Economists Predict Consequences of Bush Tax Cuts - Republicans Learn Nothing
Economists’ Statement Opposing The Bush Tax Cuts
The Economists’ statement opposing the Bush tax cuts was a statement signed by roughly 450 economists, including ten of the twenty-four American Nobel Prize laureates alive at the time, in February 2003 who urged the U.S. President George W. Bush not to enact the 2003 tax cuts; seeking and sought to gather public support for the position. The statement was printed as a full-page ad in The New York Times and released to the public through the Economic Policy Institute. According to the statement, the 450 plus economists who signed the statement believe that the 2003 Bush tax cuts will increase inequality and the budget deficit, decreasing the ability of the U.S. government to fund essential services, while failing to produce economic growth. .
Even though 450 prominent economists including 10 Nobel prize winning economists published a public statement opposing the 2003 Bush tax cuts during the debate AND accurately predicted the consequences of doing so, we still have the crazy Republican Party trying to keep them in place for those who benefited most from this failed policy. Someone please tell me which one of these consequences of the Bush tax cuts didn't come true.
1) ...will increase inequality (Check)
2) ...and the budget deficit (Check)
3) ... decreasing the ability of the U.S. government to fund essential services (Check)
4)... while failing to produce economic growth (Check)
KKK referred to herself as a she way back in the early days
and it was confirmed by her never saying she wasn't
I insinuated that she was a diesel dyke, and she didn't contest it, so obviously she is a diesel dyke.
Who in their right mind would not say they weren't a diesel dyke, if they weren't a diesel dyke!
Yes indeed, would have been cleverer if it had been Romney - could have been easily done.
The idea is that you take a very well recognized theme and stick your characters and narrative into it. If Obama had just done this, then he would be president today (whoops ... never mined).
Well I guess it depends on how you look at it. I suppose it was clever so long as your target audience is about as clever as Sarah Palin and Herman Cain combined. Then it was indeed quite a clever little bit of propaganda.
Friday, December 7, 2012
The Fiscal Cliff And The Alinsky President
The Fiscal Cliff negotiations are illustrative of the President's inability to lead and to govern. With this dire deadline of economy-killing tax increases and automatic spending cuts looming over the American people, he chooses to campaign at toy factories, golf with Bill Clinton and publicly try to intimidate the Republicans into a deal that he wants. President Obama hasn't even met with Speaker Boehner in person for weeks, choosing instead to only talk to him over the phone.
But then we really can't expect any other behavior from a committed Alinskyite like the President. When one strictly adheres to the principles of Saul Alinsky, you don't negotiate, you intimidate. You don't take a stand, but make the other guy take a stand and then you demonize it. You create so much static with class warfare rhetoric that it drowns out reason and fact. A good case in point is the President's insistence that the wealthy do not pay their fair share. He has been saying this for so long, it is almost an accepted fact by some. The real truth is that the top one percent of wage earners have gone from paying 20% of the total tax burden in the 1980s to 40% today. The percentage of the total income they earn is around 25%. If one extrapolates out the tax burden to include the top 10% of wage earners, the total share of the tax burden paid by that group is 70%. Their total percentage of the income earned is around 38%. These facts come straight from current IRS data.
No fair-minded person could conclude from the empirical evidence laid out in the previous paragraph, that the wealthy in this country are not paying their fair share. And yet, the President spews out this categorically false narrative and a certain percentage of the population laps it up like kittens lapping milk from a bowl. This is also what followers of Saul Alinsky practice, repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth in the minds of the masses. This concept is best illustrated by the incident in Bob Wooward's recent book about the debt limit negotiations in August of 2011. President Obama placed his hand on John Boehner's arm and said, "John, I have complete confidence in my ability to sway the American people." This statement shows not only the President's complete contempt for the truth, but for the American people who he looks at as sheep to be lead, not free people to be governed.
The President looks at problems not so much to be solved, but as opportunities to score political points and advance an agenda that recent polling has shown, even a majority of his voters don't want. President Reagan had a sign on his desk that read, "It is amazing what a man can accomplish when he doesn't care who gets the credit." President Obama should have a sign on his desk saying, "It's amazing what I can accomplish by blaming others for the problem."
Are you utterly and completely 'DeMinted'? Obama's absolute greatest failing in his first term was exactly the fact he couldn't seem to stop negotiating and compromising with Republicans at every single turn and essentially doing it badly again and again giving away the store to obstructionist republicans who never compromised on anything.
Way more than intimidation is what was called for in that first term which is why I voted for Hillary - she would have been collecting gonads out of the gate. That article you quoted is classic - CLASSIC - bubbleware and a yet another clear sign republicans both don't 'get it' and are just dooming themselves to utter irrelevance over the next eight to twelve years.
Make no mistake, the republican's deliberate strategy of stonewall obstructionism over the first term is entirely to blame for not only the cliff, but the lack of government action on any number of fronts. It was a calculated bet which lost and has cost republicans dearly in the end. And now, rather than man-up and own the sad reality of how their well-planned and financed strategy of obstructionism, racism, homophobia, sexism and xenophobia failed their party and the American people they instead seek to look anywhere but in the mirror in an effort to lay blame and deflect the obvious truth.
It's a remarkable detachment from reality to a world where they just make sh#t up (like that article). And really, it's hard to come to any other conclusion than republican strategists and players have somehow unwittingly become infected by the very Rovian fictions they themselves have been manufacturing for their 'base' over the past four decades.
Let us know!