

The Buffet Rule is a cynical election year class warfare ploy. The White House already admitted it would only raise about $5 billion dollars in revenue per year while at the same time the Obama budget is spending trillions. The government needs to either drastically cut spending, or drastically hike taxes on the middle class if it wants to make a real difference in reducing the debt. Guess which one Obama would choose in his second term?

Ronald Reagan called for sweeping reforms and simplification of the American tax code – primarily drastic reductions both in tax loopholes and tax rates, and he took the highest tax bracket of 50% and lowered it to 28% . Reagan wasn’t messing around.

James Pethokoukis of The American Enterprise Blog: Here are some real ‘Reagan Rules’ for Obama:

Apparently President Obama is joking that he’s willing to change the name of the Buffett Rule to the Reagan Rule if that’s what it takes to get it through Congress.  But there are already so many Reagan rules — and Obama is following none of them. Here are few Reagan Rules the president would be wise to follow:

1. Blame government, not business.

2. Cut taxes and make the safety net more efficient.

3. Get government under control.

4. Obey the U.S. Constitution.

5. Don’t forget to cut taxes.

6. Don’t hate fossil fuels.

Read at all at the link.  Reagan would have loathed Obama’s cheap and pathetic class warfare politics.

Bob Owens PJ Media: Why I Called George Zimmerman a Murderer, and Why I Was Wrong:

How naive that post now seems. The narrative created by the media at that time was one of an innocent life taken for no reason at all, by a much older, heavier, and racist man itching for a confrontation.

That was before we found out there was only one gunshot and no coup de grâce. That was before we found out that George Zimmerman had not deluged the local police with 46 paranoid 911 calls in one year, but 46 calls over a period of eight years, which isn’t unreasonable for a community watch volunteer. The media had either lied about how often he called, or purposefully compressed the timeline.

That was before we learned that Zimmerman didn’t know Martin’s race when he made the call, and that race didn’t play a roll in any of the 911 calls the local police had on file.

That was before we discovered that George Zimmerman wasn’t the 240-plus pound bruiser in the five-year-old picture the media used as much as possible, but was listed at a much smaller 170 pounds by none other than the New York Times. That’s a nominal 20 pounds heavier than a teen that stood four inches over him.

That was before we found out that two eyewitnesses placed Martin on top of Zimmerman as the aggressor, and that at least one of them claims it was Zimmerman crying for help.

That was before ABC News attempted to claim police surveillance video disproved Zimmerman’s claim of being injured in what may have been a purposeful deception. The very same news organization was forced to later admit the presence of two lacerations on the back of George Zimmerman’s skull consistent with his claim of self-defense. In the end, details of the beating Zimmerman suffered at Trayvon Martin’s hands were only given a brief mention in the local news.

That was before NBC News was forced to fire a senior producer for selectively editing audio of Zimmerman’s 911 call in a deliberate effort to make him sound racist.

And of course, almost no one knows that on the night he took Trayvon Martin’s life, George Zimmerman willingly consented to take a voice stress analyzer test, a kind of lie detector test used by the Sanford police. He passed it.

The narrative has changed in the wake of new details, eyewitnesses, and embarrassing retreats. The actual story may in fact have been a textbook example of the proper use of deadly force.

Keep reading…

Peter Ferrara, The American Spectator: Why Obama Hates Paul Ryan:

Barack Obama’s address on April 3 at the Associated Press luncheon in Washington D.C. demonstrated why our politics and our country today are seriously dysfunctional, and only the American people can fix it at the ballot box. Find the transcript online and print it out as I did.

I will show below why it reveals that the President, in fact, does not understand the major issues facing the country, indeed, he actually can’t even discuss them intelligently. Moreover, he is hopelessly, abusively dishonest about what he does understand. Thirdly, what he is demanding as policy is irreconcilable left-wing extremism.

Fourthly, what the speech shows is that Barack Obama is very angry. He is angry because he has been completely shown up by Paul Ryan, who stepped up in his budget and provided the leadership that Obama promised America in 2008, and America so badly needs, but that Obama has not only failed to deliver, but refused to deliver. In fact, he has delivered just the opposite. What the speech says to me is that Obama has internal polls showing him getting creamed in public opinion by Paul Ryan. Republicans may have those same internal polls, explaining the surge of interest in Ryan for VP.

What Ryan did most of all that has Obama actually feeling embarrassed if not humiliated is propose in his budget both pro-growth tax reform with bipartisan support, and fundamental entitlement reform that enjoys bipartisan support as well.

Keep Reading…

DaTechGuy: Why the MSM hates new media: Alabama edition:

We think about the the NBC’s and the New York Times as spinning an agenda, we rail about the Jon Stewarts and Stephen Colberts and the false narratives, but in truth to most of the country the NYT is a paper they will never read in their lives and Stewart and Colbert are so insignificant that a 53-year-old move that’s been available on video for decades not only beat them 3-1 in the rating last week but took them in the 18-49 year old demographic.

But for every NYT there are dozens of Birmingham News’ uninterested in violence by Biker Gangs if they are of the wrong color. For every Jon Stewart there are countless Worcester Telegrams who find threats of violence and arson trivial if directed at pro-life centers and for every CNN there is a slew of Torrance Daily Breezes who don’t find the actions or pronouncements of major party congressional candidates worth their time.

During his talk in Lexington Mass. last year Andrew Breitbart urged those in attendance to carry a camera and report and even if it was no more than a Kindergarten teacher pushing an agenda to send him the story and he would make it national. If you are a blogger willing to report on those local stories and promote them up the blog ecosystem you have the power to make a difference. Breitbart understood this and so does every member of the MSM with an agenda who dismisses bloggers and tweeters.

That more than anything else is why they hate you and fear you.

Update: Related thoughts on media hatred and containment from Ed Driscoll and J. Christian Adams

LifeNews: Catholic Cardinal: A Sin to Cooperate With Obama Mandate:

A leading Catholic cardinal at the Vatican has essentially said that complying the with Obama birth control mandate would have Catholics and Catholic organizations participating in sin.

The mandate compels religious employers to pay for birth control and drugs that may cause abortions in health coverage for their employees and a revised mandate will compel them to refer employees for free coverage from their health insurance plans, which will eventually have the payment mandate.

Would the Cardinal also tell the people that voting for pro abort Dems is also sinful, please?

Fox Nation: ‘The Real Obama’: Radical Inner Circle:

SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS HOST: Now, you are who your friends are, right? If we apply that saying to the president, well, we should all be very scared because the list of his friends and those serving in his administration with questionable pasts and beliefs runs very deep.

Tonight, we continue to vet the president. We look at Harold Koh, the top legal advisor at the State Department. Now he espouses some of the most controversial and downright dangerous positions of anybody in Obama’s inner circle.

In 2004, he compared the U.S. under President Bush to the likes of Iraq and North Korea saying, quote, “Several nations who’s disobedience with international law has attracted global attention after September 11 most prominently North Korea, Iraq and our very own country, the United States of America. For shorthand purposes, I will call these three countries the axis of disobedience.”

Maggie’s Notebook: DHS: Millions of Rounds of Ammo – Replacing Bean Bags With Bullets on the Border? BulletProof CheckPoint Booths – for what?:

This story doesn’t go away and no explanation is surfacing. Maybe the Department of Homeland Security routinely buys 450 millions rounds of .40 caliber high performance HST bullets to arm law enforcement around the country, over a 5 year period. Anyone know how and how often we make large purchases (seemingly large) of bullets designed to plow through about anything and do the maximum damage by ravaging whatever it enters? The last I heard, our Border Patrol is armed with bean bags. Murdered Agent Brian Terry had only a bean bag gun to defend himself against the wrong end of an AK-47, furnished to a member of a Mexican cartel member by the U.S. Department of Justice.

I’ve been wanting to write this post - Michelle Malkin: Don’t do business with progressive appeasers:

Let’s stipulate: Activists on the left are free to exercise their rights of speech and assembly to boycott businesses whose politics they oppose. Conversely, activists on the right are free to exercise the power of their pocketbooks and refrain from supporting businesses that shun their values.

So, what are you waiting for, conservatives? There are coordinated shakedowns taking place right now that involve some of America’s most prominent companies who’ve chosen to surrender to progressive bullying and race-card opportunism. Silence is complicity.

On Tuesday, McDonald’s told liberal magazine Mother Jones that the company had “decided to cut ties with ALEC, the corporate-backed group that drafts pro-free-market legislation for state lawmakers around the country.”

The fast-food conglomerate follows in the feckless footsteps of Pepsi, Coca-Cola, Intuit (maker of Quick and Quicken Books software) and Kraft Foods — which have all withdrawn support for ALEC after drum-banging from Color of Change.

I can live without all of those brands but one – Going without Coke is going to HURT.

But she’s right. It’s the right thing to do.

Breaking News?-–Political Wire: West Says Nearly Half of House Democrats are Communists

The biggest culprit in Teh War on Wimmins turns out to be….(drumroll please): Obama White House pays women less than men, records show:

Female employees in the Obama White House make considerably less than their male colleagues, records show.

According to the 2011 annual report on White House staff, female employees earned a median annual salary of $60,000, which was about 18 percent less than the median salary for male employees ($71,000).

 

*Not a typo.

Linked by Michelle Malkin, thanks!

47 Responses to “Hump Day Link-Around – Reagan Would Have Loathed The Buffett Ruse”

  1. tlipscomb555 Says:

    “We’re going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that have allowed some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying 10 percent of his salary, and that’s crazy. It’s time we stopped it.”

  2. nicedeb Says:

    The reason I call it the “Buffet ruse” is because it’s not a serious proposal. It’s an election year ruse meant to fool the drones like you. Effecting only 400 Americans, by the administration’s own admission, it wouldn’t even put a dent in the debt.
    Buffett’s tax rate is lowered by the large proportion of his income that comes from dividends and capital gains, which incur lower tax rates than regular earnings. It ‘s not even clear that this surtax on the rich would change that. Real tax reform is a good idea, but this sure ain’t it.

    In the meantime, Buffett’s Company, NetJets, a unit of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., is suing the IRS over what it called an “illegal” $643 million tax assessment.

    But the phoney POS doesn’t mind letting his name be exploited by the cynical President.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203611404577046374108267952.html

  3. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere Says:

    “I’m not the first president to call for this idea that everyone has to do their fair share,” he said, quoting one speech in which Reagan said it was “crazy” for the rich to be able to use loopholes to get out of paying taxes. “He thought that in America the wealthiest should pay their fair share and he said so.”

    Of course Reagan’s response was to simplify the tax code AND lower all the tax rates across the board, which had the net effect of raising the amount of revenue collected by the Treasury, and setting off a wave of economic activity that had been supressed by the mailiase of President Cardigan.

    If only the left could point to a similar success at any time they played the “Raise Taxes On The Rich!” card, this approach by President Downgrade wouldn’t seem quite so absurd and desperate.

  4. David @ Engage America Says:

    A surtax on millionaires might be a more politically palatable method to pay down our debt but it won’t solve our core problems. Americans don’t need another tax, we need tax reform.

    There is no doubt that tax fairness must be improved and the way to do that is to rebuild the tax code from scratch using a plan like Bowles-Simpson that leaves no sacred cows untouched. Shared sacrifice is the only way we will be able to simplify the tax code, improve fairness, and spur economic growth. http://bit.ly/noTDPF

  5. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere Says:

    Ahhh yes…the “shared sacrifice” canard.

  6. Carlos Says:

    Reagan and Obama have about as much in common as a duck and an ape. Both have two legs, both have four appendages, but the similarities pretty much disappear after that.

    Obama comparing himself to Reagan was simply a ruse to get fools to think maybe he is a centrist. And obviously, there are some fools who buy that line.

    BTW, why doesn’t he compare himself to great jackass presidents? Like Clinto? Or Carter? Or LBJ? Or JFK? Maybe it’s because all but the real fools out there know none of them was great at all, let alone THAT great.

  7. UNeverKnow Says:

    test

  8. Here are some real ‘Reagan Rules’ for Obama – John Malcolm Says:

    [...] Hump Day Link-Around – Reagan Would Have Loathed The Buffet Ruse (nicedeb.wordpress.com) [...]

  9. Carlos Says:

    Any time Obhammud (or any other politician, for that matter) begins a thought with “Let me make this perfectly clear…” you know that nothing but lies and obfuscation is next to be heard.

    Of course, in Obhammud’s case, the simple fact that he’s breathing means you’re about to hear lies and obfuscation, but that’s a different story…

    But it’s amazing how many people listen to what he says, don’t understand a single thing that he says (because inevitably, what he says is complete nonsense anyway), and really believe that he’s just dropped the biggest pearl of wisdom on their pointy little heads the world has ever seen…

  10. tlipscomb555 Says:

    Deb, Let me be perfectly clear, you hate Obama. It doesn’t matter what he does you will find fault, thus a justification to hate him. – Good Christian Values?

  11. nicedeb Says:

    You are correct – I can’t stand him because I can’t stand liars.
    And It is thanks to my “good Christian values” that I allow a a lying lefty like you to comment here under false pretenses. (Okay, fine – it amuses me, too.)

    But be advised – the moment your act wears thin – (any moment now) – the banhammer is going to fall hard.

  12. tlipscomb555 Says:

    First I don’t lie and second I am NOT a Liberal. – But I assume if someone doesn’t agree with your Right-Wing extremist views, then you believe they must be a liar and/or a leftist. I am neither. – I don’t believe in following an ideology that controls my opinions, as it seems you do. By the way, in 2010 I voted straight Republican. – I post on your blog site because I dislike the disinformation you spread like a poison that causes division among good Americans. I realize that you believe you are doing good, but doing good means offering possible solutions to problems/issues, not attacking Obama every single day.

  13. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere Says:

    not attacking Obama every single day.

    Back before the Press abdicated its duty, this was more commonly known as “reporting the facts.”

    That said, I’m not sure what your hamfisted and misguided criticism offers in the way of “solutions to problems/issues”, other than helping to slience critics of the Administration who point out the extraordinary mendacity and corruption that had been defined by the person putting his feet on the Resolute Desk when he isn’t wooing campaign funds from the 1% at $33k a plate dinners, or focusing like a laser beam on lowering his handicap on the back nine, or enjoying serial vacations on the taxpayer’s dime.

    The simple fact is that there is nothing UNChristian about pointing out bad stewardship in public servants and differences between what he and his appointees say and do that are so blatant that a blind man could see them. It has been a national pastime since John Adams’ administration, and is still Constitutionally protected, so perhaps you could move your peddler’s wagon full of “Shut Up, I said!” on down the road.

    You really aren’t likely to find any takers here.

  14. nicedeb Says:

    tlips – how many times and in how many ways do I have to tell you that nobody believes you? Your act isn’t even semi believable, okay? LOL!

  15. tlipscomb555 Says:

    I wasn’t saying that you should stop your criticism of Obama. What I was attempting to say is your relentless attacks on Obama is NOT helping anyone, and only divides Americans. It doesn’t solve anything, it only reinforces the (Left) opposition into believing that the Conservatives have No solutions and is full of hate.

  16. nicedeb Says:

    You speak well for the opposition because you ARE the opposition. Sadly, I won’t be taking your advice – I’m getting ready to do a post about Obama’s war on conservative women which I’m sure you’ll love.

  17. tlipscomb555 Says:

    You are correct, I’m the opposition to extremist of (both) the Right-Wing (and also to the Far Left). – Sadly you will hurt your side’s support. For example, the reason a Moderate Republican (Romney) is the leading Republican candidate is due to the Tea Party’s extreme views, which pushed out any reasonable (electable) candidates from attempting to run. – Additionally, the Right-Wing is pushing the moderates and independents away from the Republican Party, and you are in effect (unknowingly) helping the Democrats.

  18. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere Says:

    For example, the reason a Moderate Republican (Romney) is the leading Republican candidate is due to the Tea Party’s extreme views, which pushed out any reasonable (electable) candidates from attempting to run.

    No, the reason Romney is the candidate is that the better choices are sitting this one out, largely because most of them are already in office and serving their constituencies there, whether it is Ryan, Rubio, Pence, or even Christy, who would be way down on my list and still be preferable to Romney, who is still preferrable to President Downgrade.

    As for equating “reasonable” with electible, I can only laugh, since confining the race to the candidates who the self-appointed experts tell us are the electible ones means that the only real choice between those candidates is the part of their hair, and not the cut of their jib. Reasonable is not safe and vanilla.

    Additionally, the Right-Wing is pushing the moderates and independents away from the Republican Party, and you are in effect (unknowingly) helping the Democrats.

    Please. The last time moderates and independents were welcome in the Democratic Party was when Billy Jeff the Philanderer was in office. The hard left turn since continues to turn off anyone who has actually bothered to read the Constitution or the Federalist Papers, much to Phil Hare’s chagrin.

  19. nicedeb Says:

    Hey, T, why do you “like” right wing extremists like Jamie Ratdke and Eric Cantor and Tea Party Patriots on Facebook? So you can troll their FB pages like all Republican moderates do?

  20. tlipscomb555 Says:

    I listen to all viewpoints, if you noticed I also “liked” some Democrats as well. I haven’t posted on Jamie Ratdke, Eric Cantor or the Tea Party Patriots pages in several months. You are welcome to check since think I’m a “lair”.

  21. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere Says:

    You’re still here?

    Was the Nancy Pelosi “We Don’t Admit It Is Astroturf” meeting of concern trolls cancelled this evening?

  22. nicedeb Says:

    “listen to all viewpoints?”
    You participate in organized, left-wing FB flash mobs… Against Republicans you hate. Mmmmkay. Not “extremists”. Mainstream repubs.

    Now please stop embarrassing yourself with the phoney concern trolling. You are not fooling anyone.

  23. tlipscomb555 Says:

    I did NOT engage in an organized Flash Mobs. – I am not associated with any groups, my opinions are my own and are expressed as an individual, not with any organization or group. – I posted my critical opinion on Eric Cantor’s FB page because of my disappointment in how the debt-limit became a crisis. – I seldom post (meaning one post in many months) on politicians FB pages. – It appears that you want me to be this Left-Wing extremist that is poking fun at you, well I’m not. I am a Moderate that is sick of the Right-Wing (Tea Party) destroying the Republican Party by pushing out those of us that don’t align with your extremist views. As such, Obama now has a good chance if winning the election, and you are too dumb to understand why!

  24. nicedeb Says:

    No silly, I don’t think you are poking fun at me, you are doing a painfully poor job trying to fool me.
    (Psssst: A moderate Repub wouldn’t follow LOLGOP, a twitter account that pokes fun at Republicans).

  25. tlipscomb555 Says:

    LOLGOP is funny … what can I say. Since you checked out my Twitter contacts you will notice I have a mix of political contacts, both liberal and conservative. But mostly my contacts are business and technical related.

  26. nicedeb Says:

    Well see – T, if you find them funny, that’s fine, I would expect a lefty to think anti-Republican humor is funny. But not a Republican.

  27. Carlos Says:

    I for one am getting real tired of hearing that anyone ideologically/philosophically to the right of Lenin is a “right-wing hate extremist.”

    Got news for you, tlip: my views are at best moderate compared to 1965 politics and at worst I would be called a blithering idiot commie by many of those times. It is not we on the right who have slipped into extremism, it is the mindless, government-loving statists who have moved in a flat-scale model of the political spectrum, to socialist extremism. I and those like me who still hold values of an earlier time as worthy of being retained are definitely NOT the extremists. It is you and your kind who have pushed this country’s greatness into a mudpool and wish it to drown a sorrowful and ignoble death.

  28. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere Says:

    I am a Moderate that is sick of the Right-Wing (Tea Party) destroying the Republican Party by pushing out those of us that don’t align with your extremist views.

    Again with the “extreme wingerz !!!111!!!eleventy!” talking point. You have flogged it in this thread like it owes you money. Instead of sounding like an escapee from the DummieUnderground, how about you give some examples of the “extremist views” that have so incensed your delicate sensibilities, buttercup?

  29. tlipscomb555 Says:

    Carlos, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Medicare bill into law on July 30, 1965 with support of 13 Republicans.

  30. nicedeb Says:

    All hail Lyndon B. Johnson and the 13 RINOs.
    You know what this party needs? Even more RINOs bending to the will of the statists. That is the proper Republican role.
    No Dems should ever be asked to compromise their big government ideals in cooperation with limited government “extremist” Republicans, though. No sir.
    All the compromising should be on our side. That’s the moderate way, right Tlips?

  31. tlipscomb555 Says:

    Compromise is the way Government functions and should/must be implemented by both parties. – I posted that fact to show Carlos that not all Republicans in 1965 were ultra Conservative as he tried indicating.

  32. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere Says:

    Compromise is generally how bad law is made.

    “Constitutional limitations on Congressional Authority? C’mon, those silly founders didn’t actually mean that. People can’t govern themselves. That’s why we have the Kennedy School of Government, and Harvard Law. Where else can you take courses
    in “ruling”, and in Obama Studies?”

    But at least they can go to the Rubes back home, and tell ‘em how hard they are working on their behalf, right?

    Now where are your examples of that “Winger extremism” that gets you so puckered?

  33. geoff Says:

    I posted that fact to show Carlos that not all Republicans in 1965 were ultra Conservative as he tried indicating.

    That’s not what he said – your point is irrelevant. He said that he would have been considered a moderate in 1965, not that all Republicans were ultra-conservative in 1965. In fact, many Democrats voted against Medicare, suggesting that Carlos is right.

  34. tlipscomb555 Says:

    “Compromise is generally how bad law is made.” and good laws. Our country could not exist without Compromise, example: the Declaration of Independence http://www.teachertube.com/viewVideo.php?title=Compromise_in_The_Declaration_of_Independence&video_id=140748

  35. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere Says:

    Our country could not exist without Compromise, example: the Declaration of Independence

    And luckily, we got to keep it, despite that compromise.
    And all it cost was 700,000 dead and 2 poorly written Constitutional Amendments. What a bargain!

    Now do you have some examples of that “Winger Extremism”, or is it just time for me to drop that banhammer on you?

  36. nicedeb Says:

    Our country could not exist without Compromise,
    Brilliant point. Maybe you should go troll Dem FB pages and blogs, now, because their leadership is so bad at compromise – they won’t even present a budget.

  37. tlipscomb555 Says:

    A principle attribute of an extremist is No Compromise. – It seems Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere adheres to this qualification per his/her own words.

  38. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere Says:

    A principle attribute of an extremist is No Compromise. – It seems Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere adheres to this qualification per his/her own words.

    So you really have no examples to point to then? It was all just talking points…all of which have been busted as soon as you dropped them here? Seriously…give me an example of how that “winger extremism” manfested in a candidates or office holders that are making the Republican Party so “unpalatable” to Americans.

    For that matter, some facts that are opposed to the “disinformation” that ND posts here might be refreshing, rather than the tired old talking points. Please…you have lingered on this thread for days now, and have yet to bring anything but asertions without support.

    You’ve made this the tlipscomb555 show, but you’re about to get canceled for lack of content. Please tell me you have something, ANYthing to back up your empty rhetoric.

  39. nicedeb Says:

    See, the problem you keep avoiding, tlips, is one side has been doing most of the compromising for far too long and it’s led us to the unsustainable position we’re in, today.
    That’s a big word – I’ll repeat it for you.
    UN-SUS-TAIN-ABLE.

    The CBO estimates that our economy shuts down in 2027 if we continue down the path we’re on.
    Obama’s Buffett Ruse does nothing to fix the problem. It’s not serious. You’re asking Republicans to compromise with cheap demogoguery so we can continue on the path to destruction.

  40. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere Says:

    Besides, the real Buffett Rule isn’t the same one that President Downgrade keeps paying lipservice to.

    The real Buffett Rule is taking ten years to pay your taxes, then challenging them in Tax Court.

    Obama’s Buffett Rule is using a select group of one percenters who don’t think they pay enough to the government, and cannot bring themselves to voluntarily write a check until those who already pay taxes are obligated to pay more.

  41. tlipscomb555 Says:

    One Right-Wing extreme example: Elimination of the Min. Wage. – Anyway, I’m done with this thread … everyone have a nice weekend and don’t stress too much, life is too short.

  42. nicedeb Says:

    Hm. Nobody here has ever talked about eliminating the minimum wage, and it isn’t something most Repubs other than maybe Ron Paul (who we loathe) are talking about – so -that was a huge fail, there T.

  43. geoff Says:

    Hm. Nobody here has ever talked about eliminating the minimum wage

    Though one could argue that the large increase in the minimum wage by Pelosi et al. was a contributing factor to the recession in general and a major factor in the very high unemployment rate among 16 – 20 year olds.

  44. nicedeb Says:

    I’m pretty sure we have argued that. And I would argue against any increases until the economy is back on track. But virtually nobody is talking about eliminating the minumum wage.

  45. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere Says:

    Anyway, I’m done with this thread … everyone have a nice weekend and don’t stress too much, life is too short.

    Well, showing your ass is almost like waiving a white flag, right?

  46. geoff Says:

    And I would argue against any increases until the economy is back on track.

    And any increases in the capital gains tax. Which is what is wrong with Obama’s proposal. He’s not closing “loopholes” as much as using a giant hammer to smash the good with the bad. It’s axiomatic that increasing capital gains taxes reduces the incentive to pursue risky investment. It certainly does for me. Somehow Obama thinks he’ll end up ahead by taking investment money and using it to reduce his deficits by less than a percent. But as with all his economic policies, it’ll end up underperforming by a huge margin, and the he’ll have to…

    …blame Bush.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,473,234 hits
  • free counters
  • Is your cat plotting to kill you?
  • Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 464 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: