Mid-Week Open Thread
It's all downhill from here. . .
I mean--it's Thursday. What did you think I meant? :-)
--
- M Scott Eiland's blog
- Login or register to post comments
It's all downhill from here. . .
I mean--it's Thursday. What did you think I meant? :-)
--
winner takes all futures have basically flipped over the past 2.5 weeks. I'm surprised not to see it tighter.
- Login or register to post comments
)Oops.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
)since i've got you both here, putting these guys '_' around a word doesn't italicize it on this site.
it used to on the old tacitus, but it does _not_ do that here.
You've both been posting on this site for 2 yrs. At this pt. Im just concerned that being so slow to adjust is a personal failing that friends should help you to keep in check.
- Login or register to post comments
)....on the subject line. Looks like an underline.
--The ultimate result of shielding man from the effects of folly is to people the world with fools. -Herbert Spencer
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )That is just really F'd up, man.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )consider that you are addressing someone who doesn't even bother with the shift key.... well _unless_ its to underline some *very* important point i am making.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )yer bein lazy + stayin w/in yer comfort zone. I'm here to help.
trust you'd do same.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I don't know how to post the html so it shows. But to italicize, you surround the word or words with i and /i -- and put each into these guys < >...
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )And don't forget that second one (/i), lest we be all doomed to unwanted italics until a moderator notices the problem.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I was channel-cycling yesterday and stumbled upon Eight Men Out on TCM. And stayed until the end of the movie.
I'd forgotten just how much I liked it. Landis was right to do what he did. But Weaver and Jackson did not deserve what they got. (Tho' my sympathy for Weaver may be impacted by the fact that I now believe he was a young John Cusack.)
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Jackson was ill-used, but my sympathy for him was always tempered by the fact that being illiterate didn't mean he didn't know what he was doing was wrong--and he was one of the few participants who actually got money from the gamblers (as the movie accurately portrayed). So even if one ignores his own confession that he "just poked" at the ball at crucial moments (in spite of his .375 average with twelve hits in the eight-game Series) and the two triples hit to left field by the Reds in the Series (unusual, given a gifted left fielder for the White Sox and the usual difficulty of hitting a triple to left field given the shorter throw to third), we still have the fact that he:
--knew what was going on and didn't tell anyone, and;
--he took a lot of money from gamblers.
That's pretty damning--and even if I had a Hall of Fame vote I wouldn't vote for him. There's a story about Ty Cobb entering a liquor store in North Carolina in the 1940's and seeing Jackson behind the counter. Cobb's former rival looked at him, but showed no sign of recognition. Cobb walked over to Jackson and asked quietly, "Joe--don't you know me?"
"Sure Ty--I know you." Jackson replied softly. "I just didn't think that anyone who knew me back then would want to know me now, that's all." A sad end for a great player.
Weaver's case is a little less clear-cut: he didn't take any money and he played errorlessly at third base along with hitting .327 in the Series. However, he knew what was going on and could have blown the whistle before the Series ever started. He wasn't a Hall of Fame caliber player, so it really comes down to whether Landis was unjust in deciding that he shouldn't be allowed to play in the majors again. It's a matter of judgment, I suppose: was Weaver obligated to inform on his teammates--several of whom he was friendly with--or was the "don't be a squealer" ethic combined with the justified distaste for Charlie Comiskey's rather vile mistreatment of his players a significant mitigation to his conduct that he should have been spared the ban? Opinions will inevitably vary, but if I had been an owner in the 1920's I wouldn't have wanted a player who stayed silent under those circumstances. Even if he was played by John Cusack in the movie.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )This is the first time I've ever heard of a candidate for President conceding ten days in advance.
Remember way back in the halcyon days of the primary, when Obama was the one getting compared to McGovern? I think McCain just did McGovern one better.
--The other day I heard that ignorance and apathy are sweeping the country. I didn't know that, but I don't really care.
- Login or register to post comments
)By holding his concession speech away from a room full of his supporters a national TV audience won't have to be subjected to the supporters booing or potentially shouting out worse things when McCain concedes.
And I anticipate that he'll concede exceedingly graciously, making a point of the historical nature and even praising Obama in some areas.
--Steven Palmer Peterson
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Because it will benefit him to appear to be. Just like it benefits him to call Obama a terrorist and a socialist now.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )That's elegantly well conceived spin. Guys like you should be working for McCain instead of the knuckleheads he clearly has.
--Of course not!
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Bachi.
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )$2 million bucks to the city of Chicago. I live about three blocks away. I might stop by.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/1008/563913.html
This is maybe the best election season ever.
- Login or register to post comments
)I hope they release the tape :p
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )That's a senior McCain advisor and one of the country's most respected conservatives. He says the choice of Sarah Palin was an important factor in his decision.
http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/10/24/reagan-appointee-and-recent-mccain-adviser-charles-fried-supports-obama.aspx
And of course Scott McClellan, already on the GOP blacklist for his memoir of the Bush White House.
