Obama’s Deal with the GOP

Politics • Views: 29,908

The big political news of the day: compromise.

President Obama and congressional Republicans agreed Monday to a tentative deal that would extend for two years all the Bush-era income tax breaks set to expire on Dec. 31, continue unemployment benefits for an additional 13 months and cut payroll taxes for workers to encourage employers to start hiring.

The deal has been in the works for more than a week and represents a concession by Obama to political reality: Democrats don’t have the votes in Congress to extend only the expiring income tax breaks that benefit the middle class. The White House estimates that the proposed agreement would prevent typical families from facing annual tax increases of about $3,000, starting Jan. 1.

Obama was able to extract an agreement from GOP leaders to support an additional 13 months of jobless benefits, a 2 percent employee payroll tax cut and extensions of several tax credits aimed at working families that were included in the stimulus bill.

The deal also would revive the estate tax, but it would exempt inheritances of up to $5 million for individuals and $10 million for couples. Democrats on Capitol Hill are strongly opposed to setting the cap at that high a level and to the 35 percent rate discussed by Obama and Republicans that would apply to the taxable portion of estates.

Jump to bottom

443 comments
1 ihateronpaul  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:19:11pm

:/

2 jordash1212  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:19:17pm

Not a bad start.

3 Kronocide  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:21:45pm

I was sort of half hoping they’d take the GOP up on their game of chicken. But business needs to get done.

4 jamesfirecat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:24:16pm

How do you feel about this Charles? Your economic views aren’t something that gets mentioned in a lot of the interviews you do…

5 Kronocide  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:25:59pm

“The American people didn’t send us here to wage symbolic battles.”

Seems that just about everything nowadays is a symbolic battle instead of mundane policy making. Maybe the GOP should ‘get back to the business of the American people.’

6 Skeetghazi  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:26:40pm

This is the test if you really are a center type.

I’m not so sure yet, but I’m not flailing around like other progressive folks.

hmmm

7 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:26:56pm

This is a good compromise. I support it.

8 lostlakehiker  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:27:40pm

Now the Republicans owe Obama. They owe him a hearing on his other agenda items. And a vote. Having said that they would not consider these until taxes were addressed, well, they’ve been addressed.

9 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:28:37pm

re: #8 lostlakehiker

Now the Republicans owe Obama. They owe him a hearing on his other agenda items. And a vote. Having said that they would not consider these until taxes were addressed, well, they’ve been addressed.

I’ll believe it when I see it.

10 jamesfirecat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:28:55pm

re: #7 Dark_Falcon

This is a good compromise. I support it.

The fact that we got an estate tax increase, and that we got unemployment benefits makes me agree with it also.

That said there isn’t going to be much room for “compromise” on DADT (hell DADT was the compromise that got reached to “resolve” this issue about a decade ago, I don’t think it’ll be possible for both sides to walk away to their base claiming victory on that one….

Will be interesting and quite possibly disheartening to see how it all shakes out.

11 Gus  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:29:15pm

Well, there you have it GOP. The president has agreed to extend the Bush tax cuts and add additional business incentives to the tax compromise.

At the same time unemployment benefits are extended for another 13 weeks and provides additional exemptions for working families.

12 Skeetghazi  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:31:02pm

DADT is really high up on my list. If they can pull this off in the lame duck session? WIN.

We will see.

What’s the GOP response to this?

13 Kronocide  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:32:06pm

I can’t wait for the Usual Suspects On The Right Wing to trumpet this compromise and give Obama some credit for compromising with the GOP. Color me pessimistic.

14 Skeetghazi  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:33:55pm

I cannot find any GOP comments yet. Anyone?

15 KingKenrod  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:34:22pm

I don’t like the estate tax, but this one seems reasonable enough, and it will get at least a little extra revenue for the government.

The rest of the compromise will add to the deficit, but with a struggling economy, it’s probably the best thing right now.

I really feel like the only thing the GOP gave in on was unemployment benefits and the estate tax. It’s not much to give in on.

So this is a true compromise, and certainly increases my chance of voting for Obama in 2012, something unthinkable for me in 2008.

16 Kragar (Antichrist )  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:34:22pm

This blatant failure of the GOP to obstruct shows why we need more tea partiers in office.

17 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:34:35pm

re: #11 Gus 802

Well, there you have it GOP. The president has agreed to extend the Bush tax cuts and add additional business incentives to the tax compromise.

At the same time unemployment benefits are extended for another 13 weeks and provides additional exemptions for working families.

It’s not a best-case scenario, but half a loaf will have to do.

18 jamesfirecat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:35:00pm

re: #12 Stanley Sea

DADT is really high up on my list. If they can pull this off in the lame duck session? WIN.

We will see.

What’s the GOP response to this?

Wait a moment let me get into character

(Puts on monocle and pretends to have upper class accent like caveman from Freakazoid because I don’t know what that accent is actually suppose to represent)

///Well my good man it’s so terribly droll that President Obama simply insisted that we pay for unemployment insurance. If those people wanted to get paid they should find jobs!

Not only that but with every dollar Obama “prints” the value of my own horde decreases by comparison! (Sound of snorting) Oh my yes. But I suppose these are rather troubled times we’re living in aren’t we my dear boy?

(This post brought to you by the fact that it’s half an hour past midnight and for some strange reason my head thinks its funny)

19 Skeetghazi  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:35:49pm

re: #15 KingKenrod

I don’t like the estate tax, but this one seems reasonable enough, and it will get at least a little extra revenue for the government.

The rest of the compromise will add to the deficit, but with a struggling economy, it’s probably the best thing right now.

I really feel like the only thing the GOP gave in on was unemployment benefits and the estate tax. It’s not much to give in on.

So this is a true compromise, and certainly increases my chance of voting for Obama in 2012, something unthinkable for me in 2008.

OK, win then. Centrist President.

20 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:36:49pm

re: #12 Stanley Sea

DADT is really high up on my list. If they can pull this off in the lame duck session? WIN.

We will see.

What’s the GOP response to this?

No, there won’t be any movement on that, which sucks for me given the bill its attached to funds conference budgets for parts of the military. But the GOP has no incentive to deal, given their greater strength after the new Congress is seated. There’ll be another Continuing Resolution, instead.

21 jamesfirecat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:38:01pm

re: #20 Dark_Falcon

No, there won’t be any movement on that, which sucks for me given the bill its attached to funds conference budgets for parts of the military. But the GOP has no incentive to deal, given their greater strength after the new Congress is seated. There’ll be another Continuing Resolution, instead.

Well I heard that a number (not a large number but still) of GOP members were actually won over by the pentagon report and so would be willing to move forward on repealing DADT based on what they’ve heard.

Democratic hope springs eternal…

22 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:38:49pm

re: #16 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

This blatant failure of the GOP to obstruct shows why we need more tea partiers in office.

Given that time was running out, a compromise was needed. Some on the far sides of both parties will scream for purity, but the majority of Democrats and Republicans will accept that their leaderships got the best deal they could.

23 Kragar (Antichrist )  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:40:15pm

re: #22 Dark_Falcon

Given that time was running out, a compromise was needed. Some on the far sides of both parties will scream for purity, but the majority of Democrats and Republicans will accept that their leaderships got the best deal they could.

But Rush said compromise is weakness…

24 jamesfirecat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:40:39pm

re: #23 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

But Rush said compromise is weakness…

No Rush said Bipartisanship was Democrats doing what Republicans want….

25 Gus  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:41:41pm

re: #17 SanFranciscoZionist

It’s not a best-case scenario, but half a loaf will have to do.

And a half loaf is better than…

Raising taxes on the middle class was not an option. This is no small proposal by Obama to extend the Bush tax cuts. Republicans must acknowledge this move by the president which puts him at odds with his base.

However, it still has many aspects that should be appealing to many in his base but more importantly the general public and your average Democratic party voter.

So, now that the tax cuts have been extended we should be seeing a lot of job growth next year?

26 Kronocide  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:42:37pm

re: #21 jamesfirecat

Well I heard that a number (not a large number but still) of GOP members were actually won over by the pentagon report and so would be willing to move forward on repealing DADT based on what they’ve heard.

It’s only a matter of time.

27 Skeetghazi  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:44:13pm

re: #20 Dark_Falcon

No, there won’t be any movement on that, which sucks for me given the bill its attached to funds conference budgets for parts of the military. But the GOP has no incentive to deal, given their greater strength after the new Congress is seated. There’ll be another Continuing Resolution, instead.

That’s what I hate the most. A civil rights issue has to be a deal.

28 Gus  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:44:30pm

Tax cuts extended. No more uncertainty! Release the capital and soon the small business and investment loans will be flowing!

Or, move the goal posts and now say, “uncertainty remains because we don’t know what the tax rates will be when these tax cuts expire.”

We wait another 2 years and the uncertainty meme remains.

/Cynical

/

29 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:44:41pm

re: #23 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

But Rush said compromise is weakness…

Rush said that, but he’s not the one who was at risk of being blamed if no deal was reached. Neither side wanted to look like asshole idiots and that played a major role in allowing a deal to be reached. Fear of being blamed helped cause the politicians to be willing to deal. Ruch can scream, Beck can cry, but the deal will still go through.

30 jamesfirecat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:46:35pm

re: #26 BigPapa

It’s only a matter of time.

That’s right things are bound to get worse for homophobes…

31 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:46:51pm

re: #27 Stanley Sea

That’s what I hate the most. A civil rights issue has to be a deal.

It is what it is.

32 Skeetghazi  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:46:59pm

OH! I forgot a day. So this is a double.

John McCain is a panderer, out of touch former Military man.

If he cannot listen to Gates and the Joint Chiefs (like he said he would - remember when flip flopping was the cardinal sin?!!)

He’s either senile or the worst piece of political shit.

(yes, I’m going to get more intense as each day goes on)

33 jamesfirecat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:47:43pm

re: #27 Stanley Sea

That’s what I hate the most. A civil rights issue has to be a deal.

The rights of a minority should never have to be subject to the votes of the majority….

34 Skeetghazi  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:49:16pm

re: #25 Gus 802

And a half loaf is better than…

Raising taxes on the middle class was not an option. This is no small proposal by Obama to extend the Bush tax cuts. Republicans must acknowledge this move by the president which puts him at odds with his base.

However, it still has many aspects that should be appealing to many in his base but more importantly the general public and your average Democratic party voter.

So, now that the tax cuts have been extended we should be seeing a lot of job growth next year?

ha ha ha ha. Not according to Bernacki. Bunch of BS that tax cuts allow business owners to oooh, hire! LOL

35 sagehen  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:49:43pm

re: #21 jamesfirecat

Well I heard that a number (not a large number but still) of GOP members were actually won over by the pentagon report and so would be willing to move forward on repealing DADT based on what they’ve heard.

Democratic hope springs eternal…

and we still have to deal with the START treaty.

I’m really disturbed how difficult that’s turning out to be; I don’t even have to read the treaty to say that when all the living former Secretaries of State and NSA’s but one, from both parties, are unanimously in support of it (and the one who isn’t publicly lobbying for it isn’t opposing it, Rice has chosen to not take a stand) — those of us who aren’t former Secretarys of State and National Security Advisors should just take their word for it.

36 austin_blue  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:52:08pm

Unemployment benefits will cost $1 billion a month. The extension on the earners over $250,000/year will cost $60 billion/year.

If, as the Republicans claim, raising taxes on the high earners will prevent job creation, why haven’t these rich folks, who haven’t had a tax increase, been creating jobs over the last three years?

Oh, sorry, too logical a question.

Oh, and totally OT, here’s a fun article about a Noah’s Ark theme park!

[Link: www.nytimes.com…]

I wonder where Noah put all the beetles and all of the food?

This is just a drive-by, I’m for the rack. Good night dear Lizards. Dream happy scaly dreams.

37 jamesfirecat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:52:48pm

re: #31 Dark_Falcon

It is what it is.

At the moment the best “Deal” the GOP can hope to get is not looking horribly out of touch with the rest of the country, even the majority of Republicans support repealing DADT.

If they don’t do it by Christmas here is the add I’d be playing non stop if I was in charge of keeping the Democrats on message.

“Senator X voted against Military spending bill Y, which not only would have repealed don’t ask don’t tell, but also would have supplied our men and women serving in our armed forces at home and abroad with the funding they need to win the war on terror. But Senator X would rather stand beside homophobes than our armed men and women who came forward and told us that they wouldn’t mind if DADT was repealed. So tell us Senator X…. what do you really stand for?”

38 Gus  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:53:52pm

re: #34 Stanley Sea

ha ha ha ha. Not according to Bernacki. Bunch of BS that tax cuts allow business owners to oooh, hire! LOL

Yep. Small businesses won’t hire unless they have… more business. Or expect more business. There may be a few high earners that decide to build that addition or remodel but it won’t be anything significant.

I hope I’m wrong though.

39 Gus  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 9:59:36pm

So. Guess how much this is going to cost?

900 billion “dollars”.

Fire up the treasury sales!

40 Gus  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:01:19pm

So you would think treasury sales would increase? Let’s have a look at the current response from the Asian markets…

Treasuries Decline, Asia Stocks Gain on Tax-Cut Extension, Citigroup Sale

41 Skeetghazi  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:02:20pm

re: #38 Gus 802

Yep. Small businesses won’t hire unless they have… more business. Or expect more business. There may be a few high earners that decide to build that addition or remodel but it won’t be anything significant.

I hope I’m wrong though.

I work with “small businesses” They are NOT thinking about their next tax return, they are thinking about their monthly volume. More volume, hire more people.

Either the talk about small businesses is really about those Corps who employ over 100 or it’s just a meme, that’s taken hold.

get a grip America.

42 elizajane  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:02:21pm

Call me a lefty, then, but it just guts me to watch the Democrats do their bit to enhance the ever-increasing concentration of wealth in the top 1% of this country’s population.

Extending unemployment benefits is an emergency safety-net measure to keep families from falling into utter poverty. Giving hundreds of billions of dollars to the richest people in the country is crap. Don’t give me that line about “oh, but they’re the ones who create jobs.” If that’s true, why aren’t they doing it now? They already have more wealth, proportionately, than at any time in the past century or so.

This simply isn’t even the best way to use tax cuts to help the economy or to make jobs, and really, nobody is exactly arguing that it IS the best way. The argument is “no tax cuts in a bad economy,” not “let’s think of some intelligent ways to use tax cuts to stimulate the economy.” Extending tax cuts whose original purpose was to use up a budget surplus (remember that?) is INSANITY.

Bah.

43 KingKenrod  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:03:05pm

re: #38 Gus 802

Yep. Small businesses won’t hire unless they have… more business. Or expect more business. There may be a few high earners that decide to build that addition or remodel but it won’t be anything significant.

I hope I’m wrong though.

The extension of the Bush tax cuts is just “status quo” - it prevents a tax increase. There’s nothing really stimulative about it, except in certainty (people know their taxes won’t go up, for what that is worth).

The 2% payroll tax decrease and the extension of the unemployment benefits are real stimulation (at the cost of future growth, since it’s all borrowed money), and they are both very progressive in that they help both the working poor and the non-working poor the most.

44 elizajane  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:03:26pm

I meant “no tax increases in a bad economy,” of course.

45 Skeetghazi  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:04:39pm

re: #42 elizajane

double bah. Add a huge bit of sigh.

46 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:05:49pm

re: #42 elizajane

Call me a lefty, then, but it just guts me to watch the Democrats do their bit to enhance the ever-increasing concentration of wealth in the top 1% of this country’s population.

Extending unemployment benefits is an emergency safety-net measure to keep families from falling into utter poverty. Giving hundreds of billions of dollars to the richest people in the country is crap. Don’t give me that line about “oh, but they’re the ones who create jobs.” If that’s true, why aren’t they doing it now? They already have more wealth, proportionately, than at any time in the past century or so.

This simply isn’t even the best way to use tax cuts to help the economy or to make jobs, and really, nobody is exactly arguing that it IS the best way. The argument is “no tax cuts in a bad economy,” not “let’s think of some intelligent ways to use tax cuts to stimulate the economy.” Extending tax cuts whose original purpose was to use up a budget surplus (remember that?) is INSANITY.

Bah.

Refusing to raise taxes is not giving people money. It’s about them keeping money they have earned.

47 Gus  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:06:19pm

re: #40 Gus 802

Of course predicting treasury sales based on this news is a bit premature.

48 Skeetghazi  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:07:16pm

I see this as the Obama Presidency that no one expected.

Centrist, pissing off the left and the right.

Who would’ve thought! The way he has been painted as such a socialist etc.

It’s really amazing.

49 jamesfirecat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:07:59pm

re: #46 Dark_Falcon

Refusing to raise taxes is not giving people money. It’s about them keeping money they have earned.

Dark it’s not “raising taxes” its…

You know what, forget it.

I need to go to work in about six hours.

I’m for bed.

Besides these economic discussions just don’t seem to be worth it any more now that the we know what the people in charge are actually going to do.

Maybe there will be a good DADT thread tommorrow/later today depending on how you look at things….

50 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:09:39pm

re: #48 Stanley Sea

I see this as the Obama Presidency that no one expected.

Centrist, pissing off the left and the right.

Who would’ve thought! The way he has been painted as such a socialist etc.

It’s really amazing.

It’s about what I expected, to be truthful.

51 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:10:27pm

Goodnight, all.

52 Skeetghazi  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:12:34pm

re: #50 SanFranciscoZionist

It’s about what I expected, to be truthful.

Me too, but I still wonder at the false vitriol!!!

53 Gus  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:14:37pm

re: #52 Stanley Sea

Me too, but I still wonder at the false vitriol!!!

ODS is here to stay.

54 SpaceJesus  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:15:14pm

re: #36 austin_blue

Oh, and totally OT, here’s a fun article about a Noah’s Ark theme park!

[Link: www.nytimes.com…]

I wonder where Noah put all the beetles and all of the food?

This is just a drive-by, I’m for the rack. Good night dear Lizards. Dream happy scaly dreams.


sometimes i wonder how nice it would be if the south was like new england so i wouldn’t have to worry about learning chinese in the coming century.

55 Gus  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:18:08pm

Plus as soon as the wingnuts see the 900 billion dollar price tag they’ll be calling the Republicans that are part of this compromise RINOs. Don’t forget to that the paleocons believe that unemployment benefits are unconstitutional. I’m sire the wingnuts will find plenty to whine about.

56 goddamnedfrank  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:18:57pm
The Observer’s Abby Rapoport connected with Cook to ask about his efforts to replace the current state House Speaker.

“When I got involved in politics, I told people I wanted to put Christian conservatives in leadership positions,” he told me, explaining that he only supports Christian conservative candidates in Republican primary races.

“I want to make sure that a person I’m supporting is going to have my values. It’s not anything about Jews and whether I think their religion is right or Muslims and whether I think their religion is right. … I got into politics to put Christian conservatives into office. They’re the people that do the best jobs over all.”

He added that he prefers Christian candidates, but isn’t anti-Semitic. “They’re some of my best friends,” he said of Jews, naming two friends of his.

57 elizajane  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:22:11pm

re: #56 goddamnedfrank

I was just about to post this!
People said that after all the Muslim bashing it was only a matter of time before the theocrats of the Right went after Jews, and I wasn’t going to believe it because hey, they all want Israel to prosper and advance the immanence of the Second Coming (it has something to do with cows, right?); but now I see that People were right and I was wrong.

58 Gus  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:23:38pm

re: #56 goddamnedfrank

Good grief:

– “Straus is going down in Jesus’ name,” said one e-mail, whose origins were unclear.

– Straus “clearly lacks the moral compass to be speaker,” said another, written by Southeast Texas conservative activist Peter Morrison. A Morrison e-mail said that Straus’ rabbi sits on a Planned Parenthood board and then pointed out that Straus’ opponents in the Speaker’s race “are Christians and true conservatives.” Morrison is a contributor to the white supremacy website VDARE.

– The Tea Party-backed groups are now running anti-Straus robo-calls and e-mails demanding a “true Christian speaker,” reports News 8 Austin.

– The Quorum Report, an online newsletter, reported extensively late Monday on e-mails that mentioned Straus’ Judaism, his rabbi and the Christian faith of his House critics, who include Rep. Bryan Hughes, R-Mineola.

– Patrick Brendel reported that David Barton, leader of the group WallBuilders, has helped organize much of the anti-Straus campaign. Barton is a frequent contributor to the Glenn Beck program.

– Kaufman County Tea Party Chairman Ray Myers sent an e-mail last week praising a Straus opponent as “a Christian Conservative who decided not to be pushed around by the Joe Straus thugs.”

59 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:24:25pm

a tentative deal that would extend for two years all the Bush-era income tax breaks set to expire on Dec. 31,

why we need to “compromise” on this when a clear majority of the american people support ending the tax cut for > $250k is beyond me. i thought democracy was about doing what most people want

continue unemployment benefits for an additional 13 months

to do anything else besides extend benefits would be, simply, inhumane. if republicans need inducements in order to get them to act with simple humanity, i don’t know what to say about that

and cut payroll taxes for workers to encourage employers to start hiring

which will damage social security. thanks a lot, asshole

The deal also would revive the estate tax, but it would exempt inheritances of up to $5 million for individuals and $10 million for couples. Democrats on Capitol Hill are strongly opposed to setting the cap at that high a level and to the 35 percent rate discussed by Obama and Republicans that would apply to the taxable portion of estates.

and, yet again, as with capital gains, income earned without the sweat of one’s brow tends to get taxed at a lower rate than what i would consider work, unless you don’t earn very much. feh

and why bother to say “Obama and Republicans” anymore? what’s the difference?

60 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:27:19pm

The GOP has given up any right to complain about deficits, ever again. It is completely obvious that giving tax cuts to the wealthy means more than reducing the deficit to them. This is the proof.

61 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:29:22pm

Also, it’s getting harder and harder to argue that Obama is anything other than a moderate conservative.

62 Skeetghazi  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:30:00pm

Anyone find a GOP quote on this yet?

I cannot wait to hear their spin/take.

63 goddamnedfrank  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:30:10pm

Republicans have been comfortable saying this for some time:

re: #57 elizajane

I was just about to post this!
People said that after all the Muslim bashing it was only a matter of time before the theocrats of the Right went after Jews, and I wasn’t going to believe it because hey, they all want Israel to prosper and advance the immanence of the Second Coming (it has something to do with cows, right?); but now I see that People were right and I was wrong.

In practical usage, the term Judeo-Christian is structurally identical to “kinda pregnant.” They’ve been comfortable saying this shit for some time:

“If you are not electing Christians, tried and true, under public scrutiny and pressure, if you’re not electing Christians then in essence you are going to legislate sin.”

-Katherine Harris 2006

64 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:30:42pm

The extension of the Bush tax cuts is just “status quo”

the status quo was that they were set to expire

there was a reason that bush designed them to sunset

65 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:31:36pm

re: #62 Stanley Sea

Anyone find a GOP quote on this yet?

I cannot wait to hear their spin/take.

It would be hard for them to complain. Obama is enacting their agenda for them.

66 Gus  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:31:55pm

Good night!

67 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:32:21pm

“The American people didn’t send us here to wage symbolic battles.”

no, asshole, i voted for you to wage a real battle, not give up as fast as you can

68 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:32:34pm

re: #67 engineer dog

“The American people didn’t send us here to wage symbolic battles.”

no, asshole, i voted for you to wage a real battle, not give up as fast as you can

THIS

69 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:34:47pm

The Democratic party: like the GOP, but without the crazy. Same conservative taste, but without that dominionist aftertaste.

70 BongCrodny  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:35:55pm

Except for a six-week period this past summer, I’ve been unemployed since March.

Over the past nine months, I’ve sent out between 75-100 resumes, and I’ve received two interviews and one temp-to-perm assignment from same. I have a solid employment history and good references, but the phone is just not ringing.

I’ve gone through my savings, my 401K and I’m down to my last two weeks of unemployment benefits.

I’m 54 years old, and except for a short period on unemployment in 1981 after getting out of the Navy, I’ve either worked or attended school for 30 years. I believe in the “social safety net,” but until this year I’ve never needed (nor wanted) to take advantage of it.

The job I landed this summer was a temp-to-perm job. After six weeks, the temp agency informed me that while I was doing a good job, one of the firm’s attorneys gave her notice, which left her secretary underutilized. They let me go and reassigned the attorney I was working for to that secretary. I don’t blame the firm; between salary and benefits that’s somewhere around $50K they won’t have to pay out. Cutting costs is what the game is all about these days.

Here’s the funny part: because I went back to work for those six weeks, my unemployment now runs out in mid-December, with no further extensions. Had I not taken the assignment, my benefits would have expired before November 30, and I would have then qualified for at least one more extension. I’m guessing this was an unanticipated consequence, but it sure doesn’t make it any easier to swallow being penalized for trying to do the right thing.

It’s probably selfish of me to want this bill to pass, but an unemployment insurance extension might be the only thing that keeps me out of a shelter this winter.

71 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:39:45pm

Ok, somebody explain to me the underpinning of the idea that lower taxes on the wealthy creates jobs, in a way that doesn’t sound nuts.

Anyone.

72 goddamnedfrank  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:40:18pm

re: #65 Fozzie Bear

It would be hard for them to complain.

He’s still black tho’, and he hasn’t changed his name, or admitted to being the son of Sidney Poitier, so they’ll find a way.

/Six Degrees on the brain.

73 Skeetghazi  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:43:24pm

re: #71 Fozzie Bear

Ok, somebody explain to me the underpinning of the idea that lower taxes on the wealthy creates jobs, in a way that doesn’t sound nuts.

Anyone.

impossible. That theory is just smoke and mirrors. We’ve been living it for the past 8 years. It’s a fucking fail.

The partisians though, cannot see past their shit.

74 Jaerik  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:45:12pm

re: #71 Fozzie Bear

The basic argument is that the more money someone has, the more they spend it on buying things (which someone needs a job to provide) or spending it on additional workers to, in turn, make them more money.

The trouble is that this argument, like most ideologically “pure” arguments, is only half true. If the rich were to convert their money into purchases or hiring people at 100% efficiency, they would no longer be rich. Some amount of the extra money just sits there and piles up forever.

The question becomes, is the tax-cuts-to-jobs conversion rate the most efficient means of creating jobs, or is it the Keynesian model? Economists have been debating that one for the better part of a century with no consensus. But complex economic debate is no fun: it’s much more fun to scream simple mantras at your political enemies on cable TV.

75 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:46:35pm

re: #71 Fozzie Bear

it’s easiest to understand if you remember to confuse personal income taxes with corporate taxes, but it helps if you don’t understand how business works and forget you ever heard about corporate tax shelters

if that doesn’t work, try not reading the news for ten years and watching sitcoms instead

76 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:47:01pm

re: #72 goddamnedfrank

He’s still black tho’, and he hasn’t changed his name, or admitted to being the son of Sidney Poitier, so they’ll find a way.

/Six Degrees on the brain.

I’m wondering if this wasn’t Obama’s strategy all along: Just slowly creep to the right, agree to everything. As the ODS (veiled racism) gets deeper even as he moves right, slowly and surely, Obama takes the center, alienating bot the right and left wings, creating a centrist party that will dominate for a generation.

I mean think about it. Once your opponent has defined himself only in terms relative to your own position (i.e., “Obama is a radical leftist!”), then if you move to take the positions your opponent formerly held, then you leave your opponent no choice but to get continually crazier to distinguish himself from you.

At the end of the day, you have Obama standing in the middle of the field, with the GOP huddled on the rightmost edge, and his former base pissed off, but the vast middle of the field will find itself no longer identifying as much with either party, leaving Obama as the obvious centrist choice.

Could he be that fucking smart?

77 Eclectic Infidel  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:47:35pm

re: #70 BongCrodny

Our system is broken here. There needs to be a permanent safety net that extends beyond mere UI benefits. I’m not talking about welfare either. Of course, I’m all for checks and balances with such a system but the fact that our government takes no issue with its citizens falling into poverty, or worse due to unemployment, is morally wrong.

78 Skeetghazi  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:53:26pm

re: #76 Fozzie Bear

Andrew Sullivan has always taken this point. meep meep.

hmm

79 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:57:27pm

The thing is, if he takes the middle too fast or too soon, he risks being primaried from the left.

He might be slowly crushing the GOP by forcing it to define itself in increasingly absurd terms, but he faces a serious risk he could lose more osupport from his base than he steals from the GOP and the middle, and then we end up with a crippled and defeated DNC, and a batshit insane (ascendant) GOP ready to do batshit insane things.

It’s a smart strategy if you play it right, but there’s not a lot of room for error in the triangulation he appears to be doing.

80 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:57:53pm

re: #77 eclectic infidel

Our system is broken here. There needs to be a permanent safety net that extends beyond mere UI benefits

but that would lead to less fear, and therefore less pressure on americans to accept lower wages

to speak plainly, i think there is an agenda here to drive down wages and benefits for american workers. this isn’t a difficult to believe after you’ve seen decades of outsourcing to cheaper countries, aggression against unions, complaints about how employees with “too many” benefits are what’s causing companies to outsource, and alan greenspan testifying to congress that employers are worried about “wage pressures”

9.8% unemployment tends to help with those bothersome “wage pressures”

81 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 10:58:50pm

perhaps beepollen and blue raven would like to venture a counterargument or two

82 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:00:26pm

I mean, think about it. If the GOP doesn’t keep moving right as Obama moves right, then what reason will their base have to choose GOP candidates over Obama? The GOP has to keep ratcheting up the crazy now, because the reality of it is that Obama is enacting much of their agenda for them, social issues aside.

83 lostlakehiker  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:00:47pm

re: #8 lostlakehiker

Now the Republicans owe Obama. They owe him a hearing on his other agenda items. And a vote. Having said that they would not consider these until taxes were addressed, well, they’ve been addressed.

There’s the rub. I said they owed. Whether they’ll pay up? Remains to be seen.

84 Jaerik  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:00:58pm

My biggest disappointment with Obama has been his utter failure in moving the Overton Window any to the left since being elected. Under 8 years of Bush, the window swung pretty far right, and I was hoping we’d at least manage to swing it back to the center, where negotiations could then take place in good faith.

However, Obama has chosen to negotiate from a centrist position from the start, ensuring that any compromise solution will end up to the right by default. Witness the health care bill, an immensely controversial and hard-won “victory” that ended up being a near carbon-copy of the bill proposed by Gingrich in 1996.

I consider myself a moderate, and I was hoping that Obama’s election would help move the country more towards the center. Instead, he’s seemed completely powerless at keeping the Overton Window from sliding ever further to the right, and right off a cliff in the process. If anything, that’s his greatest failure as a President to me.

85 blueraven  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:04:48pm

re: #81 engineer dog

perhaps beepollen and blue raven would like to venture a counterargument or two

The votes are not there, get it? And my President is not an asshole.

86 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:05:34pm

re: #84 Jaerik

1. Much of the shift to the right has to do with Fox and other right wing media, which has grown to the point where it now has a large “inoculated” audience. (By inoculated, I mean they already drank the kool aid. Any time Fox tells them something that conflicts with other sources, the believe Fox. So, the crazier Fox gets, the more convinced these people become in the deliciousness of the kool aid.)

2. Obama never was terribly left of center. He would have started from the center anyway, really. Keep in mind that his campaign promises were all things that would have been on the republican agenda before Bush. He’s a moderate centrist.

87 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:06:59pm

re: #85 blueraven

The votes are not there, get it? And my President is not an asshole.

i’m glad you’re on his side, but i disagree with you that the votes for a position that the majority of americans clearly want are not there

lyndon johnson knew a lot about how to find votes and make votes - and he was just the master of a very old technique

you don’t conduct effective politics by giving up at the beginning of a fight

88 blueraven  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:10:21pm

re: #87 engineer dog

i’m glad you’re on his side, but i disagree with you that the votes for a position that the majority of americans clearly want are not there

lyndon johnson knew a lot about how to find votes and make votes - and he was just the master of a very old technique

you don’t conduct effective politics by giving up at the beginning of a fight

Right and if this had carried on into the next congress the freakin tax cuts would probably be made permanent.

We got 13 months of unemployment benefits. That is a big deal.

89 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:13:48pm

It’s the case with all compromises that nobody’s base is really going to be thrilled. Lefties will bitch about the tax cuts for the rich and righties will bitch about unemployment benefits.At first glance it looks like Obama gave more than he got but I suppose getting the GOP to vote for anything is a feat. This is a sign that Republicans are willing to play ball and aren’t going to just try to drive the economy into the ground out of spite. All the crap about the deficit was just populist noise, what they really wanted was tax breaks for the rich and they got it.

90 lostlakehiker  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:14:23pm

re: #82 Fozzie Bear

I mean, think about it. If the GOP doesn’t keep moving right as Obama moves right, then what reason will their base have to choose GOP candidates over Obama? The GOP has to keep ratcheting up the crazy now, because the reality of it is that Obama is enacting much of their agenda for them, social issues aside.

Here’s one reason: you can only go out on a limb so far before it breaks and you fall. This nation remains a nation with a political center, and whoever strays too far from that center pays a price come the next election. The “base” may determine who wins the nomination, but if it decides badly, the candidate thus selected loses badly in the general election. That happened with McGovern on the Dem side, for instance. It happened more recently in a number of Senatorial contests, on the Repub side.

The notion that Obama is enacting the Republican agenda is staggering. BOTH parties have an agenda to not crater the economy. NEITHER party wanted the “Bush” tax cuts to be rescinded across the board. This deal just kicks the can down the road a year or two. In the meantime, Obama got a good bit of what he wanted on the side, and the Republicans got their non-negotiable extension of the tax cuts, entire and for all, but just for the time being.


Party politics is a zero sum game, but for incumbents of either party, there’s a reality: tend to the business of governing, even if it means striking compromises with the other side, or you’re at risk of being swept out in two years when the voters get another crack at the House.

This reality makes it politically practical to compromise on occasion.

91 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:16:22pm

re: #88 blueraven

Right and if this had carried on into the next congress the freakin tax cuts would probably be made permanent.

We got 13 months of unemployment benefits. That is a big deal.

unemployment benefits are definitely good. as a matter of fact, i think not having an extension of unemployment benefits would be inhumane and unthinkable. and, as i said above, having to negotiate for them is ridiculous

this was the scenario i was looking for: obama makes a speech demanding an extension of unemployment benefits, saying that anybody who doesn’t vote for them is unspeakable. then, as a seperate issue - and they are and deserve to be seperate issues - he further states that the republican party is actually willing to refuse to continue to give tax cuts to the middle class if they can’t get their tax cuts for the wealthy. he should mention that this is also unspeakable

and then he should sit back and let the republican party see how they like that

92 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:16:49pm

re: #88 blueraven

It’s also ridiculously fiscally irresponsible. The deficit and debt just got swept under the rug, again. Neither party is dealing with reality. We need to increase the revenue to spending ratio. It has to be done.

And of course, the political will isn’t there to do it, because the American people are too fucking stupid to understand that you we pay more, or you get less. If the people don’t get it, then the people they vote for won’t either.

This is one point where the republicans make a good point rhetorically. They loooove to talk about balanced budgets. Unfortunately, they also have an even worse record on this issue in recent history than the democrats, which is terrible.

93 lostlakehiker  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:17:29pm

re: #87 engineer dog

i’m glad you’re on his side, but i disagree with you that the votes for a position that the majority of americans clearly want are not there

lyndon johnson knew a lot about how to find votes and make votes - and he was just the master of a very old technique

you don’t conduct effective politics by giving up at the beginning of a fight

Lyndon Johnson knew a lot about how to get votes after the voting was done but while the counting had not been finished. His nickname, Landslide Lyndon, referred to his penchant for padding the count. Is this the old technique to which you admiringly refer? I hope not. But that’s what Lyndon knew.

94 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:19:33pm

re: #93 lostlakehiker

Lyndon Johnson knew a lot about how to get votes after the voting was done but while the counting had not been finished. His nickname, Landslide Lyndon, referred to his penchant for padding the count. Is this the old technique to which you admiringly refer? I hope not. But that’s what Lyndon knew.

uh, no, and, (and i’m going to say this very politely), you are doing nothing here but muddying the waters with extraneous issues

could you please stick to the issues?

95 blueraven  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:20:15pm

re: #92 Fozzie Bear

It’s also ridiculously fiscally irresponsible. The deficit and debt just got swept under the rug, again. Neither party is dealing with reality. We need to increase the revenue to spending ratio. It has to be done.

And of course, the political will isn’t there to do it, because the American people are too fucking stupid to understand that you we pay more, or you get less. If the people don’t get it, then the people they vote for won’t either.

This is one point where the republicans make a good point rhetorically. They looove to talk about balanced budgets. Unfortunately, they also have an even worse record on this issue in recent history than the democrats, which is terrible.

Unemployment benefits are one of the biggest ways to stimulate the economy, so I disagree that it is fiscally irresponsible at this time.

96 Spocomptonite  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:23:11pm

re: #71 Fozzie Bear

Ok, somebody explain to me the underpinning of the idea that lower taxes on the wealthy creates jobs, in a way that doesn’t sound nuts.

Anyone.

I don’t understand it myself, either. How are jobs created by lowering the tax rates on income that comes *out* of businesses? The gross income, and thus the cost to businesses for employment, remains the same whether tax rates were 0% or 99%.

Even when that trickle-down crap is given as an explanation, that doesn’t work either. Tax breaks on 1% of Americans isn’t going to do much of anything for the economy, regardless of where they lie on the income spectrum. And super-high incomes aren’t a linear extrapolation of my low-income spending. Someone who makes 100x as much as I do doesn’t buy 100x as much food or 100x as many goods as I do.

It’s like anti-logic, yet they still adhere to it like its 2+2=4.

97 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:23:14pm

re: #95 blueraven

The unemployment benefits are cheap, i’m speaking of the expiration of the tax cuts. The GOP traded 1 billion for 60 billion. They got basically everything they wanted, and they got it by refusing to do anything at all until they got exactly what they wanted.

98 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:24:43pm

CBS News Poll. Nov. 29-Dec. 1, 2010

Continue for everyone 26%
Continue if earn less than $250K 53%
Expire for everyone 14%

AP-CNBC Poll conducted by GfK Roper Public Affairs & Corporate Communications. Nov. 18-22, 2010

expire for everyone 14%
expire if earning over $250K 50%
continue for everyone 34%

[Link: www.pollingreport.com…]

why does a democratic president have to compromise and accept a position that only 15% of americans support to get something that would be immoral to oppose?

99 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:25:57pm

re: #96 Spocomptonite

How are jobs created by lowering the tax rates on income that comes *out* of businesses? The gross income, and thus the cost to businesses for employment, remains the same whether tax rates were 0% or 99%.

And this right here is the the thing. This needs to be repeated forever. And nobody in the DNC is saying it.

100 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:27:02pm

re: #98 engineer dog

why does a democratic president have to compromise and accept a position that only 15% of americans support to get something that would be immoral to oppose?


That’s the way the game is played.

101 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:28:37pm

re: #100 Killgore Trout

That’s the way the game is played.

Is this where someone tells me not to hate the player? /

102 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:30:01pm

re: #100 Killgore Trout

That’s the way the game is played.

thank god when LBJ put through the civil rights acts he didn’t feel he had to make it look like the fucked up Compromise of 1850

103 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:31:35pm

re: #100 Killgore Trout

That’s the way the game is played.

Usually, holding popular legislation hostage in order to pass unpopular legislation would be political suicide, wouldn’t you think? It would, I posit, if the dems weren’t absolute failures at getting their message out.

104 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:34:44pm

re: #103 Fozzie Bear

Usually, holding popular legislation hostage in order to pass unpopular legislation would be political suicide, wouldn’t you think? It would, I posit, if the dems weren’t absolute failures at getting their message out.

and that’s exactly why it’s so infuriating that obama has this handed to him on a silver platter, but utterly throws it away

i knew he was a corporatist and a conservative democrat when i voted for him, but i didn’t think he would shoot the democratic party at exactly the point when it was in the best possible position to leverage the popular will to do good

105 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:35:39pm

re: #102 engineer dog

thank god when LBJ put through the civil rights acts he didn’t feel he had to make it look like the fucked up Compromise of 1850

If desegregation happened today, it would be a pilot program in a charter school in California, then there would be 6 studies over 12 years to measure the efficacy of desegregation, then we would have a debate about how to determine what kids get bussed there, then we would create a new federal agency to manage the bussing changes, and then, 20 years later, we would desegregate the public schools. Maybe.

106 blueraven  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:36:52pm

re: #103 Fozzie Bear

Usually, holding popular legislation hostage in order to pass unpopular legislation would be political suicide, wouldn’t you think? It would, I posit, if the dems weren’t absolute failures at getting their message out.

Because they are all playing politics here. If the dems had any sense at all they would have worked this out before now.

But instead everyone just wants to blame Obama

*** Why didn’t congressional Democrats work on this six months ago? Here’s another question for Democrats, especially those on Capitol Hill who are upset that they seem to be caving in on the Bush tax cuts: Why didn’t they work on this last spring/summer, when they might have had a stronger hand to play? As the Times says, “In meetings with administration officials after the Senate votes, the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, and many other House and Senate Democrats voiced deep unhappiness at the prospect of extending all the tax cuts and also expressed their belief that the White House did not appear to be getting enough for such a big concession.” It was the Capitol Hill Dem leadership — more than the White House — that pushed for putting off any votes on the Bush tax cuts. At the time, it was about trying to insulate some vulnerable Democrats from votes on taxes. Talk about short-sighted leadership decisions.

[Link: firstread.msnbc.msn.com…]

107 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:38:46pm

re: #106 blueraven

You make a good point. The congressional leadership is more to blame than Obama. I still think more effective use of the bully pulpit, more leadership on Obama’s part, would have made a huge difference.

108 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:39:01pm

re: #106 blueraven

but now pelosi says she wants to fight but obama says no

109 blueraven  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:43:55pm

re: #108 engineer dog

but now pelosi says she wants to fight but obama says no

The time to fight this battle was months ago. Not at the end of the year with a new republican congress coming in. Major Fail with much whining!

And with that..I’m out. Sleep well all.

110 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:43:57pm

re: #103 Fozzie Bear

Usually, holding popular legislation hostage in order to pass unpopular legislation would be political suicide, wouldn’t you think? It would, I posit, if the dems weren’t absolute failures at getting their message out.

It depends on how passionate people are about. Although few support the tax breaks for the rich most people aren’t very passionate about it. If you held a rally on the Mall against the tax breaks you wouldn’t get more than a few thousand to show up.

111 Eclectic Infidel  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:44:50pm

Goodnight lizards. I’ve a wage-slave temp job to get to tomorrow.

Pays slightly better than what I used to receive via UI benefits.

Yippee. Good thing I don’t celebrate xmas, eh?

112 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:47:15pm

re: #109 blueraven

The time to fight this battle was months ago. Not at the end of the year with a new republican congress coming in. Major Fail with much whining!

And with that..I’m out. Sleep well all.

it’s never too late to fight for what is both right and what the people want

this is like folding with four aces

113 William Barnett-Lewis  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:49:09pm

re: #50 SanFranciscoZionist

It’s about what I expected, to be truthful.

Well, duh, he was a centrist from day fucking one.

But then, as a proverbial card carrying member of the Democratic Socialists of America, why would I say otherwise?

These asshats need a serious bitchslapping.

114 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:50:01pm

re: #110 Killgore Trout

It’s hard to get angry about a tax cut. It’s more the fact that it was and is a completely unfunded tax cut. It’s nuts. It’s like people are adding 2 and 2 together and getting 5, and being totally fine with it.

115 engineer cat  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:54:23pm

re: #114 Fozzie Bear

It’s hard to get angry about a tax cut. It’s more the fact that it was and is a completely unfunded tax cut. It’s nuts. It’s like people are adding 2 and 2 together and getting 5, and being totally fine with it.

but the wingnuts always get so hot and bothered when their precious millionaires might not get a tax cut

116 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Dec 6, 2010 11:56:18pm

Our politics is basically dominated completely by magical thinking now. It’s so frustrating.

117 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 2:02:40am

The main difference between Obama and the GOP appears to be that Obama is unwilling to sacrifice people’s well-being to gain political and ideological victories. The problematic part is that since the GOP are, Obama is unable to prevent some such sacrifices from occurring; he can only ameliorate them.

And the blame placed on him from the left is fucking stupid. The legislature had a long, long, long time to deal with this, they waited, they punted, they failed. Not Obama’s fault. He has said over and over that congress needed to act, and they didn’t. I do not understand why so many on the left focus their anger against Obama and not the legislature who left it until too late to act.

118 HC4BO  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 2:04:54am

I guess now granpa doesn’t need to be “murdered” for at least 2 more years !?!?!

119 laZardo  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 2:36:22am

Well shit, I’m depressed.

Anyone got some good schadenfreude to cheer me up?

120 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 2:39:07am
121 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 2:45:50am

It’s kinda drive-by, but this may (or may not) be big.

Moscow government permits an anti-Putin protest?

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com…]

OK, gotta run.

122 laZardo  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 2:57:04am

re: #121 Sergey Romanov

It’s kinda drive-by, but this may (or may not) be big.

Moscow government permits an anti-Putin protest?

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com…]

OK, gotta run.

Only because Putin’s hitlist needs ‘refreshing.’ q;

123 jc717  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 3:20:24am

I can’t believe that Obama has never taken negotiating 101. You have to have a willingness to walk away from the table; if you must get the deal/car/job, you’re going to get screwed.

Since I’m sure that he knows this, the most logical explanation is that this is exactly the outcome he wanted. Despite the right’s ‘socialist’ rantings, Obama is economically to the right of Nixon and Bush 41.
Hope and change my a$$; just another DC corporate whore.

124 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 3:31:10am

re: #123 jc717

Why didn’t the legislature do something about this before it came to this pass?

If Obama had walked away from the table, what would have happened?

125 jc717  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 3:38:26am

re: #124 Obdicut

The GOP allowed unemployment benefits to get extended 5 times already. They would have allowed it again. It would be political suicide not to.

If he had shown a willingness to walk away, then the senate vote to end cuts for millionaires would have passed.

Obama is either week or complicit. Given that he became POTUS given his circumstances, I go with the latter.

126 researchok  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 3:41:00am

Morning, all

127 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 3:48:17am

re: #125 jc717

The GOP allowed unemployment benefits to get extended 5 times already. They would have allowed it again. It would be political suicide not to.

“Allowed”? Why wasn’t it political suicide for them to let them lapse before, as they actually did? You remember that, right?


If he had shown a willingness to walk away, then the senate vote to end cuts for millionaires would have passed.

How do you know this?

Obama is either week or complicit. Given that he became POTUS given his circumstances, I go with the latter.

You have absolutely no thought that it could be more complicated than that?

128 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 3:52:40am

I still don’t like taxes based on class envy. Shoot me.

When it comes to extending benefits, thirteen weeks is an inconceivably short amount of time, and will be extended again. These short extension periods are granted to allow more bargaining in 10 weeks.

129 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 3:56:48am

re: #128 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I still don’t like taxes based on class envy. Shoot me.

It is very short-sighted and wrong to say that progressive taxation is based on class envy.

We have a very, very real problem in America. The wealth disparity is growing, at a huge pace. Our society will not survive if it continues to do so. That is not class envy.

What do you think should be done about the accelerating disparity between rich and poor? Or do you honestly think that it’s not a problem for the nation, the economy, and our society that income for everything other than the upper quintile has stagnated?

When it comes to extending benefits, thirteen weeks is an inconceivably short amount of time, and will be extended again. These short extension periods are granted to allow more bargaining in 10 weeks.

Thirteen months.

130 Taqyia2Me  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:00:30am

re: #129 Obdicut

Yep, I read it as 13 months also…

131 laZardo  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:14:21am

re: #129 Obdicut

I think many parts of the American bureaucracy have become too complicated for its own good. The ‘rules’ need to be made simpler and above all more enforceable.

And that’s about as deep as I can go on that, from my POV from the other side of the world. :B

132 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:16:37am

re: #131 laZardo

I agree that the tax code could use massive simplification.

133 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:18:10am

re: #129 Obdicut


13 months? I swear I thought I read weeks. I blame Gus’ post #11. (“Nevermind”-Emily Latella) They probably should go ahead and make the extensions permanent. They will always (perpetually) be extended.

I knew my position on taxation wouldn’t make you happy. I have many friends who would be affected by a tax hike on the “rich”. They don’t light cigars with fifty dollar bills.

Many “uber” rich folks have come out in support of a higher percentage of tax to themselves. I think that is admirable. What stops them from simply firing their tax attorneys and simply filing short form. They could also write a check to the Government at any time.

I am a pretty simple guy.

134 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:24:15am

re: #133 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I knew my position on taxation wouldn’t make you happy. I have many friends who would be affected by a tax hike on the “rich”. They don’t light cigars with fifty dollar bills.

It’s your misrepresentation of the position of other people as ‘class envy’ that doesn’t make me happy. Do you understand that?

Again:

What do you think should be done about the accelerating disparity between rich and poor? Or do you honestly think that it’s not a problem for the nation, the economy, and our society that income for everything other than the upper quintile has stagnated?

135 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:33:49am

re: #134 Obdicut

What do you think should be done about the accelerating disparity between rich and poor?

You will not like my answer. But, here goes.

The rich will continue to get richer because part of being rich is the education of how to make yourself even richer. I do not think the governments job is to pull them downward.

The poor need to find ways to better their station.

Yeah, yeah. I know. “Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?”

136 laZardo  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:34:58am

re: #135 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Yeah, yeah. I know. “Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?”

Humbug to you too.

/t’is the season…

137 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:35:04am

re: #135 Fat Bastard Vegetarian


The poor need to find ways to better their station.

So how is that supposed to actually happen, in the real world?

What’s actually happening is that the rich continue to get richer at an alarming pace, and the middle class and below stagnate and shrink.

You don’t see any actual problems resulting from this? It’s fine for it to continue, and doesn’t need to be addressed?

138 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:40:49am

re: #133 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

13 months? I swear I thought I read weeks. I blame Gus’ post #11. (“Nevermind”-Emily Latella) They probably should go ahead and make the extensions permanent. They will always (perpetually) be extended.

I knew my position on taxation wouldn’t make you happy. I have many friends who would be affected by a tax hike on the “rich”. They don’t light cigars with fifty dollar bills.

Many “uber” rich folks have come out in support of a higher percentage of tax to themselves. I think that is admirable. What stops them from simply firing their tax attorneys and simply filing short form. They could also write a check to the Government at any time.

I am a pretty simple guy.

You conservatives keep saying “class envy” like its a bad thing.

Last time I checked, Capitalism is a system built on class envy.

Why else do the middle class struggle to try and become upper class if not for class envy and likewise with the lower trying to become middle or upper? Do they get new free business cards to go with the achievement?

139 Steve Dutch  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:42:54am

re: #18 jamesfirecat

Unless you’re Genghis Khan, you have “hoards,” not “hordes.”

140 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:43:15am

re: #137 Obdicut

If the way to address it is to drag the rich back down?

I am a lower (bottom of the barrel “lower”) middle class kid who would now be considered upper middle class. I barely made it out of high school. No college.

Stared at life looming ahead of me and didn’t like what I saw coming at me. Changed my life. Didn’t wait for someone to change it for me. Taking an extra million from some other guy because he had already made it wouldn’t have made a difference to me anyway.

I honestly have no problem with the rich. Now, being filthy rich without major philanthropy to me is a terrible thing. But, it is not my choice to make with someone else’s money.

We’ll never agree on this. And, that’s okay.

141 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:44:57am

re: #140 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

If the way to address it is to drag the rich back down?

I am a lower (bottom of the barrel “lower”) middle class kid who would now be considered upper middle class. I barely made it out of high school. No college.

Stared at life looming ahead of me and didn’t like what I saw coming at me. Changed my life. Didn’t wait for someone to change it for me. Taking an extra million from some other guy because he had already made it wouldn’t have made a difference to me anyway.

I honestly have no problem with the rich. Now, being filthy rich without major philanthropy to me is a terrible thing. But, it is not my choice to make with someone else’s money.

We’ll never agree on this. And, that’s okay.

I suppose the beset way to deal with it would be to tax everyone equally to greater degree and then spend more of the money on those in lower tax brackets….

142 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:46:19am

re: #140 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

If the way to address it is to drag the rich back down?

That’s a much better question than an accusation of ‘class envy’. However, it’s still off, given that you’re talking about the rich being ‘dragged down’. How is a tax increase dragging the rich ‘back down’?


We’ll never agree on this. And, that’s okay.

I would really like it if you could actually answer the question, though.

So how is that supposed to actually happen, in the real world?

What’s actually happening is that the rich continue to get richer at an alarming pace, and the middle class and below stagnate and shrink.

You don’t see any actual problems resulting from this? It’s fine for it to continue, and doesn’t need to be addressed?

I don’t mind disagreeing with you. I do mind that you appear to be steadfastly ignoring that there is any sort of problem here.

If you disagree that it’s a problem, and think that increased wealth stratification is just fine, then say so.

If you think that it is a problem, then you need to actually address what should be done about it.

But mostly, I just want you to stop accusing people who support progressive taxation as engaging in ‘class envy’. It is facile, wrong, and insulting.

143 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:47:27am

re: #141 jamesfirecat

I suppose the beset way to deal with it would be to tax everyone equally to greater degree and then spend more of the money on those in lower tax brackets…

Spend the money doing what?

By the way. I would gladly accept a five percent income tax rate if ever stinking penny of it went to reducing the deficit.

But those Washington fuckers’d never allow it.

144 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:48:50am

re: #142 Obdicut
I said it above. I don’t think it is a problem.

145 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:52:17am

Heh.

[Link: www.eweek.com…]

Dubbed Anonymous, the group has an ongoing “Operation Payback” campaign against “anti-piracy groups,” and have targeted Motion Picture Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of America in the past.

The group’s first victim was PayPal, knocking the payment service’s blog offline by early morning on Dec. 4, according to the cyber-security researchers at Panda Labs.

[…]

After the blog went down, there was an announcement on Twitter: “TANGO DOWN — thepaypalblog.com—Blog of Paypal, company that has restricted Wikileaks’ access to funding.”

PayPal got the blog back online after 8 hours and 15 minutes of total downtime and 75 service interruptions, according to the Panda Labs researchers. It wasn’t over, as the second attack hit the main PayPal site on Dec. 6. Shortly after, Anonymous’ Web site became unavailable, “presumably under counter DDoS attack,” said Panda Labs. The site currently has a note up confirming that it was under “heavy” DoS attack, more than six hours after it began.

[…]

Despite being hit, Anonymous targeted PostFinance, the Swiss bank that froze $41,000 in an account set up as a legal defense fund for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, on Monday afternoon. PostFinance’s Web site went offline around 12 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, according to Panda Labs. It is still inaccessible, more than ten hours later.

146 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:53:07am

re: #144 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I said it above. I don’t think it is a problem.

What do you think the consequences of a smaller and smaller segment of the society controlling more and more income will be? Do you think the quality of life for the middle and lower class is going to fall, as they have less and less income to spend?

What do you think the consequences for society will be?

147 laZardo  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 4:53:14am

re: #143 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Spend the money doing what?

Something other than what the previous administration called “national security.”

148 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:01:38am

re: #146 Obdicut

I don’t know.

I also don’t know what the extra money from the rich guy does to solve the other problem (with the exception of making him have less money)?

What is it used for, or is it just a confiscation?

149 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:03:25am

re: #147 laZardo

Something other than what the previous administration called “national security.”

Fair enough. But, what?

150 laZardo  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:04:15am

re: #145 Sergey Romanov

Dubbed Anonymous, the group has an ongoing “Operation Payback” campaign against “anti-piracy groups,” and have targeted Motion Picture Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of America in the past.

Sure enough…

According to TorrentFreak, the effort has been dubbed “Operation Payback” on the 4chan message board and was carried out in retaliation for actions against file-sharing sites.

Trolls trollin’ trolls trollin’ trolls.

151 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:05:29am

re: #150 laZardo

Yeah, trolls all the way down.

152 laZardo  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:05:56am

re: #149 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Fixing up busted roads, schools and VA hospitals, rebuilding the space program, implementing better public transportation, better healthcare…

Of course, this is also partially dependent on how much the local governments are enthusiastic about it. The irony of the military-industrial complex is that it’s about the only slice of the budget where you really do get what you pay for: a whole lotta BANG! for your buck.

153 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:07:49am

Off to face the day. Later y’all!

154 laZardo  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:08:00am

re: #153 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Off to face the day. Later y’all!

Cheers, mate.

155 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:09:30am

re: #147 laZardo

Something other than what the previous administration called “national security.”

Some of us in this country are quite happy to have our government, previous administration as well as this one, spend money on national security, which is one of the federal government’s primary functions.

As to higher taxes: Here’s what goes by the wayside when more of my income is paid in taxes - my charitable giving.

I have obligations (food, shelter, clothing, taxes) that I must provide for my family. After that, there are what many would consider luxuries, that actually we believe are quite necessary - computer and computer access, college tuition, books, music - things that make our lives a bit richer. After that, entertainment, not absolutely necessary for life, but makes the end of a hard day (or a hard two-weeks) of work more tolerable - TV, occasional movie or theater ticket - then charitable giving. Our lives and our wants & needs are pretty simple and we actually live very modestly compared to many folks with income similar to ours.

What we support, to the tune of $5,000 to $6,000 a year:
USO & Soldier’s Angels
Local Habitat for Humanity
Prison ministry
Local Catholic Charities (our local chapter provides free housing and training for single unemployed mothers displaced by Katrina - yes, there are still many of these folks).
St. Vincent dePaul - food & shelter & supplies for the homeless and needy; holiday meals for the needy as well as families who aren’t in need for food but who don’t have a large enough home to host their entire family.

These all provide services in addition to government services to people here where I live. All are good programs and worthy of support. All would suffer from lowered donations if people like me are paying more in taxes. I quite like being able to support local programs, for people living in my town. Play that out all across the country.

156 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:11:13am

re: #155 reine.de.tout

Oh, forgot Salvation Army. Every bell-ringer I pass at Christmas time gets a $5 in the bucket. Not much, but helpful to them at this time of year.

157 jc717  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:17:43am

re: #146 Obdicut

What do you think the consequences of a smaller and smaller segment of the society controlling more and more income will be? Do you think the quality of life for the middle and lower class is going to fall, as they have less and less income to spend?

What do you think the consequences for society will be?

If the past is any indication, then eventually the guillotines will get some use.

158 jc717  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:19:03am

re: #148 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I don’t know.

I also don’t know what the extra money from the rich guy does to solve the other problem (with the exception of making him have less money)?

What is it used for, or is it just a confiscation?

It can be used so that we don’t have to borrow as much from China for one…

159 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:19:20am

re: #157 jc717

Either that or Nagants.

160 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:19:31am

I see Assange was arrested in London.

161 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:20:49am

re: #160 Varek Raith

Surrendered voluntarily.

162 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:22:40am

re: #148 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I don’t know.

Then why don’t you consider it a problem, if you have no idea what the effects will be?

I also don’t know what the extra money from the rich guy does to solve the other problem (with the exception of making him have less money)?

There’s a lot of various things that it does, under progressive taxation. Basically, a lot of the services provided by the government are meant to level the playing field for children and young adults. Scholarships to universities, funding for those universities, etc. are meant to provide young people with an honest start in the market. Without those scholarships and funding for universities, we wouldn’t have the able, educated workforce that we do. Having an educated professional class is one of the best ways to enable class mobility. This is one of the best benefits that tax money can be put towards.

Likewise, infrastructure spending benefits the quality of life and the ability to find and keep jobs— not to mention basic quality of life.

Further, spending on things like unemployment insurance and other social welfare problems helps to stop people from being burdens otherwise— it costs much less money to pay for section 8 housing and welfare for someone than it does for that someone to actually be homeless, or in jail. It costs even less to provide unemployment insurance, food stamps, etc. to help otherwise marginal people stay on top of rent and groceries.

These are just a small sampling of the ways that taxation can be spent on programs that are cost-effective in the long run.


What is it used for, or is it just a confiscation?

I’m really confused why you would think it’s just a confiscation. Can you explain?

163 Flounder  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:25:16am

Why don’t they just extend unemployment benefits indefinately?

164 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:25:35am

I think an apology is in order.

I accused others without much evidence on this board of supporting Assange and/or his releasing of classified materials.

Sorry.

165 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:25:41am

re: #155 reine.de.tout

The problem is that it’s demonstrably true that people do not donate enough to charity to actually alleviate societal problems. It is wonderful that you do, and it’s wonderful that all the people who work at non-profits, donate time, money, and goods, do so.

However, it is simply demonstrably true that charitable giving does not rise to the actual level of need, especially for unsexy things like drug treatment programs, etc.

We have a government partially in order to deal with the problems that need systemic resolutions that cannot be effectively approached by individual action. There are a lot of these.

166 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:29:26am

re: #164 Varek Raith

I have yet to see a person here who supports what he did. The issue for some here is either with how Assange is dealt with, or with some proposals of how he is to be dealt with (you know, medicine should not be worse than the illness and all that), but that’s a separate issue. [‘with’ overuse, I know]

167 laZardo  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:32:34am

re: #162 Obdicut

And don’t forget reducing government waste altogether…especially in some of the more notoriously corrupt cities.

168 laZardo  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:33:47am

re: #166 Sergey Romanov

I have yet to see a person here who supports what he did.

I do. I’ve just come to dislike why.

169 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:33:52am

re: #166 Sergey Romanov

There have really been four camps:

1. Supporting what Assange did (rare, mostly trolls or one-hitters)

2. Saying that Assange isn’t the problem, is being scapegoated, that the problem lies with the leakers, and that attempts to curtail Assange, arrest him, or otherwise affect Wikileaks can have a chilling effect and will have no effect on anything.

3. Saying that Assange is an egotistical and dangerous jerk, but that the problem lies with the leakers. Viewing that attempts to curtail Assange will probably not be useful, but that repudiation of his actions is culturally a good thing. Usually also paired with a cynical notation that he’s yet to go after a hard target with real risks, like Russia.

4. Saying that what Assange has done is espionage and he ought to be arrested and charges brought, and that teaching a lesson through prosecution would be useful in curtailing future incidents.

170 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:34:08am

re: #166 Sergey Romanov

I have yet to see a person here who supports what he did. The issue for some here is either with how Assange is dealt with, or with some proposals of how he is to be dealt with (you know, medicine should not be worse than the illness and all that), but that’s a separate issue. [‘with’ overuse, I know]

I believe there isn’t really anything that can be done about him.

It just ticks me off that he has the gall to declare himself the Arbiter of Classified Material™ and releases it without much forethought to the damage it’ll cause.
I let my anger of him dictate my responses to others yesterday.

171 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:35:14am

re: #169 Obdicut

There have really been four camps:

1. Supporting what Assange did (rare, mostly trolls or one-hitters)

2. Saying that Assange isn’t the problem, is being scapegoated, that the problem lies with the leakers, and that attempts to curtail Assange, arrest him, or otherwise affect Wikileaks can have a chilling effect and will have no effect on anything.

3. Saying that Assange is an egotistical and dangerous jerk, but that the problem lies with the leakers. Viewing that attempts to curtail Assange will probably not be useful, but that repudiation of his actions is culturally a good thing. Usually also paired with a cynical notation that he’s yet to go after a hard target with real risks, like Russia.

4. Saying that what Assange has done is espionage and he ought to be arrested and charges brought, and that teaching a lesson through prosecution would be useful in curtailing future incidents.

I’d be in camp 3.

172 Four More Tears  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:36:23am

re: #171 Varek Raith

I’d be in camp 3.

Me too.

173 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:37:47am

re: #171 Varek Raith

Me too. I also think attempts to prosecute him will make him a martyr of sorts.

The funny part is he has this old-school Foucaltian view of government as these massive conspiratorial elements. If anything, what he’s shown is how bad they are at keeping secrets, and how much is common knowledge. What he revealed that really was ‘secret’ was the mechanics, not the substance.

174 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:40:49am

re: #170 Varek Raith

For me it’s not about the classified material as such. Some illegal releases of classified material may be morally justified (e.g. the Pentagon Papers). It’s about most of the materials being the mundane diplomatic cables. This is a common place, I know, but each state has a right to safe diplomacy. That said, I would even welcome the release of some diplomatic cables exposing what I consider violations - even not necessary in the legal sense (e.g. the cables regarding the shameful US pressure in regard to CIA operatives), but it’s what, a couple of documents? The rest are simply not justified.

175 laZardo  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:41:39am

re: #173 Obdicut

V-for-Vendetta ambitions aside, I’m more of an “it shouldn’t have come to this” mentality. Sure, Assange is a pompous bunghole. But OTOH, if the United States wants to hold itself up as a model of accountability and human rights in a world where authoritarianism is rampant (particularly in other big countries,) it should really put in more of an effort to do so than it did these past few years.

176 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:42:45am

re: #175 laZardo

I don’t think you can draw any sort of direct line between the US’s behavior and this document dump. As Sergey pointed out, it’s not a very effective attack against the US being authoritarian, since it mostly just shows… stuff.

177 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:43:52am

re: #174 Sergey Romanov

For me it’s not about the classified material as such. Some illegal releases of classified material may be morally justified (e.g. the Pentagon Papers). It’s about most of the materials being the mundane diplomatic cables. This is a common place, I know, but each state has a right to safe diplomacy. That said, I would even welcome the release of some diplomatic cables exposing what I consider violations - even not necessary in the legal sense (e.g. the cables regarding the shameful US pressure in regard to CIA operatives), but it’s what, a couple of documents? The rest are simply not justified.

I can agree to that.

178 laZardo  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:44:53am

re: #176 Obdicut

There’s only about 1% out though. If those are any indication, it’s just the tip of a rather nasty iceberg.

179 fat bastard vegetarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:45:54am

re: #162 Obdicut

Sorry, but I have to go to work.

I appreciate what you are saying, and your arguments are compelling.

I came from an era when the story of the Ant and the Grasshopper was a morality story of industriousness and preparedness.

In the 21st century the grasshopper has become a victim of circumstance and the ant has become a symbol of refusing to share “blessings”.

We’ll pick this up another day. But, the playing field will never be level. Our president does not want it level for his daughters, and I do not want it level for mine. Therefore the president and I will scheme and connive to ensure that we tilt it in our family’s favor.

See you later Obdi! You’re the best.

180 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:46:07am

re: #176 Obdicut

I don’t think you can draw any sort of direct line between the US’s behavior and this document dump. As Sergey pointed out, it’s not a very effective attack against the US being authoritarian, since it mostly just shows… stuff.

I’m disappointed by the lack of UFO stuff.

181 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:47:09am

re: #174 Sergey Romanov

BTW, I don’t even consider diplomatic espionage as something worthy of revealing. It’s a big meh. Officials spying on officials. Who doesn’t do it, really? Again, for me it’s only justified when it comes to human rights, war crimes, attempts to cover up such.

But even here there are exceptions. As evil as it is, it was absolutely necessary for the US and the UK to cover up the Katyn massacre, which they did successfully together with the USSR. Because the coalition had to be saved until Hitler’s defeat. So a person releasing internal documents showing that e.g. the British knew who was the culprit in the massacre but decided that the war obviously had a priority would be … an asshole at least.

182 laZardo  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:47:37am

re: #180 Varek Raith

I’m disappointed by the lack of UFO stuff.

I’m disappointed by the lack of the CALL OF DUTY BLACK OPS NUMBERS STATION CONSPIRACY stuff, but those are more “popcorn thriller” for me than tinfoil.

183 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:48:02am

re: #165 Obdicut

The problem is that it’s demonstrably true that people do not donate enough to charity to actually alleviate societal problems. It is wonderful that you do, and it’s wonderful that all the people who work at non-profits, donate time, money, and goods, do so.

However, it is simply demonstrably true that charitable giving does not rise to the actual level of need, especially for unsexy things like drug treatment programs, etc.

We have a government partially in order to deal with the problems that need systemic resolutions that cannot be effectively approached by individual action. There are a lot of these.

I agree with you, that charitable giving can not replace governmental services.

However, charities serve to supplement, in a good way, services provided by government, and I think that is very important, esp. since people can donate for local needs that need to be met.

Not every town is going to need housing/training for displaced single mothers. We do need it. Government programs are going to tend to be “one-size fits all”, whereas local charities can supplement to provide for local needs that aren’t met by that approach.

We need both.

184 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:48:30am

re: #182 laZardo

I’m disappointed by the lack of the CALL OF DUTY BLACK OPS NUMBERS STATION CONSPIRACY stuff, but those are more “popcorn thriller” for me than tinfoil.

How about a combination of the two???
CALL OF DUTY BLACK OPS NUMBERS STATION CONSPIRACY,
FROM ALPHA DRACONIS!!!

185 garhighway  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:48:43am

re: #8 lostlakehiker

Now the Republicans owe Obama. They owe him a hearing on his other agenda items. And a vote. Having said that they would not consider these until taxes were addressed, well, they’ve been addressed.

You assume a sense of honor.

Good luck with that.

186 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:49:28am

re: #179 fat bastard vegetarian

We’ll pick this up another day. But, the playing field will never be level. Our president does not want it level for his daughters, and I do not want it level for mine. Therefore the president and I will scheme and connive to ensure that we tilt it in our family’s favor.

I agree. And I will do the same for my theoretical daughters and sons. And I’m quite smart, so I will probably do quite a bit job of it.

Which is why I want the government to help work against that, so that the daughters and sons of others have a chance, and so that my daughters and sons aren’t ruined by my spoiling them, and get a chance to make their own way in the world.

In addition to just wanting other people to be able to live happy, fulfilled lives.

And wanting to pay for the cheaper, more effective option— welfare and section 8 instead of police and prisons.

See you later Obdi! You’re the best.

You too. Take care.

187 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:49:35am

re: #171 Varek Raith

I’d be in camp 3.

I would be too, leaning toward camp 4.

188 fat bastard vegetarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:52:19am

re: #186 Obdicut
That’s my point! People in government will try to level the playing field while tilting it in their family’s direction!

As long as parents love their children, the playing field will never be level.

Okay. Now I am late. Are you proud of yourself?
/

189 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:54:34am

re: #183 reine.de.tout

I think one of the best ways the government can respond to their high-level blindness is by funding things at the community level. The smaller you can get the actual responsible agency— provided good oversight— the more effective it’ll be. A neighborhood soup kitchen where they know the regulars is better than one giant soup kitchen downtown.

Whether that neighborhood soup kitchen is a non-profit or overseen by the local government, I really don’t care.

190 fat bastard vegetarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:55:50am

re: #186 Obdicut

(Whole lot of folks move from section 8 housing to prison, by the way.)

SNARK! AND AWAY!

191 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:56:07am

re: #188 fat bastard vegetarian

That’s my point! People in government will try to level the playing field while tilting it in their family’s direction!

Oh, I don’t think that’s necessarily true. If I was in government, I wouldn’t— because I really think that it’s of benefit to my children to have to make their own way in the world.

Most of the Democrats in office are wealthy; yet those Democrats push for tax increases on the wealthy. This will push the playing field in the opposite direction from their families. So this would appear, on the face of it, to be a ready disproof of your assertion.

192 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:56:24am

[Link: www.gallup.com…]

New Gallup with recent presidents’ job approvals ratings.

193 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:58:05am

re: #190 fat bastard vegetarian

(Whole lot of folks move from section 8 housing to prison, by the way.)

SNARK! AND AWAY!

Yes, they do. And given the cost of processing them through the courts and the cost of keeping them incarcerated, we should be doing a lot more to prevent that from happening.

194 fat bastard vegetarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:58:49am

re: #191 Obdicut

I think we both are extraordinarily naive.

So. There.

195 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:59:36am

re: #194 fat bastard vegetarian

I think it’s naive of you to think that you’re naive.

So double there.

196 laZardo  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:05:10am

Well tits, my PS3 just YLoDed. ;_;

197 kirkspencer  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:27:27am

re: #74 Jaerik

[snipped by Kirk]
The question becomes, is the tax-cuts-to-jobs conversion rate the most efficient means of creating jobs, or is it the Keynesian model? Economists have been debating that one for the better part of a century with no consensus. But complex economic debate is no fun: it’s much more fun to scream simple mantras at your political enemies on cable TV.

Actually, the Keynesian model has been repetitively shown to be accurate when applied.

I think it’s important to recognize that Hayek’s school of economics was created solely to oppose the socialistic conclusions seen in Keynesian economics. “Road to Serfdom” was the essence of that rejection. The principles are admirable to most in the US, to include Keynes (he wrote articles saying so). But the theories are specifically intended to gut Keynesian theory.

Go digging. It’ll take some time, but do it anyway. When you do, keep one question in mind: which school relies on evidence and which on principle. If you want a second division, watch for times when the predictions of the two schools differ and when they do see which is closer to actual results. I’m willing to have my mind changed, but in general the keynesians rely on evidence and tend to be right.

So when I see someone scoffing at keynesian theory it tends to rub me the same way as scoffing at evolution or climate change.

198 Lidane  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:28:23am

re: #27 Stanley Sea

That’s what I hate the most. A civil rights issue has to be a deal.

Seriously. Since when are civil and equal rights up for debate?

199 NJDhockeyfan  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:30:19am

Exactly 69 years ago today, on December 7, 1941, Japan fighter planes attacked our ships & planes at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. Never forget.

The Pearl Harbor Attack


…In October 1941 the naval general staff gave final approval to Yamamoto’s plan, which called for the formation of an attack force commanded by Vice Admiral Chuichi Nagumo. It centered around six heavy aircraft carriers accompanied by 24 supporting vessels. A separate group of submarines was to sink any American warships which escaped the Japanese carrier force.

Nagumo’s fleet assembled in the remote anchorage of Tankan Bay in the Kurile Islands and departed in strictest secrecy for Hawaii on 26 November 1941. The ships’ route crossed the North Pacific and avoided normal shipping lanes. At dawn 7 December 1941, the Japanese task force had approached undetected to a point slightly more than 200 miles north of Oahu. At this time the U.S. carriers were not at Pearl Harbor. On 28 November, Admiral Kimmel sent USS Enterprise under Rear Admiral Willliam Halsey to deliver Marine Corps fighter planes to Wake Island. On 4 December Enterprise delivered the aircraft and on December 7 the task force was on its way back to Pearl Harbor. On 5 December, Admiral Kimmel sent the USS Lexington with a task force under Rear Admiral Newton to deliver 25 scout bombers to Midway Island. The last Pacific carrier, USS Saratoga, had left Pearl Harbor for upkeep and repairs on the West Coast.

At 6:00 a.m. on 7 December, the six Japanese carriers launched a first wave of 181 planes composed of torpedo bombers, dive bombers, horizontal bombers and fighters. Even as they winged south, some elements of U.S. forces on Oahu realized there was something different about this Sunday morning.

In the hours before dawn, U.S. Navy vessels spotted an unidentified submarine periscope near the entrance to Pearl Harbor. It was attacked and reported sunk by the destroyer USS Ward (DD-139) and a patrol plane. At 7:00 a.m., an alert operator of an Army radar station at Opana spotted the approaching first wave of the attack force. The officers to whom those reports were relayed did not consider them significant enough to take action. The report of the submarine sinking was handled routinely, and the radar sighting was passed off as an approaching group of American planes due to arrive that morning.

The Japanese aircrews achieved complete surprise when they hit American ships and military installations on Oahu shortly before 8:00 a.m. They attacked military airfields at the same time they hit the fleet anchored in Pearl Harbor. The Navy air bases at Ford Island and Kaneohe Bay, the Marine airfield at Ewa and the Army Air Corps fields at Bellows, Wheeler and Hickam were all bombed and strafed as other elements of the attacking force began their assaults on the ships moored in Pearl Harbor. The purpose of the simultaneous attacks was to destroy the American planes before they could rise to intercept the Japanese.

[snip]

200 Bubblehead II  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:31:27am

Morning Lizards. I need a favor. I am trying to get (part of) my security system set up to be accessible over the Internet. So far I can access it over the home network, but not the Internet. I made some tweaks to my modem this morning and I need to know if they worked. Can someone go to this IP address using IE 7 or better and tell me if you see a login screen. 192.168.0.4. It may want to download an active X file. It is safe.

201 kirkspencer  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:32:55am

re: #200 Bubblehead II

Morning Lizards. I need a favor. I am trying to get (part of) my security system set up to be accessible over the Internet. So far I can access it over the home network, but not the Internet. I made some tweaks to my modem this morning and I need to know if they worked. Can someone go to this IP address using IE 7 or better and tell me if you see a login screen. 192.168.0.4. It may want to download an active X file. It is safe.

192.168.x.x is default private. It won’t get out onto the internet. You can only see it if you are part of that circle of 192.168.x.x addresses.

202 Bubblehead II  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:34:10am

re: #201 kirkspencer

Even with port forwarding enabled?

203 Romantic Heretic  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:39:36am

I’d say “Well done, Mr. President.” Except for one problem.

This all depends on the GOP keeping their word. Which I don’t believe they will do. That is because they believe they are fighting evil and you never compromise with evil.

If I was Obama and the Dems I’d put the tax cut extensions last on the voting queue. Otherwise the GOP will vote for the tax cut extensions and then tell Obama to go piss up a rope.

204 darthstar  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:41:32am

re: #202 Bubblehead II

Even with port forwarding enabled?

Try googlin’ ‘what’s my ip’ to get your external ip address. Then, after you post it (not advised), watch how many port scans you get.

205 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:41:47am

Hiker freed from Tehran prison: Time for U.S.-Iran ties

“At a very personal level, I never would have been kept in jail for 14 months if Iran and the United States had a better relationship. My fiancé, Shane Bauer, and our close friend Josh Fattal would not still be in prison in Iran today on the baseless charge of espionage.”

It’s Bush’s fault.

206 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:42:02am

re: #205 Walter L. Newton

Hiker freed from Tehran prison: Time for U.S.-Iran ties

“At a very personal level, I never would have been kept in jail for 14 months if Iran and the United States had a better relationship. My fiancé, Shane Bauer, and our close friend Josh Fattal would not still be in prison in Iran today on the baseless charge of espionage.”

It’s Bush’s fault.

[Link: www.cnn.com…]

207 iossarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:43:37am

re: #205 Walter L. Newton


It’s Bush’s fault.

Actually, it’s the UK and US’s fault for overthrowing the democratically-elected government and installing the Shah, which paved the way for the mullahs to seize power.

208 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:43:51am

re: #204 darthstar

Try googlin’ ‘what’s my ip’ to get your external ip address. Then, after you post it (not advised), watch how many port scans you get.

I want one… I want one…

Port scans… if your firewall or what ever security software you are running has the ability of showing you real time what/who is sniffing at your ports, and you’ve never seen this before, it’s almost scary.

209 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:44:13am

re: #207 iossarian

Actually, it’s the UK and US’s fault for overthrowing the democratically-elected government and installing the Shah, which paved the way for the mullahs to seize power.

Right.

210 Bubblehead II  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:47:44am

re: #204 darthstar

I already know what my static external IP address is. What I am trying to do is access the internal (dynamic) IP address of the DVR. The instructions said to set port forwarding to it. So far it hasn’t been working for external connections. Trying to figure out why.

211 iossarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:51:02am

re: #210 Bubblehead II

Not sure if I’ve understood your question right, so apologies if you already understand this:

Say you have an external IP address of A.B.C.D, and your DVR is on your local network as 192.168.0.4, listening on port X.

Then to access it from outside your local network, you would first set port forwarding on your router to forward X to 192.168.0.4, and then point your web browser (at work, or wherever) at A.B.C.D:X, which the router would then forward to the (local) 192.168.0.4 device.

212 iossarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:53:55am

Incidentally, you can use dyndns.org (or similar services) to give yourself a home address that automatically updates, for example, when Comcast changes your assigned external IP address. Quite a few routers can be made to send periodic updates to dyndns.org, or you can have one of your home computers do it.

Then you can access bubblehead.dyndns.org:75 or whatever to program your DVR.

213 rwdflynavy  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:57:28am

re: #207 iossarian

Actually, it’s the UK and US’s fault for overthrowing the democratically-elected government and installing the Shah, which paved the way for the mullahs to seize power.


Actually, it’s the Soviet’s fault for pulling out of Iran in 1946.//

214 Bubblehead II  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:58:12am

re: #211 iossarian

Tried that and it didn’t work. Tried to ping it (external IP) as well and it timed out.
re: #212 iossarian

May have to go that route. Thanks for the advice/info. Know enough about networking to dangerous. %-/

215 iossarian  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:58:34am

re: #213 rwdflynavy

Actually, it’s the Soviet’s fault for pulling out of Iran in 1946.//

Paraphrasing Douglas Adams - we should never have come down from the trees. Actually, forget the trees, why did we ever get out of the oceans?

216 rwdflynavy  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:00:13am

re: #215 iossarian

Paraphrasing Douglas Adams - we should never have come down from the trees. Actually, forget the trees, why did we ever get out of the oceans?


Ultimately, King Darius paved the way for Iran’s current situation.//

217 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:00:14am

re: #213 rwdflynavy

Actually, it’s the Soviet’s fault for pulling out of Iran in 1946.//

No… it’s actually blowback left over from the Crusades… they’ve never gotten over that. We should have been more careful then.

218 rwdflynavy  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:01:21am

re: #217 Walter L. Newton

No… it’s actually blowback left over from the Crusades… they’ve never gotten over that. We should have been more careful then.

Don’t you mean the War of Christian Aggression!!//

219 funky chicken  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:02:55am

re: #8 lostlakehiker

Now the Republicans owe Obama. They owe him a hearing on his other agenda items. And a vote. Having said that they would not consider these until taxes were addressed, well, they’ve been addressed.

I hope he holds their feet to the fire now, although I was really hoping to see ridiculous Mitch McConnell being nailed to the wall screaming for tax cuts for millionaires and zero extension in unemployment benefits, which was his preference.

220 funky chicken  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:05:21am

re: #206 Walter L. Newton

[Link: www.cnn.com…]

No honey. Y’all wouldn’t have been/still be in prison if y’all hadn’t been/still are (?) stupid.

221 rwdflynavy  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:10:33am

re: #220 funky chicken

No honey. Y’all wouldn’t have been/still be in prison if y’all hadn’t been/still are (?) stupid.

This, this, a thousand times this!!!

222 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:12:42am

re: #220 funky chicken

No honey. Y’all wouldn’t have been/still be in prison if y’all hadn’t been/still are (?) stupid.

This is where ideology dumbs down reality. It would be wonderful if Iran and the United States had better diplomatic relations. It would be wonderful if we had an embassy in Teheran. It would be wonderful if I was taller and looked like Johnny Depp.

But foregoing the reality of a situation, putting yourself in danger because you wish for a “can’t we all get along” outcome” is nothing more than stupid.

Maybe a mistake was made 50 or so years ago, the Shah should have never been given the support from the US like he got. Whatever, guess what, no matter what happened then, doesn’t change the reality that Iran’s record of human rights stinks.

I hope her friends are release, as soon as possible, but she and her friends need to stop blaming everyone else for their fuck up.

223 Bubblehead II  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:16:09am

bbiaw. Going to reconfigure the modem/router for Static IP addressing.

224 MrSilverDragon  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:26:36am

re: #222 Walter L. Newton

I hope her friends are release, as soon as possible, but she and her friends need to stop blaming everyone else for their fuck up.

But it’s always someone else’s fault. There is no personal responsibility anymore. I blame a false sense of entitlement.

/half sarc

225 funky chicken  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:28:08am

re: #222 Walter L. Newton

It reminds me of my inlaws’ making excuses for a family member who got tossed in jail for speeding/reckless driving—caught doing that after his license had been revoked for years of the same behavior.

You know what my inlaws said? They said it was PROFILING. OMFG.

The funniest thing—we’re all white. So the profiling would have been idiot redneck meth-head. And I damn well hope the cops profile for meth-heads on the road.

It’s weird how people can force themselves to absolutely believe utter nonsense.

226 lawhawk  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:32:08am

British authorities have denied Assange bail. He will remain in jail for at least a week; Assange says he will contest the extradition.

227 lawhawk  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:32:38am

re: #215 iossarian

Trust the dolphins… and thanks for the fish.

228 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:46:58am

re: #226 lawhawk

British authorities have denied Assange bail. He will remain in jail for at least a week; Assange says he will contest the extradition.

In other Assange news The Guardian is reporting journalist John Pilger comes to Assange’s defense:

3.33pm: Speaking outside the court John Pilger described the judge’s failure to offer bail as “unjust”.

Every journalist should be supporting Assange 100% he said.

Let’s put John Pilger up on the screen shall we?

In May 2007, Pilger co-signed and put forward a letter supporting the refusal of the government of Venezuela to renew the broadcasting licence of Venezuela’s largest television network Radio Caracas Televisión (RCTV), as they openly supported a 2002 coup attempt against the democratically elected government. Pilger and other signatories suggest that if the BBC or ITV used their news broadcasts to publicly support a coup against the British government, they would suffer similar consequences. Other groups, such as Human Rights Watch, Reporters Without Borders and the Committee to Protect Journalists, have described the RCTV decision as an effort to stifle freedom of expression.

229 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:49:44am

re: #228 Gus 802

Surprise!

You may have read of Britain’s Chief Rabbi. The most recent attack in a film by a Jewish MP, Gerald Kaufman, was the most vicious. Our attempts to combat this through direct challenge and through personal networking have completely failed. Carlton Television aired another deeply anti-Israel film by a journalist, John Pilger. We have been more successful here and we are in the process of getting an alternative film aired and made.

230 mikefromArlington  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:50:36am

This is all Raum’s fault Obama sold us out! Raum left a picture of himself in the Oval Office that stairs down the Pres at all times reminding him always to cave on all that is liberal to spite the f’in hippy left!

231 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:51:17am

re: #230 mikefromArlington

This is all Raum’s fault Obama sold us out! Raum left a picture of himself in the Oval Office that stairs down the Pres at all times reminding him always to cave on all that is liberal to spite the f’in hippy left!

What’s a “raum?”

232 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:51:43am

re: #229 Gus 802

John Pilger @ Lew Rockwell.

If it walks like a duck…

233 lawhawk  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:54:57am
234 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:55:25am

re: #232 Gus 802

John Pilger @ Lew Rockwell.

If it walks like a duck…

Incidentally, there’s more to John Pilger than a comment on The Guardian:

Jemima Khan, the sister of Tory MP Zac Goldsmith, film director Ken Loach and veteran journalist John Pilger all offered to stand as surety for Assange

235 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:56:35am

re: #233 lawhawk

Charles and the LFG minions have been on Pilger for years.

Interesting friends Assange has.

A pattern clearly begins to emerge doesn’t it?

236 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:57:27am

re: #235 Gus 802

Assholes?

237 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:58:26am

re: #236 Obdicut

Assholes?

[Video]

Yep. And here’s the scoop on Ken Loach:

[Link: en.wikipedia.org…]

238 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 7:59:09am

re: #237 Gus 802

Yep. And here’s the scoop on Ken Loach:

[Link: en.wikipedia.org…]

I’ll dump some of that here:

A member of the Labour Party from the early 1960s, Loach left in the mid-1990s.[5] In November 2004, he was elected to the national council of the Respect Coalition[5] He stood for election to the European Parliament on a Respect mandate. He supports the Socialist Resistance organisation. Also, he supports the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of the State of Israel ([Link: www.pacbi.org…] backed by many intellectuals in Palestinian civil society, including writers, filmmakers, students, trade unions and human rights groups. PACBI is in turn part of a wider global international movement: Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS), that opposes actions by the Israeli State.[6]

In 2007, Loach was one of more than 100 artists and writers who signed an open letter initiated by Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism and the South West Asian, North African Bay Area Queers (SWANABAQ) and calling on the San Francisco International LGBT Film Festival “to honour calls for an international boycott of Israeli political and cultural institutions, by discontinuing Israeli consulate sponsorship of the LGBT film festival and not co-sponsoring events with the Israeli consulate.”[7][8] Loach also joined “54 international figures in the literary and cultural fields” in signing a letter that stated, in part, “celebrating ‘Israel at 60’ is tantamount to dancing on Palestinian graves to the haunting tune of lingering dispossession and multi-faceted injustice”. The letter was published in the International Herald Tribune on 8 May 2008.”[9]

Responding to a report, which he described as “a red herring”, on the growth of antisemitism since the beginning of the Gaza War, he has said: “If there has been a rise I am not surprised. In fact, it is perfectly understandable because Israel feeds feelings of anti-Semitism.” He added “no-one can condone violence”.[10]

239 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:00:38am

re: #237 Gus 802

It’s actually really weird that a dude like Pilger would support Assange, seeing as he seemly has a hard-on for a regime that oppresses freedom of speech and reporters.

He may be coat-tail grabbing, or he may just love the anti-American cast that Wikileaks has assumed of late.

240 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:04:07am

re: #239 Obdicut

It’s actually really weird that a dude like Pilger would support Assange, seeing as he seemly has a hard-on for a regime that oppresses freedom of speech and reporters.

He may be coat-tail grabbing, or he may just love the anti-American cast that Wikileaks has assumed of late.

Until he we have further information it could be either. Here’s more on his other “buddy” Ken Loach:

Ken Loach takes Israel stance down under
(AFP) – Jul 17, 2009

MELBOURNE — Filmmaker and activist Ken Loach has moved to withdraw his work from Melbourne’s International Film Festival in protest against partial sponsorship from Israel, a report said Saturday.

Loach, whose work The Wind that Shakes the Barley won the Palme D’Or at Cannes in 2006, wrote to the festival’s director Richard Moore threatening to pull his film Looking for Eric because the event had received Israeli funds.

“Palestinians, including artists and academics, have called for a boycott of events supported by Israel,” wrote Loach, according to The Age newspaper.

The boycott, aimed not at independent Israeli film-makers or films but “the Israeli state”, was in protest at what Loach described as “illegal occupation of Palestinian land, destruction of homes and livelihoods” and “the massacres in Gaza”.

Controversy hit the festival earlier this week when Chinese officials attempted to ban the screening of a documentary about a Uighur activist, in the wake of recent violence in Xinjiang involving the Muslim minority.

Moore refused to exclude the Uighur film, Ten Conditions of Love, and said he would not meet Loach’s request to reconsider sponsorship from the Jewish state.

“I wouldn’t do it. The festival wouldn’t. It’s like submitting to blackmail,” he said.

Israel’s government had supported the festival in previous years, and their 2009 sponsorship involved paying the airfare for festival guest Tatia Rosenthal, Moore said.

Loach, 73, succeeded in a similar bid to have sponsorship withdrawn from the Edinburgh International Film Festival in May by threatening to boycott the program if they did not return funds from Israel.

241 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:07:50am

re: #240 Gus 802

Until he we have further information it could be either. Here’s more on his other “buddy” Ken Loach:

Ken Loach takes Israel stance down under
(AFP) – Jul 17, 2009

Every notice how “freedom of speech” with these sort of folks has a “on and off” switch in their world? Freedom of speech for me, but if you don’t agree with me, then not for thee.

242 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:08:38am

re: #240 Gus 802

Honestly, there’s so much anti-Israel and anti-Jewish sentiment in the UK that it never really seems to signify anything else but that itself. Britain appears to have a hard time dealing with situations that were mainly of its own making.

243 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:09:13am

Drudge has a rumor on his page that TIME will be naming Assange their Man of the Year? No details yet.

244 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:09:29am

re: #233 lawhawk
I’ve allways wanted to be a Minion….!!
….How’s your day starting?
I came in to work(6am) to a flat tire on the work truck….
Back in MY truck and lowered all my flags for Pearl Harbor Day!
State Court Fed Flag is frozen to the pole or jambed at mast swivel…
Go back to work…change tire ..it’s 19dig…
My head is about EXPLODE (head cold)..
I’ve got 52 hours of leave I either use or lose..(roll over the other 300
to 2011).
…and I ‘m on call starting Thursday …so I can’t take off…
Third cup of coffee is not working!
But,It’s a crisp clear beautiful day!
Hope everyones doing better than I!

245 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:13:12am

re: #242 Obdicut

Honestly, there’s so much anti-Israel and anti-Jewish sentiment in the UK that it never really seems to signify anything else but that itself. Britain appears to have a hard time dealing with situations that were mainly of its own making.

Yep, the UK has been that for quite a while.

Here’s another one that tried to post bail for Assange: Jemima Khan.

It’s the same pattern. Here’s an excerpt from one of the links:

Hillary Clinton, who a year ago called for a Palestinian state, has been forced into a complete U-turn in her Senate campaign. The Jews have been remarkably successful as a people, despite historic adversity. As a result, the Israeli lobby in the US is rich and influential. The media are largely controlled by the Jews, as is Hollywood and they account for more than half the top policy-making jobs in the Clinton administration. — Jemima Khan

246 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:15:15am

re: #222 Walter L. Newton

How do these idiots pick a place to go for a “hike”!

“Let’s spin the globe and throw a dart at it”?
Lucky the dart didn’t land on the Marianna Trench….

247 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:16:19am

All three of the most notorious people trying to post bail for Assange today are anti-Israel, and crypto anti-Semites: John Pilger, Ken Loach and Jemima Khan. The depth of those stances vary. Their connection to Assange are yet unknown to me, however…

I rest my case.

248 lawhawk  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:16:30am

re: #244 reloadingisnotahobby

The day is starting like most every other day… well now that I’ve had my coffee.

No transit delays helps the mood too.

249 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:17:42am

re: #245 Gus 802

I think Israel also gets the focus of a lot of people who are anti-government, partially because there’s lots of “Jews rule the world” conspiracies for them to indulge in, but also because Israel is, very clearly, a nation that only survives due to the actions of their government.

What I mean is that Israel has to, constantly, take actions to safeguard its citizens against external threats. Whether or not one agrees with what Israel does, it’s something that it needs to do constantly, since it’s attacked constantly and under even greater threat. So it’s one of the clearest examples of a government in action.

Here’s a hopeful bit about Khan.

[Link: www.thejc.com…]

250 lawhawk  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:18:34am

Rep Charles Rangel (D-NY-censured): My worst mistake? Trusting my staff on disclosures/filings.

That’s quite the excuse Charlie. Blame the staff when you’re the one ultimately responsible for the paperwork. You signed off on it.

Moreover, who are you blaming for being a tax cheat or for the use of a rent stabilized apartment as an office? No staff involved there. That’s all on you - and you unjustly enriched yourself by not paying taxes for all those years on your real estate holdings and paying below market rents.

Nice. Stay classy.

251 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:21:40am

re: #249 Obdicut

I think Israel also gets the focus of a lot of people who are anti-government, partially because there’s lots of “Jews rule the world” conspiracies for them to indulge in, but also because Israel is, very clearly, a nation that only survives due to the actions of their government.

What I mean is that Israel has to, constantly, take actions to safeguard its citizens against external threats. Whether or not one agrees with what Israel does, it’s something that it needs to do constantly, since it’s attacked constantly and under even greater threat. So it’s one of the clearest examples of a government in action.

Here’s a hopeful bit about Khan.

[Link: www.thejc.com…]

She is the least worrisome. I did find this Tweet in her Twitter account:

@JemKhan Jemima Khan
I’m enjoying claims that Egypt shark attacks are part of a plot by Mossad. The same was said of my marriage.
5 hours ago via web Favorite Retweet Reply

252 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:24:47am

Great stuff in the pages this morning.

253 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:26:19am

re: #251 Gus 802

She is the least worrisome. I did find this Tweet in her Twitter account:

@JemKhan Jemima Khan
US calls for impartial investigation into Israel assualt on Gaza flotilla and says inquiry could be carried out by Israel. Um…
2 Jun via UberTwitter Favorite Retweet Reply

254 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:27:04am

re: #250 lawhawk
…and W.Snipes is going to jail…WTF!

255 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:27:10am

re: #251 Gus 802

Heh. So far, the Wikileaks stuff hasn’t appeared to focus at all on Israel, so I’m a little dubious about the claim that the common tie is anti-Israel sentiment. Loach and Pilger both seem to have a great deal of antipathy for the current UK government— Loach refused an OBE— and especially of the amount of influence the US has with the UK.

Since Khan has also funded a “Free Pakistan Movement” to protest the martial law controls in place there, that might actually be a better explanation for her support for Assange, given that the US supports Musharraf.

256 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:27:15am

re: #251 Gus 802

She is the least worrisome. I did find this Tweet in her Twitter account:

@JemKhan Jemima Khan
Q- How many Israelis killed by Gaza rockets in 10 years? A- Less than the number of peace activists killed yesterday.
1 Jun via web Favorite Retweet Reply

257 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:29:28am

re: #251 Gus 802

She is the least worrisome. I did find this Tweet in her Twitter account:

@JemKhan Jemima Khan
Demand action against Israel’s attack on international humanitarian aid flotilla to Gaza [Link: tinyurl.com…]
31 May via web Favorite Retweet Reply

258 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:29:49am

re: #255 Obdicut

Heh. So far, the Wikileaks stuff hasn’t appeared to focus at all on Israel, so I’m a little dubious about the claim that the common tie is anti-Israel sentiment. Loach and Pilger both seem to have a great deal of antipathy for the current UK government— Loach refused an OBE— and especially of the amount of influence the US has with the UK.

Since Khan has also funded a “Free Pakistan Movement” to protest the martial law controls in place there, that might actually be a better explanation for her support for Assange, given that the US supports Musharraf.

Well, I’m seeing a lot of ducks.

259 garhighway  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:30:40am

re: #163 Shropshire_Slasher

Why don’t they just extend unemployment benefits indefinately?

The general sense is that in an economy offering a diligent job seeker a reasonable chance of success, the benefits should be finite and not very long. But this is not such an economy, and cutting off benefits as a motivational tool when finding a job is so difficult is inhumane.

That’s my read, anyway.

260 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:30:44am

re: #258 Gus 802

I’m just saying if you look at their anti-UK statements, you’ll probably find quite a bit there, as well. Or anti-US statements. These things go together. I’m not sure that you can hold the anti-Israel positions above the others and say “Here is the real reason”.

261 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:32:54am

re: #258 Gus 802

Well, I’m seeing a lot of ducks.

Are they is season??
READY
AIM
,,,,,

262 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:34:03am

re: #260 Obdicut

I’m just saying if you look at their anti-UK statements, you’ll probably find quite a bit there, as well. Or anti-US statements. These things go together. I’m not sure that you can hold the anti-Israel positions above the others and say “Here is the real reason”.

I agree. I’ve been noticing that Andrew Sullivan and Glenn Greenwald are also very supportive of Wikileaks and are very anti-Israel. But thier prime motivation is really a reaction to post 9-11 national security, Iraq, etc.

263 rwdflynavy  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:34:06am

re: #261 sattv4u2

Are they is season??
READY
AIM
,,,

Rabbit Season!

264 lawhawk  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:35:22am

re: #254 reloadingisnotahobby

Snipes was a tax protester and his tax obligations were in the millions of dollars. He claimed he was a non-US citizen and engaged in all manner of chicanery to avoid paying taxes.

Rangel’s tax obligations were far less and didn’t engage in overt tax avoidance as Snipes did. Rangel’s problem is that he didn’t declare his income from rental properties and did so for a decade all while being the guy running the committee that sets tax policy for the nation.

Snipes is getting what he deserves, and Rangel’s tax problems have yet to be fully resolved.

265 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:36:04am

Drudge is linking to Infowars again this morning about WallMart and DHS oppressing patriots or something.

266 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:36:23am

re: #262 Killgore Trout

People have this weird view of Israel as a very authoritarian state. They’re actually remarkably un-authoritarian given the situation they’re in. Ironically, the only other country that I can think of that withstood numerous terrorist attacks without becoming highly authoritarian was the UK during the Troubles. Then, of course, they became more and more authoritarian after the Troubles for no apparent fucking reason.

If the US was suffering rocket attacks, we’d go to war over it. No question.

267 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:37:00am

re: #261 sattv4u2

re: #263 rwdflynavy

Speaking of Wabbit season….
Internet orders only…great deals with 10% off!
Natchezss.com

268 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:37:43am

re: #263 rwdflynavy

Rabbit Season!

Must be possum season here on Georgia

I must have seen 2 dozen of them squashed on the roads around here in the last week or so

(btw ,,, I think I’ll call the Georgia Fish and Game Dept and see when they’ll be putting up Possum Crossing signs so the little critters will know where it’s safe for them to get to the other side of the road)

269 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:37:57am

My god. This is what Drudge is linking to….
BIG SIS GIVING SPY ORDERS IN WALMART CHECKOUT LINE

270 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:38:57am

re: #260 Obdicut

I’m just saying if you look at their anti-UK statements, you’ll probably find quite a bit there, as well. Or anti-US statements. These things go together. I’m not sure that you can hold the anti-Israel positions above the others and say “Here is the real reason”.

In the case of those I mentioned it’s all part of the same anti-US and anti-Israel left wing narrative. Although you will find John Pilger in the paleo-con website Lew Rockwell as I linked above.

271 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:39:42am

re: #264 lawhawk

I agree …But I hold Rangle to FAR higher standard than an actor
because of his Committee position…

272 garhighway  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:39:51am

re: #264 lawhawk

Snipes was a tax protester and his tax obligations were in the millions of dollars. He claimed he was a non-US citizen and engaged in all manner of chicanery to avoid paying taxes.

Rangel’s tax obligations were far less and didn’t engage in overt tax avoidance as Snipes did. Rangel’s problem is that he didn’t declare his income from rental properties and did so for a decade all while being the guy running the committee that sets tax policy for the nation.

Snipes is getting what he deserves, and Rangel’s tax problems have yet to be fully resolved.

Rangel is somewhere on the crooked-stupid-sloppy continuum, but it is unclear to me precisely where he falls thereon.

Snipes, on the other hand, besides being a terrible actor (but who’s in some cool movies) was a flat out tax resister. For them, I say that penalties towards the severe end of the spectrum are appropriate, especially if they are counseling/encouraging others to similarly resist.

273 Skeetghazi  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:40:32am

Jemima Khan is a socialite, you are giving her too much power here.

274 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:41:26am

re: #270 Gus 802

All I’m saying is that anti-American sentiment seems to me the much easier descriptor than anti-Israeli sentiment. The Wikileaks have mainly been ‘aimed’ at the US, and all those people have severe problems— to say the least— with the US and its foreign policy.

They’re still dumb for supporting the flotilla, etc.

275 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:41:36am

I said what I said. You decide.

If I found dirt like this on someone in the Tea Party or the GOP I don’t think people would be so passive about it.

276 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:41:39am

re: #273 Stanley Sea

“power”?

277 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:42:28am

re: #275 Gus 802

I’m not sure what reaction you want, though.

Yes, they’re anti-Israel. But given that Wikileaks is mainly targeting the US, and these people are also anti-US, doesn’t it seem more reasonable that it’s their antipathy for US foreign policy that’s driving their support for Assange?

278 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:42:51am

Assange ordered to jail while court decides on extradition

London (CNN) — WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was sent to jail Tuesday while a London court decides whether to order his extradition to Sweden.

The judge at the City of Westminster Magistrate’s Court refused to grant Assange bail, despite several celebrities coming forward and offering to pay his surety.

Assange, who was in court with security guards on either side of him and his lawyer in front, must now stay in custody until December 14. It was not immediately clear if the court would decide on that date whether to release him.

In making his decision, the judge cited the fact that Assange gave no permanent address and has a nomadic lifestyle, and that he has access to significant funding that would make it easy for him to abscond.

279 Skeetghazi  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:43:12am

re: #276 Obdicut

“power”?

Ah I typed fast.

She’s a socialite, I read about her in the society pages, dating Hugh Grant or something.

280 rwdflynavy  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:43:16am

re: #270 Gus 802

In the case of those I mentioned it’s all part of the same anti-US and anti-Israel left wing narrative. Although you will find John Pilger in the paleo-con website Lew Rockwell as I linked above.

Proof they will try to pin anything on the JOOOS!!

Egypt: Sinai shark attacks could be Israeli plot

281 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:43:57am

re: #280 rwdflynavy

Proof they will try to pin anything on the JOOOS!!

Egypt: Sinai shark attacks could be Israeli plot

Yawn.
Call me when they put lasers on the sharks.
/

282 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:44:15am

re: #280 rwdflynavy

Proof they will try to pin anything on the JOOOS!!

Egypt: Sinai shark attacks could be Israeli plot

Did they report about the “lasers beams” attached to the sharks heads!?!?
/

283 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:44:38am

re: #281 Varek Raith

You just type faster that I!!

284 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:44:43am

re: #280 rwdflynavy

They have pictures!

Image: jewish-shark-week.jpg

//

285 rwdflynavy  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:45:45am

re: #282 sattv4u2

Did they report about the “lasers beams” attached to the sharks heads!?!?
/

Nope, just ill-tempered Sea Bass.

286 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:47:08am

re: #285 rwdflynavy

Nope, just ill-tempered Sea Bass.

I had one of those for dinner once

TIP,, NEVER order the “fresh SEA bass” at a truck stop in Indiana!!

287 lawhawk  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:50:11am

re: #286 sattv4u2

Don’t eat the fish.

288 researchok  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:51:06am

re: #275 Gus 802

I said what I said. You decide.

If I found dirt like this on someone in the Tea Party or the GOP I don’t think people would be so passive about it.

Are you really surprised?

289 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:51:36am

re: #277 Obdicut

I’m not sure what reaction you want, though.

Yes, they’re anti-Israel. But given that Wikileaks is mainly targeting the US, and these people are also anti-US, doesn’t it seem more reasonable that it’s their antipathy for US foreign policy that’s driving their support for Assange?

Because in certain circles being against US foreign policy goes hand and hand with anti-Israel sentiment. It’s right there in the words of John Pilger, Ron Paul (who also came to support Assange) and others. The only reason these Wikileaks focus on the US for the time being is because they were obtained from the US computer by Bradley Manning.

The primary goal of the Wikileaks is to deconstruct or dismantle US foreign policy in the ME which correlates with the anti-war movements of the past 10 years. One of these goals is to prosecute American politicians for “war crimes” for our actions in Iraq. Another is to promote the withdrawal of US troops in Afghanistan.

When one deconstructs our long standing US ME policy they also, by default, endanger the safety of Israel. At the same time they are also in “solidarity” with one state factions with regards to Israel and Palestine.

291 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:53:23am

re: #289 Gus 802

“the US computer” is a little awkwardly written.

292 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:54:19am

I got a really nice new scarf for Hanukkah last night… neat… wee… I’m going to wear this in Paris next month… perfect timing.

(Of course, the night before, my girlfriend gave me a whoopie cushion… is there a message here?)

293 researchok  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:55:20am

re: #289 Gus 802

Because in certain circles being against US foreign policy goes hand and hand with anti-Israel sentiment. It’s right there in the words of John Pilger, Ron Paul (who also came to support Assange) and others. The only reason these Wikileaks focus on the US for the time being is because they were obtained from the US computer by Bradley Manning.

The primary goal of the Wikileaks is to deconstruct or dismantle US foreign policy in the ME which correlates with the anti-war movements of the past 10 years. One of these goals is to prosecute American politicians for “war crimes” for our actions in Iraq. Another is to promote the withdrawal of US troops in Afghanistan.

When one deconstructs our long standing US ME policy they also, by default, endanger the safety of Israel. At the same time they are also in “solidarity” with one state factions with regards to Israel and Palestine.

Well said.

See this: Why Julian Assange Is No Daniel Ellsberg

294 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:56:03am

re: #289 Gus 802

Because in certain circles being against US foreign policy goes hand and hand with anti-Israel sentiment.

Definitely.


When one deconstructs our long standing US ME policy they also, by default, endanger the safety of Israel. At the same time they are also in “solidarity” with one state factions with regards to Israel and Palestine.

Sure. But that’s a rather long way around to get to saying that the reason that they’re supporting Assange is because they’re anti-Israel.

What I’m saying is:

These people are anti-US. Wikileaks is perceived as damaging the US. That explains their motives better than anti-Israeli sentiment does, given that it takes a few turns around the Mulberry bush before support for Assange is detrimental to Israel. Remember, one of the primary effects to come out of this has been to show the hypocrisy of the Muslim nations in their attitudes towards Iran.

Let me put it in a Tea Party perspective. A lot of Tea Party assholes are anti-Jewish. However, their opposition to the building of mosques is not related to their anti-Jewishness, except in so far as it’s related to their Christian supremacy in general. So, if someone were going to say that they oppose mosques because they’re anti-Jewish, I’d say the more obvious explanation is that they’re anti-Muslim.

So, in this case, I think these people volunteering Assange’s bail are doing so because they all strongly oppose US foreign policy. That one of those pieces of policy is support for Israel is true, but I don’t think that, therefore, means that the real connection between these three is antisemitism.

295 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:56:20am

re: #292 Walter L. Newton

I got a really nice new scarf for Hanukkah last night… neat… wee… I’m going to wear this in Paris next month… perfect timing.

(Of course, the night before, my girlfriend gave me a whoopie cushion… is there a message here?)

YOU send a message

Wear both the Hanukkah scarf AND the Whoopie cushion (and nothing else) when you go to the Eiffel Toiwer!!

Oui Oui, Walter! !

296 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:56:32am

re: #292 Walter L. Newton
The Whoopie Cushion is for in flight entertainment!
….Because the movie WILL suck!

297 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:57:15am

re: #296 reloadingisnotahobby

The Whoopie Cushion is for in flight entertainment!
…Because the movie WILL suck!

I wonder of any airline ever shows Snakes On A Plane!?!?!?

//

298 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:57:22am

re: #293 researchok

Well said.

See this: Why Julian Assange Is No Daniel Ellsberg

He’s only the messenger… leave him alone…

Don’t shoot messenger for revealing uncomfortable truths (by Julian Assange December 08, 2010)

[Link: www.theaustralian.com.au…]

299 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:57:26am

Attempted Pepsi Can Bomber, Worried By Gov’t, Tracked Down Via Facebook (VIDEO)

According to the FBI, poll worker Kay Reed opened the polls at the Osage Baptist Church in Osage, Arkansas at 6 a.m. and found a 12-ounce can of Pepsi soda sitting by the gym door. She reportedly placed the can on the desk of the church secretary.

It wasn’t until the next day that somebody noticed wires coming out of the bottom of the can and called the sheriff’s office, which told the FBI.
….
I’m in a transitional period in my life. I’m a patriot. The government worries me. I have a nice shop full of enormous old machines and others I have made,” Krause writes. His favorite movies were listed as “V for Vendetta” and “Taxi Driver,” and he wrote that he’d like to meet Thomas Jefferson.

300 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:58:14am

re: #297 sattv4u2

…or the Airplane Series…LOL

301 garhighway  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:58:24am

OT: Some good news from Afghanistan…

[Link: www.nytimes.com…]

302 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:58:27am

re: #299 Killgore Trout

Krause wins the ‘non-sequitur statement’ award of the day.

303 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 8:59:35am

re: #296 reloadingisnotahobby

The Whoopie Cushion is for in flight entertainment!
…Because the movie WILL suck!

Wrong… both movies will suck… on international flights, they usually manage to assault you with two feature length failures and a few more hours of lame TV sitcoms or BBC specials on cheese making.

I wonder if repeats of “LOST” will be playing?

304 researchok  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:00:32am

re: #298 Walter L. Newton

He’s only the messenger… leave him alone…

Don’t shoot messenger for revealing uncomfortable truths (by Julian Assange December 08, 2010)

[Link: www.theaustralian.com.au…]

A Prophet. A real Prophet.
/

305 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:01:09am

re: #303 Walter L. Newton

Wrong… both movies will suck… on international flights, they usually manage to assault you with two feature length failures and a few more hours of lame TV sitcoms or BBC specials on cheese making.

I wonder if repeats of “LOST” will be playing?


For your sake, lets hope the pilot doesn’t want to recreate it!

307 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:02:30am

re: #292 Walter L. Newton

Wow!
That is next month!!
Hope you have a “Most Excellent Adventure”!!

308 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:02:53am

re: #296 reloadingisnotahobby

The Whoopie Cushion is for in flight entertainment!
…Because the movie WILL suck!

Wouldn’t that be a really neat novelty… Whoopie cushions that looked like.. well.. Whoopi… you get to sit on… never mind…
//

309 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:03:11am

re: #294 Obdicut

Definitely.

Sure. But that’s a rather long way around to get to saying that the reason that they’re supporting Assange is because they’re anti-Israel.

What I’m saying is:

These people are anti-US. Wikileaks is perceived as damaging the US. That explains their motives better than anti-Israeli sentiment does, given that it takes a few turns around the Mulberry bush before support for Assange is detrimental to Israel. Remember, one of the primary effects to come out of this has been to show the hypocrisy of the Muslim nations in their attitudes towards Iran.

Let me put it in a Tea Party perspective. A lot of Tea Party assholes are anti-Jewish. However, their opposition to the building of mosques is not related to their anti-Jewishness, except in so far as it’s related to their Christian supremacy in general. So, if someone were going to say that they oppose mosques because they’re anti-Jewish, I’d say the more obvious explanation is that they’re anti-Muslim.

So, in this case, I think these people volunteering Assange’s bail are doing so because they all strongly oppose US foreign policy. That one of those pieces of policy is support for Israel is true, but I don’t think that, therefore, means that the real connection between these three is antisemitism.

OK But the fact that all three of the notorious people trying to post bail for Assange today are antagonistic towards Israel remains. However, I still believe that we’re not applying the logic you present consistently when presented with other information regarding the American left’s ideological opponents (i.e. the GOP, Tea Party, etc.).

310 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:03:29am

re: #303 Walter L. Newton

Are you bringing a Laptop?

311 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:03:33am

re: #303 Walter L. Newton

Wrong… both movies will suck… on international flights, they usually manage to assault you with two feature length failures and a few more hours of lame TV sitcoms or BBC specials on cheese making.

I wonder if repeats of “LOST” will be playing?

International flights I have taken, show much more than just two movies.

312 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:05:35am

re: #310 reloadingisnotahobby

Are you bringing a Laptop?

They have Whoopie Cushions for the TOP now !?!?!

wow!!

313 researchok  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:05:39am

re: #309 Gus 802

OK But the fact that all three of the notorious people trying to post bail for Assange today are antagonistic towards Israel remains. However, I still believe that we’re not applying the logic you present consistently when presented with other information regarding the American left’s ideological opponents (i.e. the GOP, Tea Party, etc.).

There is also the ever growing meme that somehow Israel is responsible for the wikileaks scandal.

314 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:05:52am

re: #309 Gus 802

OK But the fact that all three of the notorious people trying to post bail for Assange today are antagonistic towards Israel remains.

Which I haven’t in the least bit denied in any way, shape, or form. So I’m really unsure why you keep repeating it. They’re anti-Israel.

However, I still believe that we’re not applying the logic you present consistently when presented with other information regarding the American left’s ideological opponents (i.e. the GOP, Tea Party, etc.).

But how so? You haven’t actually described what it is I’m doing differently. I thought my analogy above would have helped. It is entirely true these people are anti-Israel. However, I don’t think they’re posting bail for Assange (or rather, not posting bail, but wanting to) because they’re anti-Israel, but rather because they’re anti-America, especially since Wikileaks, with its revelations on Iran, has actually given some support to Israel.

So how is my logic different?

315 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:06:50am

re: #313 researchok

There is also the ever growing meme that somehow Israel is responsible for the wikileaks scandal.

It was the specially trained Mossad sharks.
/

316 researchok  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:07:04am

re: #315 Alouette

It was the specially trained Mossad sharks.
/

LOL

317 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:07:12am

re: #313 researchok

There is also the ever growing meme that somehow Israel is responsible for the wikileaks scandal.

Heh. But that belief would go directly against the idea that supporting Assange was out of anti-Israel sentiment. Then those people posting bail would be part of the Zionist conspiracy.

318 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:07:13am

I’m heading to the Pharmacy…..
Anyone need anything?
Someone mentioned Aleve Cold and Sinus or ??

319 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:07:38am

re: #318 reloadingisnotahobby

A 300 pack of Prilosec for my wife, please.

320 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:07:42am

re: #317 Obdicut

Heh. But that belief would go directly against the idea that supporting Assange was out of anti-Israel sentiment. Then those people posting bail would be part of the Zionist conspiracy.

My head hurts.

321 researchok  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:07:48am

re: #317 Obdicut

Heh. But that belief would go directly against the idea that supporting Assange was out of anti-Israel sentiment. Then those people posting bail would be part of the Zionist conspiracy.

Like it has to make sense?
/

322 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:08:58am

re: #318 reloadingisnotahobby

I’m heading to the Pharmacy…
Anyone need anything?
Someone mentioned Aleve Cold and Sinus or ??

There was a really hot woman working the photo counter when I was there last week. Her phone number would be appreciated

OUCH ,, oh ,,hey honey ,, how long have you been standing behind me

323 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:09:29am

re: #321 researchok

I think that Assange et al. probably didn’t actually read what they were revealing too carefully, because I think otherwise they might not have released the ones that portray Iran and other Middle Eastern nations in such a negative light.

324 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:09:53am

re: #314 Obdicut

Which I haven’t in the least bit denied in any way, shape, or form. So I’m really unsure why you keep repeating it. They’re anti-Israel.

But how so? You haven’t actually described what it is I’m doing differently. I thought my analogy above would have helped. It is entirely true these people are anti-Israel. However, I don’t think they’re posting bail for Assange (or rather, not posting bail, but wanting to) because they’re anti-Israel, but rather because they’re anti-America, especially since Wikileaks, with its revelations on Iran, has actually given some support to Israel.

So how is my logic different?

I didn’t say your logic is different. In fact I rather accept it. All I am saying is that if we found out that three people who were trying to post bail on a clearly right-wing (American) antagonist had anti-Israeli ties people would not be so fast to rationalize and conclude that it’s not the whole story.

325 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:11:10am

re: #307 reloadingisnotahobby

Wow!
That is next month!!
Hope you have a “Most Excellent Adventure”!!

Thank you… have a busy 10 days planned… Besides a 4 day museum pass, we will be attending a perfromance of the Cirque D’hiver (winter circus)…

[Link: en.wikipedia.org…]

Dinner and show on the Seine barge Métamorphosis…

[Link: www.metamorphosis-spectacle.fr…]

A walking tour of the medieval left bank area with my friend Arthur Gillette…

[Link: www.au-chateau.com…]

A visit with a LGF denizen, hitting all the old haunts of Satre and Hemingway.

A day in Versailles…

[Link: www.chateauversailles.fr…]

And various and sundry other things to do, people to say hi to and places to be.

Yes… I’m excited. It’s been three years since the last time there… and I’ve had to do a lot of scrimping and saving this time to afford it. And I travel on the cheap.

326 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:11:37am

re: #324 Gus 802

I didn’t say your logic is different. In fact I rather accept it. All I am saying is that if we found out that three people who were trying to post bail on a clearly right-wing (American) antagonist had anti-Israeli ties people would not be so fast to rationalize and conclude that it’s not the whole story.

I.e. One right wing kook says something off the wall about school lunches and suddenly it becomes “right wing declares war on the poor!”

327 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:11:42am

re: #319 Obdicut

A 300 pack of Prilosec for my wife, please.

THAT’S going to leave a mark!!LOL
First I must use the ..puter to order paper products for all my buildings !
A couple pallet should last a while……….
Then home to un screw my head and put it an shelf!

328 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:12:34am

re: #324 Gus 802

All I am saying is that if we found out that three people who were trying to post bail on a clearly right-wing (American) antagonist had anti-Israeli ties people would not be so fast to rationalize and conclude that it’s not the whole story.

I’m not sure why you think I wouldn’t. It’d be worth noting, as it’s worth noting now, that he was anti-semitic. But if the three people trying to post bail for him were all Ron Paul style isolationists and he was a Ron Paul style isolationist too, I’d think that was the real story, and the antisemitism was a sideshow. As I do in this case.

329 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:14:20am

re: #328 Obdicut

I’m not sure why you think I wouldn’t. It’d be worth noting, as it’s worth noting now, that he was anti-semitic. But if the three people trying to post bail for him were all Ron Paul style isolationists and he was a Ron Paul style isolationist too, I’d think that was the real story, and the antisemitism was a sideshow. As I do in this case.

OK But I’m not talking about you Obdicut. I’m saying this as a general observation.

330 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:14:39am

re: #326 Gus 802

It’s true that that’s over the top— though the right wing has done plenty of other crap to deserve, if not the ‘war’ rhetoric— something close to it. Refusing to allow an up or down vote on the tax cut extensions was a rather shitty thing to do.

331 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:15:02am

re: #310 reloadingisnotahobby

Are you bringing a Laptop?

I have a netbook going with me, mainly so my girlfriend can remote into her work if there is any fires to put out.

I’m bring a Ipod Touch, 2nd generation, loaded with apps, maps, info, movies and games to pass some of the down time.

332 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:15:25am

re: #329 Gus 802

Was this just a problem of the english-language “you”?

Because you did say:

However, I still believe that we’re not applying the logic you present consistently when presented with other information regarding the American left’s ideological opponents (i.e. the GOP, Tea Party, etc.).

That’s why I’m belaboring the point.

333 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:17:20am

re: #332 Obdicut

Was this just a problem of the english-language “you”?

Because you did say:

That’s why I’m belaboring the point.

But is said “I still believe that we’re not applying the logic you present consistently.”

“We’re” not applying the logic consistently. We as in us right here.

334 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:17:59am

re: #333 Gus 802

But is said “I still believe that we’re not applying the logic you present consistently.”

“We’re” not applying the logic consistently. We as in us right here.

But is I said…

Groan. PIMF

335 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:18:11am

re: #333 Gus 802

I’m lost in the grammar zone.

336 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:19:34am

re: #335 Obdicut

I’m lost in the grammar zone.

I’ll shorten it:

We’re not applying the logic you present consistently.

337 shutdown  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:21:27am

The markets seem to like the compromise

[Link: www.webpagescreenshot.info…]

338 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:22:39am

re: #336 Gus 802

Now it’s too short.

/

No, seriously, all I’m saying is: The anti-american sentiment of these people explains their support of Assange more than their very real, and undeniable, anti-Israel sentiment.

And given what I said above— that Israel is one of the most visibly active governments in the world— I generally expect all anti-government types to be particularly antipathetic to Israel, because they’re dumb that way. And often to believe conspiracy stories about Jews, because likewise.

339 lawhawk  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:22:59am

re: #325 Walter L. Newton

Getting a Metro pass and a museum pass are good ways to save - especially on the Metro.

And be sure to use the money you’ve saved on food. Definitely plenty of good eats to be had in Paris.

340 shutdown  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:25:28am

re: #339 lawhawk

Getting a Metro pass and a museum pass are good ways to save - especially on the Metro.

And be sure to use the money you’ve saved on food. Definitely plenty of good eats to be had in Paris.

That’s right, almost forgot —
Have a great trip, Walter. Eat and drink well, enjoy Paris and remember to watch your step
Image: May+5-16+’10+594.jpg

341 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:26:59am

re: #331 Walter L. Newton

I have a netbook going with me, mainly so my girlfriend can remote into her work if there is any fires to put out.

I’m bring a Ipod Touch, 2nd generation, loaded with apps, maps, info, movies and games to pass some of the down time.

You bringing me back some French post cards!?!?
/

342 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:27:09am

re: #339 lawhawk

Getting a Metro pass and a museum pass are good ways to save - especially on the Metro.

And be sure to use the money you’ve saved on food. Definitely plenty of good eats to be had in Paris.

I always do… and I already have the museum pass… 4 day one… and I always eat “local,” that also save money.

Paris is a second city for me.

343 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:28:24am

re: #340 imp_62

That’s right, almost forgot —
Have a great trip, Walter. Eat and drink well, enjoy Paris and remember to watch your step
Image: May+5-16+’10+594.jpg

I know how to do the “Paris sidestep.”

Of course, I’ll report from “on the road.” Travel dates are Jan. 14 through Jan 24th.

344 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:28:30am

re: #338 Obdicut

Now it’s too short.

/

No, seriously, all I’m saying is: The anti-american sentiment of these people explains their support of Assange more than their very real, and undeniable, anti-Israel sentiment.

And given what I said above— that Israel is one of the most visibly active governments in the world— I generally expect all anti-government types to be particularly antipathetic to Israel, because they’re dumb that way. And often to believe conspiracy stories about Jews, because likewise.

All I was saying, or can say, is that global anti-Americanism typically (but not always) goes hand in hand with global anti-Israelism and anti-Semitism. This is particularly true in Muslim countries and with the European intellectual left. And, not much to my surprise, I found three of them this morning.

345 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:29:07am

re: #341 sattv4u2

You bringing me back some French post cards!?!?
/

Nope… but I have this URL…

346 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:30:39am

re: #345 Walter L. Newton

Nope… but I have this URL


Too late

You should have told reloadingisnotahobby about it. He’s going to the drug store and could have gotten you a salve or something for that!
/

347 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:32:08am

re: #344 Gus 802

All I was saying, or can say, is that global anti-Americanism typically (but not always) goes hand in hand with global anti-Israelism and anti-Semitism. This is particularly true in Muslim countries and with the European intellectual left. And, not much to my surprise, I found three of them this morning.

Oh, I think almost every UK ‘leftist’ is anti-Israel, with very few exceptions. They mostly have bought the stupid framing of the situation as Israel vs. Palestine, rather than Israel vs. The Rest of the Middle East, and buy into the notion that Israel can unilaterally make life better for the Palestinians.

Ironically enough, this is partially because of the US, which I feel attempts to portray the issue as Israel vs. Palestine so that we can maintain our relationships with the other nations in the Middle East.

348 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:32:44am

Okay ,,, it’s 12:30. I’ve been up for 6 hours and all I’ve accomplished is driving my son to the bus stop for school and then gave blood!
I really should go do sumfim productive

But ,,,,,,,

349 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:32:52am

Got to run over to Pine Junction to drop off a choker at a craft store. It’s a custom piece, for someone who lost their long time canine companion. It’s a polished piece of Lavikite with a sterling silver coyote on the stone, howling up at the sky, silver and black wood beads…. with a monogramed cursive sterling silver “T” on the back, first initial of his dead pets name.

BB later.

350 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:35:01am

There’s a word thats not used much anymore

SALVE

also

TROUSERS

just sayin’

351 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:35:18am

slacks!

352 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:35:28am

re: #347 Obdicut

Oh, I think almost every UK ‘leftist’ is anti-Israel, with very few exceptions. They mostly have bought the stupid framing of the situation as Israel vs. Palestine, rather than Israel vs. The Rest of the Middle East, and buy into the notion that Israel can unilaterally make life better for the Palestinians.

Ironically enough, this is partially because of the US, which I feel attempts to portray the issue as Israel vs. Palestine so that we can maintain our relationships with the other nations in the Middle East.

I think Jon Stewart hit the nail on the head when he mentioned how in the middle east, the enemy of our enemy is the guy who donates money and supplies to our enemy (I think more or less referencing Saudi Arabia and Iran) and that at this point we should cut out the middle man and just declare war on ourselves….

353 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:42:34am

re: #179 fat bastard vegetarian

Sorry, but I have to go to work.

I appreciate what you are saying, and your arguments are compelling.

I came from an era when the story of the Ant and the Grasshopper was a morality story of industriousness and preparedness.

In the 21st century the grasshopper has become a victim of circumstance and the ant has become a symbol of refusing to share “blessings”.

We’ll pick this up another day. But, the playing field will never be level. Our president does not want it level for his daughters, and I do not want it level for mine. Therefore the president and I will scheme and connive to ensure that we tilt it in our family’s favor.

See you later Obdi! You’re the best.

The problem is that here is how the modern tail of the ant and the grasshoper goes.

The Ant was born into a hive that was rich and so it sat around all day eating the food that its parents had gathered for it.

The grasshopper scrapped and scournged, but no matter how hard it tried it could never find as much food as the ant had just laying around for it.


Tah-dah.


This is not always the case, there are “productive rich” and there will always be productive rich, who we should respect, but for every Bill Gates there seems to be at least two Paris Hiltons…

354 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:42:44am

re: #348 sattv4u2
Bleeding is productive when done for someone else!!

355 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:44:14am

re: #348 sattv4u2

Okay ,,, it’s 12:30. I’ve been up for 6 hours and all I’ve accomplished is driving my son to the bus stop for school and then gave blood!
I really should go do sumfim productive

But ,,,

Go eat a cookie, you deserve it!

356 Tigger2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:48:01am

re: #11 Gus 802

Well, there you have it GOP. The president has agreed to extend the Bush tax cuts and add additional business incentives to the tax compromise.

At the same time unemployment benefits are extended for another 13 weeks and provides additional exemptions for working families.


13 months not weeks.

357 Gus  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:48:49am

re: #356 Tigger2

13 months not weeks.

Thanks.

358 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:53:26am

re: #249 Obdicut

I think Israel also gets the focus of a lot of people who are anti-government, partially because there’s lots of “Jews rule the world” conspiracies for them to indulge in, but also because Israel is, very clearly, a nation that only survives due to the actions of their government.

What I mean is that Israel has to, constantly, take actions to safeguard its citizens against external threats. Whether or not one agrees with what Israel does, it’s something that it needs to do constantly, since it’s attacked constantly and under even greater threat. So it’s one of the clearest examples of a government in action.

Here’s a hopeful bit about Khan.

[Link: www.thejc.com…]

And yet those on the right who insist government can’t do anything good like to cudle up with it…

359 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:54:27am

re: #358 jamesfirecat

Huh?

360 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:55:20am

re: #358 jamesfirecat

And yet those on the right who insist government can’t do anything good like to cudle up with it…

I hope no one here takes offense at “cuddle up with” there were probably better ways of phrasing that.

The Republicans like to paint themselves as a party that is very supportive of Israel, despite the fact that the way Israel functions puts to lie the Republican claim that the government can’t do anything useful.

Or maybe they can look the other way by telling themselves its only Israel’s army that is always functioning and defense spending is the one government area they agree with….

361 rwdflynavy  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:56:59am

re: #360 jamesfirecat

I hope no one here takes offense at “cuddle up with” there were probably better ways of phrasing that.

The Republicans like to paint themselves as a party that is very supportive of Israel, despite the fact that the way Israel functions puts to lie the Republican claim that the government can’t do anything useful.

Or maybe they can look the other way by telling themselves its only Israel’s army that is always functioning and defense spending is the one government area they agree with…

Conservatives think government can’t do anything right. Liberals think government can’t do anything wrong. In related news, stereotypes are fun!
//

362 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 9:57:47am

re: #358 jamesfirecat

re: #360 jamesfirecat

You were doing better when you telling me to get a cookie!
/

363 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:00:03am

re: #360 jamesfirecat

Oh, right, yeah. The GOP tends to ignore things about Israel like gays serving in the military and socialist programs.

However, there’s strong support for Israel on the American ‘left’ as well. Which isn’t surprising, given that most Jews vote for Democrats.

That’s where the whole “Israel lobby” meme comes from. It’s not a charge that the GOP is under the thumb of Israel and the Jews, but that both parties are.

There’s a streak of anti-Israel sentiment in the ‘left’, including some elected officials. There’s fewer on the ‘right’, but that may be changing now with the Paulian and other nutjobs ascendant, and Beck pushing his antisemitic crap.

364 Capitalist Tool  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:01:57am

This gives ‘catch and release’ a whole new perspective…
[Link: washingtonexaminer.com…]

365 Capitalist Tool  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:07:38am

re: #363 Obdicut

Someone still listens to Glenn Beck? Anyone with a clue, I mean…

366 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:08:29am

And (just about) nobody calls these people on what they say!

“I don’t know how anyone can keep a straight face and say they are for deficit reduction while they insist on a permanent tax cut for the wealthiest Americans, completely unpaid for. If they think it’s okay to raise taxes for the embattled middle class because we don’t give more money to millionaires, it really is time for people in America to take up pitchforks.

SEN. CLAIRE MCCASKILL

“Give” more money to millionaires. Only the irrational thought processes of a mindless left wing moonbat could lead to the thought process that allowing someone to keep money they have worked for and earned actually constitutes “giving” them money.
I won’t even comment about the call to (arms) pitchforks!

[Link: realclearpolitics.com…]

367 webevintage  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:09:37am

WORST PRESIDENT EVAH!!!!!!1111!!!!
/

well at least that is what the whiners on DK and Huffpo are saying.
Personally I like a President who is willing to put the unemployed and working families ahead of winning political battles.
But I think I am what is called an Obot…..

368 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:10:07am

Ah well

A nice brisk (it hasn’t hit 40 degrees here today) walk in the park with the dogs should do me good

369 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:11:03am

re: #367 webevintage

WORST PRESIDENT EVAH!!!1111!!!
/

well at least that is what the whiners on DK and Huffpo are saying.
Personally I like a President who is willing to put the unemployed and working families ahead of winning political battles.
But I think I am what is called an Obot…

Funny how an election can get results!

370 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:11:05am

re: #366 sattv4u2

The relationship between citizen and government is mutual. The government would not be able to collect the tax if the citizen didn’t exist and work, and the citizen would not be able to make that money without the government safeguarding their property and person, overseeing the market, and enforcing laws.

371 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:14:16am

re: #366 sattv4u2

And (just about) nobody calls these people on what they say!

“I don’t know how anyone can keep a straight face and say they are for deficit reduction while they insist on a permanent tax cut for the wealthiest Americans, completely unpaid for. If they think it’s okay to raise taxes for the embattled middle class because we don’t give more money to millionaires, it really is time for people in America to take up pitchforks.

SEN. CLAIRE MCCASKILL

“Give” more money to millionaires. Only the irrational thought processes of a mindless left wing moonbat could lead to the thought process that allowing someone to keep money they have worked for and earned actually constitutes “giving” them money.
I won’t even comment about the call to (arms) pitchforks!

[Link: realclearpolitics.com…]


Every single penny ‘the rich” have, is safeguarded by the fact that they live in a functioning society where property can not be taken willy nilly, not to mention the society they live in is civilized enough to provide them with goods and services, along with the government serving to keep those dollars actually meaning something by convincing people with confidence that little scraps of paper with certain words written on them are worth actual honest to god food.

As a Republican recently pointed out…

The more you own the more you owe to society for the fact that it protects what you have.

372 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:14:28am

re: #370 Obdicut

The relationship between citizen and government is mutual. The government would not be able to collect the tax if the citizen didn’t exist and work, and the citizen would not be able to make that money without the government safeguarding their property and person, overseeing the market, and enforcing laws.

And where does keeping the current tax rates for everyone change that?

373 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:14:51am

re: #371 jamesfirecat

see # 372

374 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:16:04am

re: #372 sattv4u2

And where does keeping the current tax rates for everyone change that?

We’re arguing against your claim that “. Only the irrational thought processes of a mindless left wing moonbat could lead to the thought process that allowing someone to keep money they have worked for and earned actually constitutes “giving” them money.”

Because it implies that people own all the money they make without owing anything to anyone.

They don’t.

You made that money with the help of society and government, so it makes sense that you owe some of it back to society and government in turn.

375 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:19:03am

re: #374 jamesfirecat

Because it implies that people own all the money they make without owing anything to anyone.

I implied nothing of the sort

IF the rich were paying NO taxes you would have validity

In that they DO pay their (to use the lefts favorite) “fair share” McCaskill is doing one thing and one thing only
Whipping up class warfare

376 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:19:28am

re: #372 sattv4u2

And where does keeping the current tax rates for everyone change that?

You seem to have entirely missed the point of my comment.

When you talk about people earning their money, it’s true that people do go out there and work away and earn their money. Not everyone, of course— some people get money through unearned income. But most people put in a days work, and get a days pay.

The government has no such option. The government doesn’t get to work in the market and receive money for honest work. Sure, it may charge fees, etc., but it is not allowed— and would be a hideous thing— if it were run as a capitalistic enterprise.

The revenue of the government comes from taxation on citizens, who benefit from its existence. To view the money that the citizens they make as entirely ‘theirs’ is to ignore that the government has done enormous work in making sure they can do that work, that they can be safe in their possessions, and that that money actually means something and can be traded on the market for goods and services.

Do you understand?

377 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:21:38am

re: #375 sattv4u2

Because it implies that people own all the money they make without owing anything to anyone.

I implied nothing of the sort

IF the rich were paying NO taxes you would have validity

In that they DO pay their (to use the lefts favorite) “fair share” McCaskill is doing one thing and one thing only
Whipping up class warfare

But how do you know if what they’re paying at the moment counts as theri “Fair share” or not?

378 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:21:42am

re: #376 Obdicut

Do you understand

Yes, which doesn’t negate my 372 nor 375

As stated, McCaskill is doing one thing

And we haven’t EVEN touched on her pitchfork comment

How many threads were devoted to “The Tree Of Liberty ,,,,” Tea Party signs!

379 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:23:06am

re: #378 sattv4u2

You don’t appear to understand, since what I wrote does, in fact, address your posts.

380 palomino  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:23:40am

re: #366 sattv4u2

And (just about) nobody calls these people on what they say!

“I don’t know how anyone can keep a straight face and say they are for deficit reduction while they insist on a permanent tax cut for the wealthiest Americans, completely unpaid for. If they think it’s okay to raise taxes for the embattled middle class because we don’t give more money to millionaires, it really is time for people in America to take up pitchforks.

SEN. CLAIRE MCCASKILL

“Give” more money to millionaires. Only the irrational thought processes of a mindless left wing moonbat could lead to the thought process that allowing someone to keep money they have worked for and earned actually constitutes “giving” them money.
I won’t even comment about the call to (arms) pitchforks!

[Link: realclearpolitics.com…]

You’re right. McCaskill should really leave the “pitchfork” talk to Palin and Beck and the other wingnut reactionary know-nothing populists who have perfected it.

381 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:24:17am

re: #377 jamesfirecat

But how do you know if what they’re paying at the moment counts as theri “Fair share” or not?


Table #1

You decide

[Link: www.taxfoundation.org…]

382 FQ Kafir  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:25:50am

Seems obvious that this is an effort to put the tax issue in the rearview mirror so the legislative calendar of the lame-duck can be used to try to pass DADT, START, DREAM etc.

If no compromise was reached (and it still may get scuttled), the lame duck would’ve been a log jam.

383 harrogate  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:25:53am

re: #76 Fozzie Bear

I’m wondering if this wasn’t Obama’s strategy all along: Just slowly creep to the right, agree to everything. As the ODS (veiled racism) gets deeper even as he moves right, slowly and surely, Obama takes the center, alienating bot the right and left wings, creating a centrist party that will dominate for a generation.

I mean think about it. Once your opponent has defined himself only in terms relative to your own position (i.e., “Obama is a radical leftist!”), then if you move to take the positions your opponent formerly held, then you leave your opponent no choice but to get continually crazier to distinguish himself from you.

At the end of the day, you have Obama standing in the middle of the field, with the GOP huddled on the rightmost edge, and his former base pissed off, but the vast middle of the field will find itself no longer identifying as much with either party, leaving Obama as the obvious centrist choice.

Could he be that fucking smart?

That is exactly what I think he has been doing all along. And by definition if it works it will benefit him very much politically and make Andrew Sullivan very happy.

But is it good for the country for the “center” to continue to be constructed ever rightward? It’s not really about Obama, after all.

384 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:25:56am

re: #380 palomino

You’re right. McCaskill should really leave the “pitchfork” talk to Palin and Beck and the other wingnut reactionary know-nothing populists who have perfected it.

I see

So McCaskill says it, but it’s REALLY Palin/Becks fault!

Can you work George Bush in there somewhere also?

385 palomino  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:26:22am

re: #369 sattv4u2

Funny how an election can get results!

Actually your party had the cards to force this even before the midterms. Obama needed to get by the Senate filibuster, and the GOP was firm in opposing expiration of only the mid class tax cuts. Thus he had to cut a deal with the GOP to get anything passed.

Obama did what presidents, and most adults, have to do—he compromised. Just as he did on financial reform, health care, etc.

386 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:26:57am

re: #379 Obdicut

You don’t appear to understand, since what I wrote does, in fact, address your posts.


I didn’t say it did not “address” them

I stated it didn’t negate my point

387 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:27:47am

re: #385 palomino

Actually your party had the cards to force this even before the midterms. Obama needed to get by the Senate filibuster, and the GOP was firm in opposing expiration of only the mid class tax cuts. Thus he had to cut a deal with the GOP to get anything passed.

Obama did what presidents, and most adults, have to do—he compromised. Just as he did on financial reform, health care, etc.

Didn’t seem to “compromise” till post November 2010

Funny that!

388 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:27:52am

re: #381 sattv4u2

Table #1

You decide

[Link: www.taxfoundation.org…]

Why don’t you come out and tell me what you think a “fair share” is and then I’ll do the same?


Do agree that my point has value that if the Rich aren’t paying enough then you can say they should pay more without it being class envy/warfair?

389 Capitalist Tool  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:27:54am

Income taxes are a mechanism to ‘keep the little guy little’.

390 webevintage  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:29:08am

re: #385 palomino

Actually your party had the cards to force this even before the midterms. Obama needed to get by the Senate filibuster, and the GOP was firm in opposing expiration of only the mid class tax cuts. Thus he had to cut a deal with the GOP to get anything passed.

Obama did what presidents, and most adults, have to do—he compromised. Just as he did on financial reform, health care, etc.

After the Saturday vote on extending the tax cut for the middle class and the one for the bill moving the $250,000 income to a million I’m not sure what else the President could do.
There are obviously not enough Dem votes in the Senate to pass what the House passed.

391 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:29:16am

re: #387 sattv4u2

Didn’t seem to “compromise” till post November 2010

Funny that!

Yeah funny how Obama respected his Senator’s enough that when they said they didn’t want to vote on this till after the election, he let them do that!

392 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:30:01am

re: #388 jamesfirecat

Why don’t you come out and tell me what you think a “fair share” is and then I’ll do the same?

Do agree that my point has value that if the Rich aren’t paying enough then you can say they should pay more without it being class envy/warfair?

They are ALREADY ” paying more”

What part of that don’t you get?/

Top 1%,,, 38.02%

Top 10% ,,, 69.94%

393 palomino  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:30:35am

re: #375 sattv4u2

Because it implies that people own all the money they make without owing anything to anyone.

I implied nothing of the sort

IF the rich were paying NO taxes you would have validity

In that they DO pay their (to use the lefts favorite) “fair share” McCaskill is doing one thing and one thing only
Whipping up class warfare

Class warfare is a two-way street. Sure the left tries to make working/middle class people resent the rich. But the right tries to make those same people resent the poor—as “welfare queens” and other lazy urban types who supposedly live off the taxes of the middle and upper classes.

394 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:30:45am

re: #392 sattv4u2

They are ALREADY ” paying more”

What part of that don’t you get?/

Top 1%,,, 38.02%

Top 10% ,,, 69.94%


Maybe I feel that they should be paying even more based on how much disposable income they have not how much raw income they make?

395 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:31:15am

re: #393 palomino

Class warfare is a two-way street. Sure the left tries to make working/middle class people resent the rich. But the right tries to make those same people resent the poor—as “welfare queens” and other lazy urban types who supposedly live off the taxes of the middle and upper classes.

Don’t forget when the right goes after the “Urban very urban” Elites with their “book learning”!

396 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:32:09am

re: #394 jamesfirecat

Maybe I feel that they should be paying even more based on how much disposable income they have not how much raw income they make?

And who are you to decide what is “disposable” or not?

Put another way,,, how much income (for lets say, a family of 4) is “enough” to live on before the rest becomes “disposable”!?!?!

397 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:33:59am

re: #396 sattv4u2

And who are you to decide what is “disposable” or not?

Put another way,,, how much income (for lets say, a family of 4) is “enough” to live on before the rest becomes “disposable”!?!?!

Last time I checked (which was in church and I was in high school) it was 50,000 dollars.

That obviously varies from state to state, and from year to year.

But excuse me for thinking that maybe people making over a million a year might get taxed, GASP 40% on all income above 1 million dollars!

398 palomino  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:36:01am

re: #384 sattv4u2

I see

So McCaskill says it, but it’s REALLY Palin/Becks fault!

Can you work George Bush in there somewhere also?

No, McCaskill says it even though it’s REALLY the domain of the right these days to traffic in reactionary populist rhetoric about tea party revolt, 2nd amendment remedies, 2nd American revolutions, etc. What’s remarkable about McCaskill’s comment is only that it came from the left in this climate.

Why would I throw Bush in with Palin and Beck? Compared with those two, he was a genius and humanitarian.

399 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:36:51am

re: #397 jamesfirecat

Last time I checked (which was in church and I was in high school) it was 50,000 dollars.

That obviously varies from state to state, and from year to year.

But excuse me for thinking that maybe people making over a million a year might get taxed, GASP 40% on all income above 1 million dollars!

Really
Why not 950K?
900?,,, 750K ,, whats so magical about 1m?

400 lostlakehiker  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:38:29am

re: #71 Fozzie Bear

Ok, somebody explain to me the underpinning of the idea that lower taxes on the wealthy creates jobs, in a way that doesn’t sound nuts.

Anyone.

Lower than what? Any level of taxation you can name is lower than some higher level, and higher than some lower level.

In a state-run economy, the government decides what work shall be done. It hires and fires. There are jobs for all, because the government has a mandate to provide jobs for all. A state-run economy doesn’t have unemployment. At least, not on paper.

What can happen, and does happen, is that the State fails to discover and exploit opportunities for innovation. It overlooks, often deliberately, ways to get the same work done with fewer workers. Over time, a situation develops in which many people work at jobs that don’t make much sense. The economy languishes.

The State has the problem that it just doesn’t have enough `eyes’ to watch for all those opportunities. Hence, the superior results of capitalism. In a capitalist economy, there are millions of determined, resourceful individuals looking for ways to produce better stuff or better services, or to produce the same stuff and services using less inputs. There are also millions of fools making foolish mistakes. But the ones who get it right make money, and find themselves in a position to scale up their operations, while the fools lose money and must shut down or hand over their operations to somebody else.

This is turbulent, and when either bad luck or folly scupper a business, good workers lose out. But this turbulence has a point: it cleans out the unproductive side of the economy and points as much as possible of everybody’s efforts into productive channels.

Taxation raises money for the government. To the extent that there are things that must be done, things government can do that the private economy is not going to do, that’s good. Taxing the rich is a fine way to do it; the rich have plenty of money and they’ll never miss an occasional upgrade from first class to private jet.

But that’s a misunderstanding of what the rich do with their money. Most rich people got rich by investing most of what they make. The money they make doesn’t go mainly to paying for private jet trips. Mainly it goes to this capitalist business of organizing production for greater value added at less cost in labor and materials. Only to the extent that the capitalist has capital can he do this. If he has more capital, he can do more.

So the real tension here, the real question, is this: taxing the rich cuts into both “private jets” and “organizing production”. For this reason, tax policy is not a no-brainer. There are arguments on both sides. Taxes must be got from somewhere. Private enterprise doesn’t pay for the courts, the NSF, the interstate highways, the armed forces, etc. The poor have no money. (Doh!) The middle class has some, and should pay some, but the rich have more and should pay more. On the other hand, the wealth of the rich is not just idle wealth that would serve the overall interests of society much better if immediately all shifted into the coffers of the State. It’s doing its own part in the scheme of things. The State is just not cut out to decide whether to make more Transformers and fewer Pet Rocks for next Christmas. A trivial decision, you think. But that’s exactly the point. There are a trillion trivial decisions that must be made, and the State cannot attend to a meaningful fraction of them.

Democrats and Republicans agree that there must be a State, and that the State should leave much of the job of organizing production to the free market. Both are capitalist viewpoints. The disagreements revolve around just where to set the tax rates. A little higher, a little lower? It’s hard to know. We’re somewhere in the ballpark of the right answer, but the uncertainty band is wider than either party will acknowledge.

401 palomino  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:40:08am

re: #387 sattv4u2

Didn’t seem to “compromise” till post November 2010

Funny that!

Have you paid attention these past two years? Obama has shown a willingness to compromise with both blue dogs and moderate republicans that makes the left in his party quite upset.

How do you think Obama got a financial bill passed? He compromised. As for health care, even though he got no gop votes, it was only his moves rightward wooing Republicans (like Snowe, Collins, Brown) that ultimately got blue dog Dem votes that insured passage.

402 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:40:11am

re: #399 sattv4u2

Really
Why not 950K?
900?,,, 750K ,, whats so magical about 1m?

It’s a nice f**ing round number, and why shouldn’t the tax code be based around round numbers that are easy for people to understand?

403 palomino  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:41:34am

re: #390 webevintage

After the Saturday vote on extending the tax cut for the middle class and the one for the bill moving the $250,000 income to a million I’m not sure what else the President could do.
There are obviously not enough Dem votes in the Senate to pass what the House passed.

And there really never were enough Dem votes to overcome filibusters, except for a short period of time when Kennedy and Byrd were still alive and conscious.

404 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:43:28am

re: #391 jamesfirecat

Yeah funny how Obama respected his Senator’s enough that when they said they didn’t want to vote on this till after the election, he let them do that!

Holy Schnikies

What politician wants to be on record voting for/ against a hot button issue days/week/months prior to an election!?!?! Of COURSE Obama “let them do that”

(paranthetically ,,ANY President regardless of party would and has done the same when “their” party is in power)

405 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:44:19am

K Kiddies

Dogs are goin’ nuts

BBL

406 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:44:33am

re: #404 sattv4u2

Holy Schnikies

What politician wants to be on record voting for/ against a hot button issue days/week/months prior to an election!?!?! Of COURSE Obama “let them do that”

(paranthetically ,,ANY President regardless of party would and has done the same when “their” party is in power)

Then why blast Obama for “refusing to compromise”?

407 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:45:43am

re: #406 jamesfirecat

Then why blast Obama for “refusing to compromise”?

Where did I “blast” anyone?

I stated (correctly) that elections have a magical way of changing things

408 gamark  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:46:34am

re: #394 jamesfirecat

Maybe I feel that they should be paying even more based on how much disposable income they have not how much raw income they make?

How is this “disposable income” basis different from the current tax law?

409 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:46:46am

re: #406 jamesfirecat

Then why blast Obama for “refusing to compromise”?

re: #407 sattv4u2

Where did I “blast” anyone?

I stated (correctly) that elections have a magical way of changing things

My exact quote

Didn’t seem to “compromise” till post November 2010

Funny that!

Thats “blasting”??

410 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:47:24am

re: #408 gamark

How is this “disposable income” basis different from the current tax law?

It’s not enough!

:)

411 palomino  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:48:59am

re: #407 sattv4u2

Where did I “blast” anyone?

I stated (correctly) that elections have a magical way of changing things

Really? Like in 2008, when, after they took a second consecutive thumpin’, the GOP decided to work constructively with Obama and compromise on major issues? ///

Apparently this magical effect of elections only applies in some cases.

412 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:51:24am

re: #411 palomino

Really? Like in 2008, when, after they took a second consecutive thumpin’, the GOP decided to work constructively with Obama and compromise on major issues? ///

Apparently this magical effect of elections only applies in some cases.

Was that before or after Obama told McCain that “we won”
Was that before or after Obama told the repubs he “didn’t want to hear a lot of talking”? and that they had to “sit in the back seat”?

413 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:53:20am

re: #412 sattv4u2

Was that before or after Obama told McCain that “we won”
Was that before or after Obama told the repubs he “didn’t want to hear a lot of talking”? and that they had to “sit in the back seat”?

Dude do you know how good it is to “sit in the back seat”? You don’t have to do any work, and yet you still end up where you’re going. Why do y ou think people pay other people to drive them around?

414 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:55:01am

re: #413 jamesfirecat

Dude do you know how good it is to “sit in the back seat”? You don’t have to do any work, and yet you still end up where you’re going. Why do y ou think people pay other people to drive them around?

Under your tax scenario, nobody would anymore because thats “disposable income” that shouldn’t be “given” to them with lower (i.e. CURRENT) tax rates!

415 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:56:57am

re: #414 sattv4u2

Under your tax scenario, nobody would anymore because thats “disposable income” that shouldn’t be “given” to them with lower (i.e. CURRENT) tax rates!

Really at 40% tax rate for money made over a million dollars nobody would hire a chauffeur?


I didn’t realize they weren’t invented until after Regan lowered the tax rates!

416 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:58:21am

re: #414 sattv4u2

Under your tax scenario, nobody would anymore because thats “disposable income” that shouldn’t be “given” to them with lower (i.e. CURRENT) tax rates!

During the early 60’s the top marginal rate was above 90%.

There were still rich people, and chauffeurs, and private planes. This is a specious argument.

417 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:58:56am

re: #415 jamesfirecat

396 and 408 are still awaiting your answer(s)

418 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 10:59:40am

re: #416 Fozzie Bear

During the early 60’s the top marginal rate was above 90%.

There were still rich people, and chauffeurs, and private planes. This is a specious argument.


That there were

Does that make a 90% rate right then?

419 sattv4u2  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:01:42am

re: #416 Fozzie Bear

During the early 60’s the top marginal rate was above 90%.

Oh ,, and btw ,, what was one of THE first initiatives of President Kennedy ,, and why?!!?!?

420 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:02:35am

re: #418 sattv4u2

That there were

Does that make a 90% rate right then?

“Right” or “wrong” doesn’t apply. It proves it works, and that it doesn’t prevent luxury or wealth.

The question is, does it work better than what we are doing now, for achieving a specific goal?

421 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:02:45am

re: #417 sattv4u2

396 and 408 are still awaiting your answer(s)

For 398 I already told you 50,000 but I’ll raise it to 100,000 just to be on the safe side.

As for 408 the difference is that the idea that people should be taxed based no ton how much money they take in, but of what percent of the money they take in is disposable…

422 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:03:45am

re: #419 sattv4u2

During the early 60’s the top marginal rate was above 90%.

Oh ,, and btw ,, what was one of THE first initiatives of President Kennedy ,, and why?!!?!?

Ask Kennedy.

My point doesn’t relate to whether it’s right or wrong, i’m simply addressing your inaccurate implied assertion that taxing income at the top end heavily somehow eliminates the possibility of becoming wealthy, which is clearly absurd.

423 palomino  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:05:31am

re: #412 sattv4u2

Was that before or after Obama told McCain that “we won”
Was that before or after Obama told the repubs he “didn’t want to hear a lot of talking”? and that they had to “sit in the back seat”?

I’m talking about the negotiations that went on for months (with Obama bending over backwards to accommodate Sens Collins, Snowe, Brown, Grassley, et al.) even after the GOP congress made it clear that they were unlikely, as a matter of strategy, to compromise with Obama on anything.

And all you’ve got are a few out of context quotes that you reflexively throw out because you’ve heard right wing entertainers use them.

424 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:06:50am

re: #423 palomino

I’m talking about the negotiations that went on for months (with Obama bending over backwards to accommodate Sens Collins, Snowe, Brown, Grassley, et al.) even after the GOP congress made it clear that they were unlikely, as a matter of strategy, to compromise with Obama on anything.

And all you’ve got are a few out of context quotes that you reflexively throw out because you’ve heard right wing entertainers use them.

At the moment in the us “Right wing entertainers” is a oxymornon if you ask me.

Is their a conservative version of Jon Stewart?

425 palomino  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:09:16am

re: #415 jamesfirecat

Really at 40% tax rate for money made over a million dollars nobody would hire a chauffeur?

I didn’t realize they weren’t invented until after Regan lowered the tax rates!

All this talk about “permanent” tax cuts is absurd. There are no permanent tax cuts or tax hikes. Policy changes in response to economic conditions and govt priorities.

If we ever decide that long term deficit reduction is a priority, rates as “low” as 36% will probably be looked back upon fondly. We can cut all kinds of spending, but our entitlement and military obligations insure that balanced budgets won’t occur without tax increases.

426 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:09:31am

re: #424 jamesfirecat

Rush/Beck are de facto political leaders, regardless of what they call themselves.

427 schnapp  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:10:46am

milton friedman said tat there were 4 roles of government in the economy;
1. To set the rules of the game i.e. contracts
2. To promote competition and prevent monopolies
3. Provide public goods like roads, the police and military.
4. Support those who cannot support themselves.

Economists analyse peoples behaviour by looking at the marginal effects. In tax, the argument against high taxes is that the higher the marginal tax rate the less marginal benefit there is to save and invest or work rather than consume and spend time with your family and friends. I support progressive taxes in practice, but lower taxes on income from work and saving and investing are better than heavy taxes on te rich to redistribute income.
There is a fine balance.
America needs a VAT or GST. I think all state income and corporate taxes should be replaced by a consumption tax.

428 palomino  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:12:11am

re: #424 jamesfirecat

At the moment in the us “Right wing entertainers” is a oxymornon if you ask me.

Is their a conservative version of Jon Stewart?

I tend to think of Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, et al. as entertainers. Because it’s hard to take them seriously as political commentators (unlike George Will or Ross Douthat who are sober serious conservatives, but too boring to have their own shows).

429 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:14:58am

re: #427 schnapp

milton friedman said tat there were 4 roles of government in the economy;
1. To set the rules of the game i.e. contracts
2. To promote competition and prevent monopolies
3. Provide public goods like roads, the police and military.
4. Support those who cannot support themselves.

Economists analyse peoples behaviour by looking at the marginal effects. In tax, the argument against high taxes is that the higher the marginal tax rate the less marginal benefit there is to save and invest or work rather than consume and spend time with your family and friends. I support progressive taxes in practice, but lower taxes on income from work and saving and investing are better than heavy taxes on te rich to redistribute income.
There is a fine balance.
America needs a VAT or GST. I think all state income and corporate taxes should be replaced by a consumption tax.

Which would be a much greater burden on those with little than on those with much,

///BRILLIANT!

430 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:16:08am

re: #428 palomino

I tend to think of Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, et al. as entertainers. Because it’s hard to take them seriously as political commentators (unlike George Will or Ross Douthat who are sober serious conservatives, but too boring to have their own shows).

Maybe so, but they wield their “humor” like a sledgehammer, while Jon Stewart truly has a rapier wit….

431 schnapp  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:18:53am

re: #429 jamesfirecat

most other countries including all the socially democratic nordic countries have high VATs and low taxes on capital income.
The regressive effects can be averted by either exempting certain items or (preferably in my opinion) giving tax credits to low income earners.
Consumption taxes are much more efficient. Different state tax laws (and regulations) are a huge drag on business and the economy and the government should try to create a seamless national economy. A VAT would be a good step forward.

432 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:21:57am

re: #431 schnapp

most other countries including all the socially democratic nordic countries have high VATs and low taxes on capital income.
The regressive effects can be averted by either exempting certain items or (preferably in my opinion) giving tax credits to low income earners.
Consumption taxes are much more efficient. Different state tax laws (and regulations) are a huge drag on business and the economy and the government should try to create a seamless national economy. A VAT would be a good step forward.

Okay sorry, I missed the part where you also mentioned that only “state” income would be solely VAT based, excuse me for misreading you… have an “I’m sorry” upding.

433 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:23:56am

re: #426 Fozzie Bear

An exaggeration most often put forth by their critics. They can rouse the base. But hey can not pass a bill, veto or sign a bill. They serve on no committees such as ways and means. They are also convenient scapegoats for the elected leadership and its negligence.

434 schnapp  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:24:40am

re: #432 jamesfirecat

haha yeah thats what we did in australia where we also have a federalist system.

435 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:26:32am

re: #434 schnapp

How well does that work?

436 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:27:25am

re: #434 schnapp

haha yeah thats what we did in australia where we also have a federalist system.

So its not all fish that can kill you with one sting if they can’t rip you apart with one bite, birds and mammals that will kick you guts out, vermin that can survive a full on car crash better than a car, poisonous snakes and spiders, and British videogame critics down there?

437 palomino  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:28:17am

re: #430 jamesfirecat

Maybe so, but they wield their “humor” like a sledgehammer, while Jon Stewart truly has a rapier wit…

Stewart and Colbert are gifted political satirists.

Limbaugh and Beck are angrier older versions of the morning zoo guys who have to fill up three hours each morning and thus resort to things like fart sound effects (or in this case, blind populist rage.)

438 schnapp  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:31:12am

re: #435 Rightwingconspirator

well the states always complain that they don’t get their fair share of the GST revenue because it is collected by the federal govt.
also the tax isnt ideal because certain things like fresh food are exempt which makes it complicated for businesses. It would be better to raise tax credits for families and the age pension to relieve them of that extra GST tax burden.
The rate is 10% but most economists and the oecd say that it should be higher. But the US and australia need a “seemless national economy” of state regulations and taxes because it’s had for businesses to comply with all the different state rules and regulations.

439 schnapp  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 11:32:15am

re: #436 jamesfirecat

haha that too

440 Taqyia2Me  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 12:32:42pm

re: #318 reloadingisnotahobby

I wouldn’t be disappointed if a 500 count jar of Darvon 250mg tabs appeared in my nightstand!
(just doin’ my part to help the FDA in clearing that off the market…)

441 lostlakehiker  Tue, Dec 7, 2010 5:37:19pm

re: #165 Obdicut

The problem is that it’s demonstrably true that people do not donate enough to charity to actually alleviate societal problems. It is wonderful that you do, and it’s wonderful that all the people who work at non-profits, donate time, money, and goods, do so.

However, it is simply demonstrably true that charitable giving does not rise to the actual level of need, especially for unsexy things like drug treatment programs, etc.

We have a government partially in order to deal with the problems that need systemic resolutions that cannot be effectively approached by individual action. There are a lot of these.

What about blood? Government never donates blood, and blood donations do matter. And somehow or other, the public general does come through. I’ve kicked in 50 units plus, lost count, over the years, and not set any records.

442 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Dec 8, 2010 7:15:47am

re: #441 lostlakehiker

What about blood? Government never donates blood, and blood donations do matter

Depending on how you define ‘blood’, the government donates shitloads of blood. If you’re defining the government as made up of the people in the government, it donates a ton.

If you’re defining government as a non-human entity, then it doesn’t donate blood because it doesn’t have any blood.

Moreover, the government spends a lot of time and energy both attempting to get people to donate the blood, processing the blood, and otherwise paying for the costs of donating blood. The amount of donated blood wouldn’t be anywhere near as high without the government providing that support.

This is a really asinine point for you to make, either way. I can’t tell if you’re being serious or intentionally trying to make a stupid point. Poe’s Law in action.

443 CSKapper  Wed, Dec 8, 2010 9:06:44am

I hope that this is the beginning of better things to come. I never like when one party controls everything. There is no balance. I hope the Tea Party dies and moderation ensues.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
4 weeks ago
Views: 442 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1