One by one, rational, principled conservatives are breaking away from the modern GOP.
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH
- Login or register to post comments
)from our right leaning commentariat here at the forvm.
It's like they all banned themselves. I wonder why.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )the only principle i have been able to detect is a self preservational to back away from a losing ticket.
all the problems with the modern gop were just as evident two and six and eighteen months ago as today. it is their certainty of the imminent loss that is causing them to suddenly find their "principles".
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )It's rats/sinking ship time.
But they'll be back - all of them - with sketchy memories of the falling out and platitudes about how things have really changed, and all is comfy again.
There will be no big reinvention on the republican side, regardless of the election's outcome. Back to governmental malfeasance, cronyism and god, guns, gays and race to divide the country and whip up the small minded.
I still think mccain can squeak by and win. Maybe. Kinda maybe.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )They got one from the University of Florida College of Law, so there.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )But today they're speaking to me. Right now on the F-P is:
That's great. He probably wants to raise taxes on the top income earners + get out of Iraq. Good for him.
The rest of the post backs up Frank's sincerity:
That's the whole post and again I think it's great. Am I now redstate's target audience? What gives?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )"Majority of Americans Now Hate America"
--The other day I heard that ignorance and apathy are sweeping the country. I didn't know that, but I don't really care.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )was gay?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/austria/3236260/Jorg-Haider-successor-tells-of-their-relationship.html
"I want the world to know he was much more than my political mentor!" Fantastic. Happy Friday everyone
- Login or register to post comments
)...should have been a dead giveaway.
EDIT: Something seems wrong about the story. Austria is not exactly Tribeca. More like one big Catskills. I find it difficult to believe that somebody that well known (and at the top of a controversial right-wing party for years) in such a small-townish political environment would have openly frequented said establishment. Granted, the guy was kind of nutty. I believe he had a Jewish guy as a deputy for a while (where's Zelig?), which hints at some...er...unusual views for a neo-Nazi.
--The ultimate result of shielding man from the effects of folly is to people the world with fools. -Herbert Spencer
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )A Pittsburgh police commander says a volunteer for the McCain campaign who reported being robbed and attacked near a bank ATM in Bloomfield has confessed to making up the story. Police say charges will be filed. More details to follow.
I fully expect Al Sharpton to appear in a flash to defend this poor girl.
- Login or register to post comments
)After the original "mugging" story broke, Fox News VP John Moody wrote:
Whoops. Man, the Fox News demo really is desperate. I enjoyed the "not because they are racists" part. No, no, of course not. "They" have plenty of black friends, like, y'know, whatsisname, the guy from work.
The "fair and balanced" coda, which Moody undoubtedly would like to retract, said:
Equally stupid, but whatever. It's over anyway, guys, deal with it.
Funniest part of this story? The woman carved the "B" on her cheek backward, in a mirror. I guess that "big African-American man" was as dyslexic as he was violent, eh, dumbass? What's the over/under on the number of Sarah Palin tchotchkes she owns?
--The other day I heard that ignorance and apathy are sweeping the country. I didn't know that, but I don't really care.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )and using a mirror wouldn't have mattered.
--Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )the validity of the story when "the assailant" was describe as having "carved a "B" on her face". When I finally saw her picture over on Atlas Shrugs(I feel icky) it's obvious that the implement used to "scratch" the "B" into her face, was not a knife.
--I had discovered a great secret. That everyone loves themselves more than they love anybody else. And if I wanted them to love me, I better be like THEM!... Ken Nordine
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )This election is so eventful!
But seriously anyone disturbed enough to mutilate herself deserves some empathy.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )and, quite frankly, I am more than a little concerned about a possible "twenty-twelver" mass-suicide in the event of an Obama win. I sincerely hope that doesn't happen. Lighten up People! It's just politics-nothings going to change that much!*
*except for the re-education camps. Some things simply have to be done. It's for the good of the "People"!
--I had discovered a great secret. That everyone loves themselves more than they love anybody else. And if I wanted them to love me, I better be like THEM!... Ken Nordine
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )but mockery is. ;)
--The other day I heard that ignorance and apathy are sweeping the country. I didn't know that, but I don't really care.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Atrios just posted that she should have gone with an 'O'
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )doncha know?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )the Conservative Victimhood Complex to its next logical level, that's for sure. The hot young republican fad next semester will be self-cutting in their dorm rooms if the old man and the lady don't win.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )It's everywhere - mortgage defaulters, "refundable tax credits" AKA welfare, the rich aren't patriotic unless they pay more, "spreading the wealth", noises about the "fairness" doctrine, and probably reparations at some point. Every one of these memes involves someone being victimized and the Dem Party running to their rescue to foster the dependency complex. So I guess it's liberal humor to claim that's what the Repubs are doing, huh?
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )nt
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )however I would list "gloating" and "saying I told you so" way, way, way above "victimhood"!
Edit: Oops, forgot one! We're also really good at the logistics of getting people to Rallies, Protests and Demonstrations. Not so good at deciding anything once we're there but getting there is NOT a problem!
--I had discovered a great secret. That everyone loves themselves more than they love anybody else. And if I wanted them to love me, I better be like THEM!... Ken Nordine
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )usually midmorning after coffee & bong rips kick in, and you find yourself with several thousand fellow Democrats in a park or intersection, highway median, sidewalk or parking lot and all of a sudden everybody goes...
Ok now what?
I mean, we got these pickets, we got markers, who's in charge of this here outfit, anyhow?
I hate that moment. Usually we recover by shouting a bunch of slogans. That generally keeps us busy until we get distracted and wander off and/or the cops start shooting tear gas.
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )and bong hits in the morning! That's generally referred to as a "wake'n bake". :o
--I had discovered a great secret. That everyone loves themselves more than they love anybody else. And if I wanted them to love me, I better be like THEM!... Ken Nordine
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )It took me a minute to pick up on your little joke at the expense of decades of Rush Limbaugh's whiny harrumphalism, perennial Weekly Standard pearl-clutching over affirmative action taking white people's jobs, Sarah Palin's jut-jawed defiance of the elite liberal media (speaking of pearls), the fainting couches of every MSM outrage, dark insinuations about fifth columns & the Vietnam dolchstoss repurposed for Iraq, the Reagan cri de coeur over the millennial injustices of income tax, death tax, capital gains tax, any tax, the IRREPARABLE DAMAGE done to the institution of marriage by public homosexuality (though nobody can quite explain the mechanism), they heavy onus we all are forced to bear in the form of bilingual government documents, the closing of the American mind (to conservative hobbyhorses) in our universities, movies, media, books and associations, and the poor, poor, put-upon NRA.
Funny, funny stuff.
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )beggars and Corporate Socialists of the very worst sort. The entire Bush tenure has been characterized by looting and plundering, no bid contracts, loophole creation, wholesale shipping of jobs overseas, horrible no-bid contracts a doubling of the public debt. Look who's in line now for Mo Gummint Cheeze: the very jackasses who got us into this mess.
Ain't gonna be a bailout for the little guy. There will be for Joe the Hedge Fund Manager. The economy did just fine under Clinton, when progressive taxes were truly progressive.
It just amazes me, when people who aren't rich can be hornswoggled into believing taxing the rich is a bad idea. I'm paying more in taxes on a percentage basis, as an independent contractor than ever, I didn't see the Republicans riding to my rescue or any of the other S Corps. I got to ride like a flea on the dog's back of Accenture Government Consulting, a Bahamas Corporation.
All this cheap talk from McCain about corporate taxation being less in Ireland than here just chaps my cheeks. McCain never made a dime under his own steam, what the hell does he know about me and my problems? The very idea that he'd cuddle up to Phil Gramm and the rest of them, he's a political prostitute.
I make a pretty good living, but I can tell you for a fact, I make a whole lot more than Joe the Plumber, but I ain't gonna pull in a quarter million this year. Under Obama, my taxes will go down.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I have no problem with an across-the-board, modest tax increase if it will be used to pay down the deficit, but we both know it won't. Taking from the top and giving - literally giving money - to those at the bottom is income distribution any way you look at it, Blaise.
Pointing out the deficiencies of the Republican party is preaching to the choir with me. That had nothing to do with my comment that the Dem Party is the party of victimhood, as opposed to personal responsibility. Both parties can and do have sucky, hypocritical memes - it's not a zero-sum game. If you want to talk about why one party is superior to the other, fine, but that doesn't change my point one whit.
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Working markets should be creating jobs. Remember that scene from the Fifth Element where Zorg Explains It All?
That, Tomsyl, seems to be the Republican response to everything. Republicans don't give a damn about turning poor people into meaningful participants in a market based economy. Real market systems do not appeal to them at all. It's all about picking up the glasses they shatter.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )because that's just a dodge that avoids responding to my criticism of Democrats and of Obama's veiled handout plan. Who gives a fee what the "Republican response to everything" is? If that's your basis for backing Obama, just say so, then respond to my criticism of his preachery.
Also note that to a degree my original post was an experiment to illustrate the kind of liberal dogpiles that happen here when someone voices a conservative thought or disses Obama. Don't bother me at all; just makes my fingers hurt dancing with the gang. But it still says something about the site, doesn't it?
What could Jesus learn from Obama?
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The poor, by any definition and calculation, cost this country a great deal of money. They fill our prisons and emergency rooms, they deal drugs, they are, all things considered, the worst enemy this country has at present time.
It would seem to me, and I consider myself an Evolved Conservative, the numbers entirely justify bringing the poor out of poverty. If we are so desperately concerned about this credit crisis, consider the poor, who don't even have checking accounts.
I'm not averse to the rich getting richer. They'll get richer, regardless of how much of the tax burden they bear. A rising tide floats all boats. I don't lump you into the standard Republican model, but you do conform to many idioms of Republican parlance, especially your aversion to assisting the poor, who ought to be considered a tremendous blight on this country.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )But he's not. He's playing hide the ball with all of his talk of "tax cuts for 95% of the people." That is a lie - tax cuts are just that, and handouts are handouts. His dishonesty on this subject can only mean he fears a backlash if he simply says what he plans on doing if elected. And handouts are for victims who are owed something for their victimhood, aren't they? Or is it just free cash, like a small lottery win?
Look at who will get this largess and tell me they are "the poor" who are filling prisons, dealing drugs and so forth. They are actual working people who don't make very much money, and it does them a disservice to imply they would be up to criminal mischief if the govt. didn't pay them off.
No, I don't object at all to money going to people at the low end of the income scale, Blaise. Your claim that I am adverse to helping them is your own bias talking, not me. All I've asked for is an honest debate on the subject instead of campaign lies. It is you that feels the urge to personalize that by surmising that I don't support the underlying reality.
Has it remotely occurred to you that I might, amid all my miserliness and "aversion to assisting the poor", have found my own way of doing that that doesn't involve Barack Obama? Wouldn't it be pretty embarrassing to accuse someone of being adverse to helping the poor, only to find out that they put as much or more of their income to exactly that end as you do? Hypothetically speaking, of course.
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )or you don't. Up to now, you haven't. I don't see anything disingenuous about how Obama's presented his tax plan. Nor do I believe those plans will mean doodly in the long haul: Congress controls taxation.
Yes, Obama does propose to lower income taxes for most Americans and make taxation more progressive. Who on earth puts 250K of taxable income on his tax returns? Do you? Does anyone here file that sort of return? If he does, he needs a better tax preparer.
Look, if you think Obama hasn't been straightforward with his tax plans, how do you know what he's going to do? Where's the Intrepid Reportage showing how Obama's secretly planning to do a Robin Hood on America? Dishonesty presumes there are two versions of the story: the lying version and the truthful version. Where is the lying version?
How you do natter on about Victimhood! Who's being victimized here? A handful of people who will be obliged to return to Clinton-era levels of taxation. Who's po-mouthing all this? Are you going to be directly impacted by these putative tax increases? If you're not, who are you standing up for here?
My taxes didn't go down under Bush and the Republican Congress. They went up. Who reaped the benefits of the current scheme? Well, in part I did, because I got to do the scut work for a few well-connected corporations who did veryvery well over the last few years. I spent long stints at -- lessee -- a payroll outfit, two defense contractors, two insurance companies, Citigroup, USDA and I did the integration of two drug companies.
It seems to me, however imperfectly I understand this situation or your motivation, that you are claiming lies are being told about all this. The only Victims I see here are a few exceedingly wealthy people who will only need to renegotiate their contracts.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The victims are those getting the handouts. I said in the post you are responding to that I was not adverse to that, so there's no excuse for your misunderstanding on that point.
My knowledge about the actual effects of the Obama tax plan comes from third-party and relatively independent sites that have analyzed it and pointed out the impossibility of giving tax cuts to people who don't pay taxes. What is your defense of Obama's vaunted position on that? Have you truly never heard him say that he will cut taxes for 95% of the people? do you think it is possible to give a tax cut to someone who doesn't pay taxes? If so, explain how.
Again, your snapback shows it is not possible to respond to what someone says without attempting to characterize (or in this case, stubbornly mischaracterize) that speaker's background, motivation and political views. Objective responses cana be made to criticisms without the personal attacks, you know. It's not even that hard.
(Cue to you to insist that you are not making personal attacks, and another monologue about how I sure seem to be this and not that, plus another diatribe on how the Republicans have ruined the country. Yes, they have, and so have the Democrats.)
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I'd really like to see these analyses. Barack Obama's plan looks very much like Clinton's 1993 tax reforms, again, a progressive taxation scheme. I favor progressive taxation, not because I am in favor of Soaking the Rich, but because the country benefits the rich far more than the poor.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I asked you at least three times whether tax credits in your mind are the same as handouts - you've never answered. If Obama says the purpose of his tax credits in order to reduce tax payments, but it will actually result in positive payments to those on the bottom end of the income scale, then he is misleading voters, aka lying to get elected.
Here is an example of one of the third-party analyses I referenced:
The details of who pays what currently and under Obama's plan are here. This is something I assumed everyone knew, but apparently not.
Here is a summary of Obama's tax plan from his own website. Where does it say anything about his supposed "tax credits" actually resulting in a net income gain to those who currently pay no taxes? Answer: nowhere. Instead, the Obama website speaks in terms of "tax cuts" that will "completely eliminate income taxes for 10 million Americans."
What Obama is referring to is sometimes called a "refundable" or "non-wasteable" tax credit. The people using that term are again favoring the disguise and administration of welfare-equivalent payments through the IRS. Here is Obama's tax plan in more detail, again from his own website. Where does he say that his tax plan will itself result in net income to certain taxpayers? If it does, it's pretty well hidden, wouldn't you agree?
Does Obama himself admit that his "tax credits" are actually the equivalent of welfare payments? Well, indirectly and grudgingly:
Your reference to Clinton's tax plan is inapposite because it says nothing at all w/r/t net government payouts to those at the low end of the scale. It simply refers to changes in a progressive rate tax system. You keep trying to recast my position as an opposition to progressive tax rates, which I have never even remotely said.
Instead of constantly trying to characterize me as this or that, just pretend my posts come from a disembodied voice, kind of like the moving hand, having writ etc. then you will feel less of an urge to give me your opinion of what I am, which will make it easier to respond instead to the questions I ask.
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Let's make this worst-case, poor dumb people are being given money on street corners by the satanic minions of ACORN.
What, exactly, is your problem with that?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Here are the specific questions I have asked you in this sub-thread:
From Comment No. 131999:
What is your defense of Obama's vaunted position on that? Have you truly never heard him say that he will cut taxes for 95% of the people? do you think it is possible to give a tax cut to someone who doesn't pay taxes? If so, explain how.
From Comment No. 132014:
Here is Obama's tax plan in more detail, again from his own website. Where does he say that his tax plan will itself result in net income to certain taxpayers? If it does, it's pretty well hidden, wouldn't you agree?
from Comment No. 131988:
Has it remotely occurred to you that I might, amid all my miserliness and "aversion to assisting the poor", have found my own way of doing that that doesn't involve Barack Obama? Wouldn't it be pretty embarrassing to accuse someone of being adverse to helping the poor, only to find out that they put as much or more of their income to exactly that end as you do?
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )If you pay no taxes you know this. But you also know that if your income rose (and most people do expect or hope to have their income rise) you would pay less than you otherwise would, unless you suddenly earned more than $250,000.
So I think everybody understands what he means by this.
That said, I do wonder how he would handle raising the SS cap.
--Of course not!
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )You are the one who needs to come up with something predicting panem et circenses from Obama. If your line of rhetoric is to be taken seriously, indolent persons shall be handed your hard-earned wealth gratis, they will dance the hula-hula and hit the nearest liquor store for a pint of popskull and a bag of Frito's chips.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )http://www.bumwine.com/
--The ultimate result of shielding man from the effects of folly is to people the world with fools. -Herbert Spencer
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I ask questions; you punt. You ask what questions I asked; I reask them. You ignore them again in favor of a new dodge. I'm quits on this; it's not really a discussion.
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Let's just imagine Congress did decide in its infinite wisdom to loot your bank account and give your money to the aforementioned Fritos-eaters.
Don't like it? Don't vote for the Frito-Eater's candidate.
Now, fact is, you have not demonstrated Obama lied about anything. Even if he did, he'd have to get his Frito-Eater bill through the House and Senate. The devil's in the details. Fact is, regardless of whether or not the much-vaunted 95% of the population gets taxed less or none or gets some money back, Bush wrote a check for everybody, like some pitiful Santa Claus figure, Spreading the Wealth Around and told us all to Go Shopping after 9/11.
This much I do know and understand. It's awful hard to say 95% of working Americans will get a tax cut in any event, since a great many of them don't pay any federal income tax. So I don't see how the welfare component comes into play at all, Goolsbee revisionism or no.
But what I find most interesting, and most hypocritical in this whole debate, from top to bottom: when you're cornered and pinned to the wall about helping poor people, you're all for it. But in any practical terms which mean one of your dollars actually operates on a poor person's behalf in any meaningful way, then it's all about Horrible Welfare.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )thread, which is the falsehood of tax "cuts" for people who don't pay taxes, the way the tax plan is spun on the Obama website, and what independent tax policy people say the deceptions are. All of that apparently blew right by you.
I asked you specific questions about welfare disguised as tax cuts and gave you direct links to what Obama claims and what the reality is. You either can't or won't respond to any of that, though you assured me you'd read it. To you this is all about the degree to which Obama's tax plan will affect me personally (which really isn't any of your business) and my supposed parsimoniousness. Presumably your intent is to disguise your complete failure to answer the simple question poised; but the dodge is so obvious.
So this really was only half of a discussion, with me asking questions that you can never bring yourself to answer, and you trying to make everything I say personal to me, even though I am someone you know virtually nothing about. Now you are off on yet another tangent, this one about my supposedly hypocritical something or another. IOW, you've brought the discussion to the level of "I don't have to answer your question because your mother wears army boots."
So it is clear after a dozen posts that you either can't answer the "tax cuts = welfare" question, or you won't answer it because know the answer would undercut your argument that Obama's not hiding anything from voters. So what's the point in continuing to talk with you? My points been made, but it took more time than it was worth waiting until you ran out of gas.
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I have made my point clear enough. If you don't declare 250K on your long form, you've got no dog in this fight. Your taxes won't go up.
It is a patent lie to say poor do not pay taxes. They pay sales taxes, in a far larger proportion of income than their wealthy counterparts. No 401(K) for them, they don't have checking accounts or credit cards. But they do pay taxes, and do not trouble me further with that pathetic and totally inaccurate claim that the poor do not pay taxes.
The word Liar drops easily from your lips. It is a constant refrain: Obama the Liar. Obama the Traitor.
The fact is, you don't want a dime of your money to end up in so-called Welfare to the Poor.
Your question has been answered time and again, and yet you act as if giving money to poor people through a tax rebate is somehow a lie, a trick. Have it your way, Tomsyl, but you made this personal. It is the signal aspect, the defining trait of the man who has run out of argument that he makes it personal.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )First, there is no litmus test for criticizing a candidate or a sitting politician. Either the criticism is valid or it is not. If someone (here, you undisputably) insists on demanding the politics, income, ethics etc of the questioner instead of answering the question or criticism posed, it is a de facto admission that there is no answer to the criticism itself. Bzzzz - instant loss of the debate.
Let's look at what you've done here minus the verbose window-dressing. I have now asked you five times whether you agree that it is deceptive to mask welfare payouts as "tax credits", yet you have never answered that question. I have asked you three times whether it is deceptive for Obama to claim that he will lower taxes for 95% of workers when only two-thirds of the workers in the country pay any income taxes now. Again, you're refused to answer that very simple, direct question. Again, sorry pal but you lose the debate on this by default.
You irrelevantly shout in your comment that "it is a patent lie to say poor do not pay taxes." That shows a complete failure to understand what is being discussed here. I have from the beginning been referring to Ovama's statements w/r/t federal income tax. The tax credits he promises are federal income tax credits - do you really think the federal government has the power to reduce state sales taxes? Do you deal with tax credits in your business? If so, do you recognize them as maxima? Do you expect the federal government to send you a check for the difference if a tax credit available to your business has a greater maximum value than the tax you pay?
What have you done instead of answer simple questions? Well, you've demanded to know my income, which is none of your freaking business. You've essentially called me parsimonious and miserly, claiming I don't care for those at the low end of the spectrum because I have the temerity to question how Obama mischaracterizes his handouts. Again, BS. You know zero about me and what I do or don't do w/r/t charities and the poor in general, so your attacks on and insults of my personal views towards the poor are pure organic fertilizer, spouted from complete ignorance, and a transparent dodge of the questions I've asked.
I challenge you to admit that the following statement by you (taken verbatim from your post above) is based on complete ignorance of me, my income, any charitable donations I or my family may make, and any other relevant issue:
The fact is, you don't want a dime of your money to end up in so-called Welfare to the Poor.
Do you have the cojones to retract the completely ignorant, baseless personal attack on me in the above comment? Will you be honest and admit here that I have not said the following in any part of this subthread:
Obama the Traitor.
Will you admit that the Obama website (links to which I've repeatedly provided to you) talks specifically and repeatedly in terms of "tax credits", "tax reductions" and and "tax relief", without mentioning gifts to people who already pay no taxes, welfare payments, or "tax rebates", a term you seem to suddenly have discovered? Let's see. Think of this as a litmus test for you, if you like.
If your response is yet another spate of personal attacks and rote defenses of Obama like your last several posts, you won't be hearing from me again on this. I've already spent far too much time repeating the questions you won't answer and wading through your evasions, amateur mindreading and personal insults.
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I suspect Obama probably took a look at taxation policy and said he would issue a credit to people who weren't actually paying taxes. It could be interpreted as Welfare, so by some accounts, he amended it. I don't see any lies or obfuscations in there, you are free to draw whatever conclusions you wish, including the dreadful Spreading the Wealth conclusion, so hateful to the Conservative ear.
You see deception, I see none. Leave it at that.
As for your income, taxation affects us all. I ask if your taxes will go up, you won't answer. You say it's a Personal Question. It's not. It goes to this idiocy of believing in policy which won't help you. That's been a hallmark of Republican philosophy forever. Let's pretend we're all rich. Live in that contemptible fantasy world if it suits you.
Fact is, you think Obama's trying to sneak some welfare into his tax plan. No denying you find that to be a terrible lie. I ask, so what if there is some welfare in it? I make little jokes about Fritos and the hula-hula, you don't get the joke and you don't get my intent, either. Your question was answered long ago, and don't you dare say it wasn't answered. I don't care if the poor spent their welfare check on Fritos and Mad Dog. If that isn't an answer, nothing is.
I don't care if there is welfare embedded in Obama's plan. It doesn't bother me. Get the hell over it. I don't care if taxes go up on the rich. I make a lot of money but I don't make 250K. I don't want taxes to go up to the confiscatory era of Nixon, but neither does Obama. He want's them to go up to Clinton-era taxation.
You've spent an unpleasantly large fraction of your posts on this business. You made this personal. I don't care what you think of me. It doesn't matter what we say, what matters is what people hear. What I hear from you is a pent-up fearful rage, endless calumnies about Obama Tryin' to Hide Welfare Payments in his Tax Plan, and if it isn't that, it's tub-thumping about Bill Ayers. You don't like Obama? Rubs your fur the wrong way? Well good, I hope he rubs every last bit of your fur the wrong way. I hope he offends every last pro-Bush pro-McCain Republican's fur the wrong way. They ruined this country, and now the Democratic janitors get to come in to clean up the wreckage. I hope the Republican Party roasts in hell forever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The very definition of ad hominy attacks.
Your question was answered long ago, and don't you dare say it wasn't answered.
I dare. Despite several hundred words from you, you have never answered the original question posed here: whether Obama's description of his tax plan is an honest one. And of course it is not honest; you cannot lower the taxes of people who do not pay taxes.
All you've said is that you don't give a hoot whether Obama is honest not, followed by banal shots at me for asking that question. It is painfully obvious you have no intention of ever answering me, making talking to you a waste of my time. Bye.
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Obama talks about cutting taxes. Not income tax. Taxes. His plan will, therefore, be a net cut for everyone -- well, almost everyone, dang! -- including those folks who only pay taxes into the regressive FICA system. This has been discussed elsewhere. It's not that hard to understand. Suggesting that these are 'welfare payouts' is a deeply wingtarded argument worthy of Sean Hannity. It also plays into race-baiting. Which, I'm assuming, is why the McCain campaign favors it.
But if you need more help, here's a pretty nice guy over at TPM who walks through it for you.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )A twofer. Neat.
You obviously missed the quoted text and links above from the Tax Foundation and even from Obama's own campaign. Check them out, find a reference to FICA or sales tax on the Obama website, then get back to me.
Whoops, you said "wingtard". Never mind, no need to look anything up - you're at the end of your argument, apparently.
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Tax cuts. Income tax cuts. There's a difference.
That I'm explaining this to the guy who refused to recognize the difference between voter fraud and voter registration fraud because his argument was a joke and hey, I guess you were right, ACORN really did turn this election around...
That's just gravy.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The issue seems worth getting into, and is instead dying way out here on the fractal arm of this subthread.
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )about what the policy actually is (I used the term "non-wasting"), and I've probably spent too little time discussing that and too much time on to what degree it's been disclosed. Past time to throw the switch on this thread, particularly after your gentle hint to do that.%^>
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )How about not answering starting now? Or going back in time and starting yesterday on this thread? I don't think we have enough pixels left otherwise.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )-
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Hey, if you think you're makin' headway, go for it. But the comments seem to be getting longer, not more effective.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Consumer spending during the Bush 'boom' years has largely been fueled by tapping into housing equity (now gone) and by ever expanding consumer credit (about to be gone), because real wages have remained flat.
Getting money into the hands of those who will spend it in order to avoid the imminent collapse of consumer spending is essential if a major recession is to be avoided. If Obama judges tax cuts are the best vehicle to achieve that, while also going some way to correct the tax imbalance imposed under the GOP's 'trickle down' economic regime and you want to call that 'welfare', then so be it. But it's really 'welfare' for the US economy for the benefit of everyone, not just the fortunate few who have been making out like bandits at the expense of the rest of us and the health of the US economy as a whole over the past 8 years.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )At the end of the day, 55 million of those cut beneficiaries never make enough to pay in the first place. They will now, in effect, be On The Dole.
--The ultimate result of shielding man from the effects of folly is to people the world with fools. -Herbert Spencer
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )This is only a proposal at best, and a pipe dream at worst. When Bush wrote all those checks to taxpayers, where were the cries of outrage? The rebates were tiny, but they acted as an economic stimulus, selon les Republicans. Now that the deficit has been doubled to pump liquidity back into the world economy and the banks have been partially nationalized, let's just not have any more of this ridiculous rhetoric about how poor people aren't equally deserving of a bit of help.
No, the real problem, Bernard, is this. Though they will loudly deny it, the Republican Party has always been the party of the rich and they hate the poor with all their hearts. They work endlessly to deny the poor the vote through a thousand means. Let someone say "Spread the wealth", regardless of the innocuous context, and the Republicans will rise up as if the speaker was a child molester or cannibal.
Now that's the reality. Republicans don't give a sh!t about the poor and believe them less worthy than hedge fund managers.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )....deserves anything, Blaise. I'm self-serving to the core; not being a hedge-fund manager, I'm no more interested in hedge-fund manager welfare than I am in unemployed bum welfare. From a normative POV, they are one and the same. (And the hedgies, far from being bailed out, are in the process of being slaughtered. But I digress.)
The only reason that I'm in favor of the bankers being bailed out is that, unlike the former two groups, I need the banks to keep working. That's it in a nutshell. If I didn't have a vital interest in the banks, several in point of fact, I'd be happy to see them go to the wall, too. It'd just clear out a niche and I'd start a new one myself. :^) But the economy depends on workable fractional reserve banking, and even a few months with most of the banks dead and gone would be far worse for me than a boost in taxes or the Big Three going the way of the dodo, so I don't complain. Dems da breaks.
No hate or silly talk of worthiness here, my friend, it's just business. Banks are more important to me than either hedge-fund managers or the poor.
(As far as working to deny anybody the vote, it appears to me that everybody tries very hard to get people who vote like them out to the polls and keep everybody else away. Shocking! Why would I want people with significantly less than I do to vote a lot? Everybody votes for personal pan et circensis, so I'd clearly end up on the losing side of that proposition.)
--The ultimate result of shielding man from the effects of folly is to people the world with fools. -Herbert Spencer
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )dude, i think bernard is already voting republican, you don't have to sell _him_ on this fact!
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Or perhaps over-complicated. You're looking for emotions where none are required. See above.
--The ultimate result of shielding man from the effects of folly is to people the world with fools. -Herbert Spencer
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )All I read is conservatives eliding between the two.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )when I ask if you'll be directly affected by Obama's proposed tax increases, that's not an idle question. I presume you do quite well, I presume most of us do pretty well, all things considered, there are trade-offs people make in their personal lives, money's not everything.
But in saying only a few people would see their taxes go up, I think it's reasonable to ask if those increases would affect you. If they don't, then where's your beef? I can understand someone operating in their own self-interest, I know I do. But if these tax increases don't affect you, what's your problem with them? Isn't that a reasonable question to ask?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )goes to deficit reduction. Nor do I have anything against government payments going to people at the low end of the wage scale. Is it so unreasonable to expect that would be done in an honest and transparent manner?
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )and you're ready to vote again for the party that ran the deficit up by an unprecedented amount? And vastly expanded the size of the government?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Where have I said I am ready to vote for McCain? Your comment is the umpteenth example of people dodging the question by mischaracterizing the questioner. Is it really so important to you to focus on who is asking a question about Obama rather than the question itself? Because like I said, that is such a transparent dodge.
--Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Here's something to chew on: all politicians are liars. This is a definitional matter, part of their job description. Depending on the year and circumstances, Barry's claimed plan may or may not harm me. But the thing is, I don't expect his proposals (or McCain's, for that matter) to last more than 15 minutes after the inauguration. They are DOA. That much is plain from current circumstances. He's gonna have to go looking for more revenue or he's gonna have to ditch a bunch of the goodies he wants. The latter will be a joy to watch, but I bet he'll take a shot at the former first.
Now, I'm still not too worried about it. Barry's clearly gonna have to dig deeper, but I believe the crappy shape of the economy will rather handily restrict him in a number of ways. But that's still no reason to vote for him; I'm calculating only that he won't be able, ultimately, to do much of what he'd like to do.
--The ultimate result of shielding man from the effects of folly is to people the world with fools. -Herbert Spencer
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Now we're both watch the markets going crazy these days, you from your Tory side of the fence, me from my Liberal side of the fence. Are these markets completely rational? In most cases they're not.
We can look at them collectively, in which case we get one viewpoint, one I generally don't think is all that valid, or we can look at it one stock or one market at a time, casting a jaundiced eye at all the related stocks and markets.
Politics really is no different, to my way of thinking. The CEOs get on the conference calls and make predictions. Some are accurate, some aren't, and the analysts have their say, too. I'm paying attention to AMD, it's trading around 3 something, but it's 3Q numbers were better than anyone had hoped. Despite some serious problems with the Barcelona processor, AMD is getting its act together.
So here's Obama, making his estimates and predictions. He interprets the current state of affairs and says we ought to move back to a more Clinton-ian mode. There are differences, where Clinton actually ran some nominal surpluses, Obama won't have the luxury of an economy on the rebound like Clinton did. AMD faces huge competition from Intel, and things could get tough for AMD if their notebook processors can't match Intel's stuff. There are good reasons to think AMD can't do it, but I think they can. Lots of good reasons to think Obama won't make the analysts expectations, either. But he might.
See, if Obama brings the intangibles of good governance and adaptive strategies to the table, his stock will trade up. Don't underestimate the power of intangibles. The world will let out a huge sigh of relief to see Bush sent back to Crawford. FDR faced huge obstacles when he came to office, but he did rally the nation with nothing more than the sound of his voice, and a firm belief we had nothing to fear but fear itself.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )you might as well say human beings ruined the country.
The republicans had near total control of the government for the last eight years. Saying it's everyone's fault is technically true, but the conservatives and their party, the republicans, are mostly to blame.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )And Shrub got handed a recession on the way in, so I'm happy to see him passing Barry one on the way out.
That said, I blame it mostly on the poverty-stricken douchebags who used cheap credit to enhance their otherwise miserable life, and the greedy idiots who lent them the money. Things would be so much easier if losers just accepted that they'd lost.... :^)
--The ultimate result of shielding man from the effects of folly is to people the world with fools. -Herbert Spencer
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )investment paper in convoluted securities built on said cheap credit?
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile