Bill Kristol: You Know, Maybe GOP Should Consider Raising Taxes

And the rush to adopt the Democratic agenda by "conservatives" continues apace.

"The leadership of the Republican Party and the leadership of the conservative movement has to pull back, let people float new ideas. Let's have a serious debate," Kristol said on "Fox News Sunday." "Don't scream and yell if one person says 'You know what? It won't kill the country if we raise taxes a little bit on millionaires.' It really won't, I don't think."

...

"I don't really understand why Republicans don't take Obama's offer to freeze taxes for everyone below $250,000, make it $500,000, make it $1 million," Kristol said. "Really? The Republican Party is going to fall on its sword to defend a bunch of millionaires, half of whom voted Democratic and half of whom live in Hollywood?"

Hey, I have an idea, why don't we throw card check in to sweeten the pot?

A few problems with this:

1- It's idiotic.

2- It's moronic.

3- It's atrocious economics. We wouldn't be conceding simply a political point but a major economic one....increasing taxes hurts the economy. Why in the world would sign on to that? What votes are we suddenly getting?

4- The federal government has more than enough revenue (assuming tax hikes raise revenue for the purpose of this discussion). What it has is a spending problem. If you think you can trade tax hikes for spending cuts with Democrats, you probably think you can trade amnesty for Hispanic votes or that Pennsylvania is in play for the GOP. History shows...otherwise.

5- It's a moronic idea.

Can we wait just a little longer before we decide to throw every conservative principle overboard?

Here's my suggestion as to what we should do...talk to average people. We spent a lot of time talking to and about "job creators". Well, not everyone is going to start their own business or even wants to. We need to speak directly to the Dirty Jobs people and not just the people who own businesses that do dirty jobs.

Yes, the people who do those jobs benefit from the impact of job creation friendly policy for "job creators" but it's a secondary effect. We should be the party that not only stands for the Joe the Plumbers of the world but also the guys he hires. Talk directly to them about what conservatism means for them. Right now we're reaching them indirectly, through a double bank-shot approach We should talk about how energy from the ground is the manufacturing of the 21st century. Not everyone wants a high tech job and people don't want to hear about how helping their boss will someday help them, talk directly to these people. Hell, we might even manage to connect with some Hispanic and even black voters in the process without sell our souls in the process.

I hate appeal to Reagan "arguments" but that's how he won the "Reagan Democrats" over.

It's important that we focus on the disaster that the Romney campaign was in every way but this election shouldn't have come down to Orca working or not on election day. People should have been camping out to vote against Obama. Clearly they weren't.

We have a lot of problems selling conservatism (policy, technical proficiency and message emphasis) but being more like the Democrats isn't one of them.

In the meantime, I remain "For Sequestration". The people voted for irresponsibility last week, let them have it.

Posted by: DrewM. at 11:48 AM



Comments

1 Give them what they voted for.

Posted by: Duh! at November 12, 2012 11:52 AM (Zs83Q)

2 How about we start by acting like individualistic, freedom loving, liberty seeking people before we start trying to sell it to anyone else?

Posted by: runninrebel at November 12, 2012 11:52 AM (J4gw3)

3 Why are we acting like we get a say anymore? They trumped us on that, they won. This should be where the American people get what they want good and hard, but make them fight this crap on the far left grounds so the left destroys themselves in the process. Literally start debating the socialists in Congress plans to tax rich people at 100% of their income, and the far left plans to tax them at 85%. Let Americans see what Harry Reid has been hiding for the past 2 years while he shut down the Senate.

Give them the knives with which they kill themselves. But whatever nothing I say has any effect on this shit.

Posted by: Mr. Pink at November 12, 2012 11:53 AM (++kZl)

4 If the set A represents moronic ideas, and the set B represents ideas by Bill Kristol, does the Venn Diagram of A and B represent B entirely within A?

Posted by: Kevin in ABQ at November 12, 2012 11:53 AM (C3KwS)

5 It's important that we focus on the disaster that the Romney campaign was in every way
***
I am amazed how many people are still pushing back on this.

Romney ran a worse campaign then McCain. I'm amazed he pulled it off but he did.

Oh...and I told you so...

Posted by: 18-1 at November 12, 2012 11:54 AM (AUeaU)

6 Fuck yeah. let's tax the super rich at 90%. Matt Damon, Beyonce, Harvey Weinstein, Jay Leno- time to pony up.

Posted by: Jones in CO at November 12, 2012 11:54 AM (8sCoq)

7 Gotta agree.

Marginal tax rates on top earners are already over 40% in many parts of the country. At what point are tax rates high enough for "the rich"? Enough already.

More to the point, if the GOP doesn't stand up to higher taxes/lower spending, then its completely worthless as a party. What the hell happened to "limited government"?

If that's not a plank (correct THE plank) of the GOP, I'm done with it.


Posted by: Looking closely at November 12, 2012 11:54 AM (+PDlV)

8 Bring back the Yacht Tax!!! Let's show those millionaires and the people who work at the boat yards who's boss!

Posted by: Jinx the Cat at November 12, 2012 11:54 AM (1Jxa1)

9 Read the comments. Lots of people agreeing. Lots of people saying start with tax deduction for state taxes, etc.

I find this stimulating. Really.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 11:54 AM (tuE4N)

10 BECAUSE AT SOME POINT, YOU'VE MADE ENOUGH MONEY.

Right?

Posted by: Jones in CO at November 12, 2012 11:54 AM (8sCoq)

11 To Drew's point - Romney lost the election because he felt he could win with the white vote. Truth was, he could - but he would have to maximize the vote to do so. He didn't.
These people didn't vote for Obama for a reason, they don't like these policies, and thats why we shouldn't adopt them.

Amnesty would be suicide for the GOP. As bad as it is, if we must make nice with the democrats somewhere, its here. Let the suburbs reap the whirlwind.

Posted by: JollyRoger at November 12, 2012 11:54 AM (t06LC)

12 But, but - wanking to porn!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: tubal at November 12, 2012 11:55 AM (BoE3Z)

13 I've been saying this for a year. Give the Dems their taxes on the rich. But make rich = $1M. They could have done this and gotten something in return like Keystone. And it would have taken away the big Dem talking point.

So yes Bill, you're right. But about a year too late.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at November 12, 2012 11:55 AM (HDgX3)

14 The best thing the GOP can do is disband. They are useless as an organization and they stand for no principles.

If you were wondering were the 3 million GOP voters went this election just listen to the likes of Bill Kristol.

Yeah Obama is in office...but the GOP prove here they are no better.

Posted by: ALL_IS_LOST at November 12, 2012 11:55 AM (T/L2Z)

15 The Romney campaign was not a "disaster in every way". Compared to what - McCain's "non-campaign"? Romney ran a fairly strong campaign and was at least competitive until the end. When all was said and done there was no way to compete with Obama's total media control, but that would have been the case with any Republican candidate.
Could Romney's campaign been even stronger? Yes.
Did Romney make mistakes (such as ORCA)? Yes.
Was it a complete disaster? No. He lost, but he made a good run.

Posted by: Norcross at November 12, 2012 11:55 AM (THNke)

16 Piss ant Krystal has always been a liberal posing as a conservative.

Posted by: Vic at November 12, 2012 11:55 AM (YdQQY)

17 >>The Republican Party is going to fall on its sword to defend a bunch of
millionaires, half of whom voted Democratic and half of whom live in
Hollywood?"

Damn right we are.

Same way we're going to stand up for Freedom of Speech, even though the media uses it to lie about Republicans and embargo negative stories about the current administration.

Is "priniciple" not something that Bill Kristol is familiar with?


Posted by: Looking closely at November 12, 2012 11:56 AM (+PDlV)

18
14
The best thing the GOP can do is disband. They are useless as an organization and they stand for no principles.


They have.

Posted by: tubal at November 12, 2012 11:56 AM (BoE3Z)

19 Congresswomen from San Francisco who own wineries should be heavily, HEAVILY taxed.

Posted by: Jones in CO at November 12, 2012 11:56 AM (8sCoq)

20 I understand your point, because Bill Kristol is a quivering pussy. But I'd love to raise the hell out of taxes on Gulfstream Liberals and let them have a big fucking taste of the medicine they've been prescribing for the rest of us.

Personally, I think the reps should simply vote present on everything now. Let the democrats have everything they want. Burn baby burn.

Posted by: thirteen28 at November 12, 2012 11:56 AM (AbmsP)

21 Kristol is just looking to stay on the cocktail circuit in DC...

Posted by: Tony253 at November 12, 2012 11:56 AM (PryWG)

22 The GOP will now move to the left. The idiots who stayed home because Romney was not conservative enough for them are ... idiots

Posted by: Terry Gain at November 12, 2012 11:56 AM (Xri0e)

23 I meant the comments on this story at NRO.

End tax free muni bonds - make the trust funders pay taxes.

End hollywood tax cuts, too.

How about a special tax on the lawyers take from lawsuits? Trial lawyers are all Dems.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 11:56 AM (tuE4N)

24 "Can we wait just a little longer before we decide to throw every conservative principle overboard? "
==========

No. Time's a-wastin'.

Posted by: The GOP Establishment Types at November 12, 2012 11:56 AM (znT2j)

25 I'm a conservative, really!

Posted by: Bill "Moderate Gun Control" Krystal at November 12, 2012 11:56 AM (/YJYi)

26 I am all for confiscatory excise taxes on the FMV of the endowments of private foundations and colleges/universities. Then there is the 20% excise tax on the gross revenues from movies, dvds, entertainment downloads, etc.

Why is it fair the Harvard sits on $30 billion in endowments and still raises tuition in excess of increases in the CPI? Or that the Gates Foundation sits on $37 billion to make sure the future generation that will end up stuck with our bills will be too sparsely populated to pay them off?

Posted by: NC Mountain Girl at November 12, 2012 11:56 AM (V7HuV)

27 Question, could Republicans in the House demand that these tax increases pay the deficit down to 0?

ie Tax increases have to be as high as the spending, make the American people actually pay for what they are voting for, because then it would become politically impossible to keep advocating the same stupid shit Dems do year after year.

But whatever, the Republicans are so fucking inept they couldnt defund NPR after they kicked the shit outa the Dems in 2010, so odds are nothing they want will happen.

Obama 2016!!!!

Posted by: Mr. Pink at November 12, 2012 11:57 AM (++kZl)

28 Do Kristol and Frum date.....or are they both married and just having an affair?

Posted by: Tami at November 12, 2012 11:57 AM (X6akg)

29 Look folks with 1 trillion deficits every year, spending cuts will not be enough.

Taxes will be going up. Hit the libs first.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 11:57 AM (tuE4N)

30 Either we believe in the rule of law (no amnesty for illegals) and the laws of economics (no tax increases) or we believe only in getting elected so that we, and not they, can be the ones dividing the spoils.

I want to win. And I'm willing to trim my sails to win where necessary. For instance, I probably could be convinced that fighting for life in the political sphere rather than the cultural sphere is a waste of time, so I might give on abortion. And I probably already am convinced that being against gay marriage isn't worth any time at all for the GOP or conservatives.

But if we start agreeing to increased taxes and amnesty, we might as well be Democrats.

Posted by: The Regular Guy at November 12, 2012 11:57 AM (qHCyt)

31 Senators who marry rich ketchup widows should be taxed at 90% rate. FOR THE CHILDREN.

Posted by: Jones in CO at November 12, 2012 11:57 AM (8sCoq)

32

Normal
0




Quote from a European Newspaper

Some people have the vocabulary to sum up things in a way
that you

can quickly understand them. This quote came from the
Czech

Republic. Someone over there has it figured out. It was
translated

into English from an article in the Prague newspaper
Prager Zeitungon:







The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a
citizenry

capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will

be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama
presidency

than to restore the necessary common sense and good
judgment to a

depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their

president. The problem is much deeper and far more
serious than

Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America.
Blaming the

prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast

confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The
Republic can

survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool.
It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him
their president."

Posted by: thirteen28 at November 12, 2012 11:57 AM (AbmsP)

33 In the meantime, I remain "For Sequestration". The people voted for irresponsibility last week, let them have it.


Except that will damn near cripple the Military

Posted by: Nevergiveup at November 12, 2012 11:57 AM (79ueO)

34 I am all in for sequestration. Also, I am all in for tax raises for everybody, and new taxes on everyone. Has to be a minimum, even for those on assistance. Moral hazard folks. Dems want this, let's give them all of it. I especially want taxes raised for those over $500,000. They vote majority Democrat, so f them. They are what we like to call door slammers, as in they don't want the rich club to be less exclusive. They got theirs and all that.

Posted by: Koenig Jojo at November 12, 2012 11:57 AM (Yv6gq)

35 Truth be told, I think the top marginal rate for keeping the capital gains rate as it is might be the best we can do.

Posted by: Alec Leamas at November 12, 2012 11:58 AM (mg08E)

36
24
"Can we wait just a little longer before we decide to throw every conservative principle overboard? "
==========

No. John Roberts.

Posted by: tubal at November 12, 2012 11:58 AM (BoE3Z)

37

Here's what the braintrust in DC is gonna do:

NOTHING.

Their plan is to Kick the Can Down the Road.

Status Quo. Tax rates and spending will remain the same for another year. And then...

they'll kick the can down the road again.

Posted by: soothsayer at November 12, 2012 11:58 AM (b1TCv)

38 I like the idea being floated by Reynolds et al that we tax the living crap out of Hollywood and the liberal billonaires. Start making noise about taxing the Google guys, Gates, Zuckerberg and the rest of the Obama loving billionaire tech geeks. Who loses jobs when you tax the hell out of Hollywood and Silicone Valley ? Liberals. Lots and lots of Prius driving, environment living, abortion supporting, gay loving liberals. I think until liberals actually start losing jobs, they'll never realize why raising taxes is so bad for the economy. BUT if you tax the right people and have the Republicans in the House figure out a way to tax Hollywood and the tech companies, make sure the public knows exactly who we want to tax, then stand back and watch Obama explain why these people shouldn't be taxed, maybe a point gets made. We've spent years defending the billionaires from tax breaks and what has it gotten us? If Google gets taxed to hell and lays off 300 tech workers, the majority of whom voted democratic, why should I care?

8 out of the 10 riches counties in the United States voted overwhelmingly for Obama. Lets find out who those people are and tax the shit out of them.

Posted by: Matt at November 12, 2012 11:58 AM (c4UpU)

39 Ya know what? The majority of people who vote in this country seem to be fine with
fiscal insanity, racial division, class envy, environmental idiocy and
dependence on government. Let them have what they voted for.

As for Kristol, he is a fool and a coward.

Posted by: MCPO Airdale at November 12, 2012 11:58 AM (tYaDf)

40 No more tax free muni bonds...hurt John Kerry and the leftist cities!

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 11:58 AM (tuE4N)

41 So the plan is to, ah, talk to people?

Talk until we win a fillibuster-proof majority of the entire government and we can make everyone do what we want without compromise. Because we're that damn good.

As soon as we get that, we can govern.

Posted by: CJ at November 12, 2012 11:58 AM (9G+G5)

42 Bill Kristol is right...

Posted by: soren at November 12, 2012 11:59 AM (MPFD8)

43 We couldn't even cut Cowboy Poetry.

Obama will take the tax hikes and then push for another stimulus.

Every economist I've talked to (Ha!) says that raising taxes and cutting spending is the death knell for this economy. Worst thing you can do.

So first tax hikes........and then...........

Posted by: Ronin at November 12, 2012 11:59 AM (AzwZn)

44 I really don't want to be in the business of managing decline. If those are the terms of governing, I'll pass. Let the other side do that. I'm not willing to dump everything just to get an 'R' into office.

Posted by: Todd W at November 12, 2012 11:59 AM (vVmp0)

45 We either win by our principles or lose by our principles, but we shouldn't change our principles just for the sake of winning an election. Would you want to win an election at the cost of losing a Country?

Posted by: not neo just conservative at November 12, 2012 11:59 AM (MNXL5)

46 Wouldn't it be quicker to send all the rich people to the camps?

Posted by: Herr Shickelgruber at November 12, 2012 11:59 AM (NIZHJ)

47 If I ever have to hear "tax cuts for the rich" again I think my head will explode. Yes, they should let the taxes go up on the above $250K crowd just like obama wants. You cannot be a job creator until people realize that what Bill Clinton told them all during the campaign - that his higher taxes where better than the evil Bushes tax cuts - actually hurts the economy. Let them own it and then come back with the tax reform plan. Sometimes you need to break it before you can remake it.

Posted by: Tom at November 12, 2012 11:59 AM (G82cl)

48 Tax all those doing meaningless jobs like actors and acrtresses and comedians and TV stars for a start.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at November 12, 2012 11:59 AM (79ueO)

49 Oh, and I think the Republicans *should* get on the tax bandwagon.

Just target democrat constituencies.

Hollywood, for example, should get a nice hefty increase - and their account tricks that allow them to play with how they pay residuals banned.

Of course the idiots running the Republican party, and especially Mittens, should have been on this six months ago.

Posted by: 18-1 at November 12, 2012 11:59 AM (AUeaU)

50 Romney lost 51-48. He lost by about 330K votes in all swing states. This is out of 10M+ votes cast in those swing states. If you didn't know any of this and went only by what the MSM and conservative media is writing a week later you'd think Romney lost 70-30 and didn't win a single state.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at November 12, 2012 11:59 AM (HDgX3)

51 If the talking heads insist that repubs stayed home on Election Day, why the hell were our crowds so much bigger at Romney events than Obama ones? There was enthusiasm in our camp.

Posted by: NCKate at November 12, 2012 11:59 AM (MsQkt)

52

We will do exactly what the EU is doing: nothing, talk about doing something, print more dollars, and continue to prop up our bankrupt treasury.

Posted by: soothsayer at November 12, 2012 12:00 PM (b1TCv)

53 Have to take silly talking points away from the Dems. And let's notgo out of our way to make sure the economy is humming along fine and the Dems get all the credit for it while we're at it. Obama and the Dems won by making the Republican party out to be "the party of the rich guys" in large part because of the taxes "on the rich" schtick. We should have let the rates rise two years ago. We would have taken that argument away from them (dumb as it is, the voters bought it) and it might have marginally worsened the economy on Obama's dime. It won't lower the deficit or reduce spending or create a single job. But as long as the Republican party can be painted as "the party of the rich" it will lose large turnout elections.

Posted by: jdp at November 12, 2012 12:00 PM (gfPGB)

54 I'm confused. Has everyone forgotten about the Bush Tax Cuts? People do realize they are expiring December 31, 2012? The Democrats knows this and they want it to lapse so that they can fund more of their stupid bullshit while running 1.5 trillion dollar deficits every year.

Not to mention, they're going to have a regressive effect on the economy. But the people want more free shit so they don't care either way.

Posted by: Kaitian at November 12, 2012 12:00 PM (1sDtj)

55 I'm all for raising taxes.
Let's start with Hollywood.
Then move to those who pay no tax whatsoever due to low income.
Then raise the price of FCC broadcast license by 5,000%
Increase lottery ticket sales taxes.
A 10% environmental offset tax on all newspapers and magazines printed on paper more frequently than every 35 days.


Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at November 12, 2012 12:00 PM (IzkD0)

56 "Piss ant Krystal has always been a liberal posing as a conservative."
==========

He's just a garden variety neo-con, isn't he, in the literal sense?

I mean, lefty morons have been shrieking "NEOCON!!1!!" at every single conservative they see for about 15 years now, as though "neocon" means "really, REALLY conservative."

But neocons are really just liberals who went to the right on foreign policy, right? And isn't that Kristol to a tee? Or am I mistaken about that?

Posted by: Kensington at November 12, 2012 12:01 PM (znT2j)

57 Obviously if the tax cuts for some expire, they should expire for all. Just hitting the producer level gives us the economic hit, and none of the populist credit.

Posted by: toby928© for TB at November 12, 2012 12:01 PM (evdj2)

58 "he 2012 Federal budget—a word I use very advisedly, since there wasn’t an actual, you know, budget—as enacted, spent a total of $3.59 trillion. Of that amount, total mandatory spending was $2.252 trillion. Discretionary spending, i.e., those things in the federal budget that can be arbitrarily changed without changing federal law, was $1.338 trillion. So, 63% of expenditures is mandatory spending which can’t be touched without changing Federal law.

On the revenue side, when you tote up all the taxes, excises, fees, etc., the Federal government collected $2.469 trillion. So, in 2012, once mandatory entitlements were covered, there was a grand total of $217 billion to fund the entirety of the remaining Federal government. The result was a deficit of $1.1 trillion.

So, to boil it down to the simplest terms, our current revenue is just enough to cover our mandatory spending, and about 1/3 of the defense budget. Everything else is funded solely through deficit spending.

When the Bush-era tax rates are raised in January, we will finally stick it to those rich SOBs and get the money they owe us. That will provide a massive influx of tax revenue in the amount of…uh…$42 billion in 2013. By the Democrats’ estimate. Which means the deficit will be slashed from $1.1 trillion to $1.058 trillion."

From Q and O.

Think about that math for a bit. Taxes be going up folks....get what we want by making Libs pay.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 12:01 PM (tuE4N)

59 since many of Hollywood's top earning get paid in part on how much the movie brings in, perhaps we can start basing those Hollywood types' income tax on the money the film makes, not how much the participants might eventually get. Kind of a Sec409(a) for the Film Industry.

Posted by: mallfly at November 12, 2012 12:01 PM (bJm7W)

60 Do nothing. Let the Bush tax cuts expire. Obama owns it. Let it burn.

Posted by: Marie at November 12, 2012 12:01 PM (P9OJs)

61 What it has is a spending problem.

This is true. In business you always have two choices, #1 increase
revenue, or #2 cut costs.

Those choices are not so limited to those with their own printing
presses. We'll call that choice #3.

Four more years of choice #3 is all we are going to see.

Posted by: Schrödinger's cat at November 12, 2012 12:01 PM (feFL6)

62 I see no reason to try and stand in front of this. I would start by listing the net worth of everyone in Congress, especially folks like Reid and Pelosi. Let's start a discussion about them paying their fair share. Let's also talk about why they don't participate in Obamacare like the rest of us. There's no reason for government employees to have their own special health insurance. Let them use what the rest of us use. Start by pointing out the perks at Congress and talk about how they can pay their fair share. Also, why would we continue to fight against tax increases on the media? We need to target this stuff, instead of looking obstructionist.

Posted by: notsothoreau at November 12, 2012 12:01 PM (5HBd1)

63 Is there any single person on the planet who knows how sequestration works? Seriously, is there one single person who knows?

Well, not everyone is going to start their own business or even wants to.


Yup. It is possible that I could make substantially more money by freelancing. I don't want to do that. I do not want to take on that risk. I don't want to have to do the paperwork to pay both sides of the payroll taxes. I know myself well enough to know that I will not appropriately budget myself for the lean months vs. the good months. I know that I'm trading potential money for possible job security.


Maybe that's a plan of attack, explain directly to employees how the system is designed to make it more advantageous for everyone to be considered a contract worker. We need to get back to Econ 101 stuff, such as that profit is what is left after expenses and that those expenses include taxes too.

You know, we all mocked the person who commented at Kos or DU about how the government can never go broke because it can always print money. When we respond with yeah that worked so great for Weimar Germany and Zimbabwe, sadly, most people will have no clue what we are saying. There really are generations who were never taught core economic principles and now we are paying the price.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Coming not nearly soon enough. at November 12, 2012 12:01 PM (VtjlW)

64 Romney actually ran a fairly excellent campaign. Yes, he was dogged by some stupid issues but overall he still fought hard to increase enthusiasm for him which did work. Whereas the Democrats with help from the MFM played a bunch of scare tactics against single women, latinos, whatever while attempting to suppress enthusiasm for anyone who might vote for Romney. Afterall, Obama could only win through low turnouts and that's what happened.

Posted by: Kaitian at November 12, 2012 12:02 PM (1sDtj)

65 If Republicans cut a deal on this I may find another Party.

Had House Republicans not extended the Bush tax cuts and made Obama own a big tax increase, Romney would have easily beat him.

Republicans will be blamed no matter what happens from here until eternity by the MSM, but if the average American sees a substantial tax increase after Obama and Senate Democrats were reelected, they're going to blame Democrats.

Kristol is an idiot, his advice to the Republican Party has probably done more damage than any other conservative "opinion maker" I can think of. His only interest is getting the US in as many wars in the Middle East as possible.

Posted by: McAdams at November 12, 2012 12:02 PM (aVSeo)

66 Why are we acting like we get a say anymore?

----------

Because we control the House. The Democrats controlled it for 40 years, including those where a GOP won the presidency in a landslide. Nothing, can get done with the House - unless the House cedes it willingly. Yes, at times you will have reduced leverage, but you can trade away certain things without trading away core principles.

It appears we have a pretty weak hand right now, but the fact that the House basically retained its power as is during this election debacle should mean something.

If we are going to trade away tax rates, let's get something really meaningful in return. Since I am very suspicious of that, let's just let go over the fiscal cliff and let the chips fall where they may.

Posted by: SH at November 12, 2012 12:02 PM (gmeXX)

67 #30

That.

If GOP doesn't stand for small government, does it stand for ANYTHING AT ALL?


Posted by: Looking closely at November 12, 2012 12:02 PM (+PDlV)

68 ...increasing taxes hurts the economy. Why in the world would sign on to that?

Speed the collapse, and you speed the subsequent reformation.

Posted by: The KGB at November 12, 2012 12:03 PM (OjrK0)

69 The problem with principle is that it is powerless against a corrupt regime and an equally corrupt majority of the population.

What works is to use the enemies weapons against them. Use the same populist bullshit they use. But use it better.

Tax not income, since the super rich don't have income. They have PROPERTY.

Pass a one-time tax on the property of people with more than 20 million dollars in property and holdings. Tax Soros. Tax Buffet. Tax George Lucas and all the Hollywood Marxists. Take half of their money.

Take half of their foreign holdings, too. No hiding of assets off-shore. Your money is in a Swiss bank. Tough shit, you still owe half of it to the "people."

Income? No, don't tax that at all. That's what drives the economy. Property just sits there, not stimulating anything. The Jay-Zs with their 50 million dollar gold limos are not helping ANYBODY.

Take away some of the ill-gotten booty from the super rich pirates, and maybe shut them up in doing so.

Heck, they got their money by robbing the rest of us anyway.

And they always vote for redistributionists since they know they will only steal from the stupid lowly people who, ick, WORK for their sustenance.

Posted by: Mick McMick at November 12, 2012 12:03 PM (l+MMl)

70 I don't buy the stayed at home line. Not one bit. It is anecdotal, but the surge and enthusiasm, even up to the end, was with RandR. In your hearts, you know they got cheated. Burn the media.

Posted by: Koenig Jojo at November 12, 2012 12:03 PM (Yv6gq)

71 I want a talent tax on journos, athletes, and actors.

You were just lucky to be born talented....you didn't build that. 20% tax.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 12:03 PM (tuE4N)

72 "increasing taxes hurts the economy. Why in the world would sign on to that?"

People who are stuck on stupid (FREE SHIT!) needs to feel the hurt, period.

Posted by: Kaitian at November 12, 2012 12:03 PM (1sDtj)

73 Conservative... ? You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

The political class is not composed of democrats or republicans, liberals or conservatives. They are all statist. The is only the desire to expand power and reduce freedom. But they are true believers. This is what they have to do because it is fair. That it gives them status, power and money is just a gosh darn shame. What has to be done has to be done. This is the smaller part of a rant about the nature of the bureaucracy. Failure is the only option when to big to fail. It proves there was not have enough authority or money. Give them more and everything with work out right ( i.e. another failure, Unexpected!)

Raising taxes does not create more revenue. It suppresses economic activity.

Posted by: Ron at November 12, 2012 12:03 PM (6bVkc)

74 Romney actually ran a fairly excellent campaign.

------

The results suggest otherwise.

Posted by: SH at November 12, 2012 12:04 PM (gmeXX)

75
"Really? The Republican Party is going to fall on its sword to defend a bunch of millionaires, half of whom voted Democratic and half of whom live in Hollywood?"
Interesting, because I see it the other way around. "President Obama is willing to take the nation over a fiscal cliff and make 99% of Americans suffer in order to squeeze a few more dollars out of millionaires?"

Posted by: sydney jane at November 12, 2012 12:04 PM (WDFri)

76 Here's an idea. How about we get some new conservative "thought leaders" on TV.

Fuck Bill Kristol. He got his way when we started two wars in the Islamic world that destroyed the Republican brand.

There are few people more responsible for the state of the Republican Party than Bill Kristol.

Invade the world, invite the world.

Decade long wars that everybody hates plus massive illegal immigration from 3rd world shitholes. That was what Kristol advised us to do. And that's what we did

Kristol is old. Get him off my TV.

He wants new idea? How about new people, too.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at November 12, 2012 12:04 PM (ZPrif)

77 I'm so done with urging the GOP do this or do that.

They'll do whatever they think is in their best interests. And they will probably get that wrong too.

Posted by: runninrebel at November 12, 2012 12:04 PM (J4gw3)

78 If the talking heads insist that repubs stayed home on Election Day, why
the hell were our crowds so much bigger at Romney events than Obama
ones?
***
Romney got out Republicans, but not enough conservatives. Obama got out Democrats.

Republicans have to appeal to conservatives. Mittens didn't - so the Republicans lost even though Obama ran a terrible campaign himself.

Posted by: 18-1 at November 12, 2012 12:04 PM (AUeaU)

79 A good negotiator would give Obama his taxes "on the rich" but get something in return. Problem is Boehner will give Obama his taxes and get nothing in return.

Stupid
Party

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at November 12, 2012 12:04 PM (HDgX3)

80 increasing taxes hurts the economy. Why in the world would sign on to that?

Speed the collapse, and you speed the subsequent reformation.


Posted by: The KGB at November 12, 2012 12:03 PM (OjrK0)





Then we should pay for Sandy Fuck's birth control because trying to keep up with that cost will send us speeding over the fiscal cliff

Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 12, 2012 12:05 PM (1Jaio)

81 Tax Welfare and Food Stamps. They are the source of our economic growth.

Posted by: Butters at November 12, 2012 12:05 PM (NIZHJ)

82 "15 The Romney campaign was not a "disaster in every way". Compared to what - McCain's "non-campaign"?"

McCain got more votes.

Romney ran a campaign that satisfied the preconceptions of the rightwing punditry - avoid social issues, "it's the economy, stupid", fundraise, fundraise, fundraise.

It failed. Disastrously.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 12, 2012 12:05 PM (hjRtO)

83 Once you realize Kristol is a plant and stooge for the other side placed in our camp, all of his advice and recommendations make a lot more sense. Never, never, ever listen to that man. Do the opposite. He should be shunned by all right thinking Cons/Libertarians. Stop and think, nobody betrays the left from inside the way so many do the right, do they? Exactly. Rigged game. All progressives.

Posted by: Koenig Jojo at November 12, 2012 12:05 PM (Yv6gq)

84 Interesting, because I see it the other way around. "President Obama is willing to take the nation over a fiscal cliff and make 99% of Americans suffer in order to squeeze a few more dollars out of millionaires?"

It's a win-win from his POV.

Posted by: toby928© for TB at November 12, 2012 12:05 PM (evdj2)

85 The answer is simple and these two things are not negotiable

1) Go back to Clinton era tax rates
2) Go back to Clinton era spending as a percentage of GDP

Do not waver from this position, go in front of the camera's and say this is the deal.

3) Go back to Clinton era blow jobs in the Oval Office

Sorry couldn't help myself.

Posted by: bobbymike at November 12, 2012 12:05 PM (wJSZn)

86 Yeah GOP...adopt the Dem platform...at your peril.

Posted by: Max Wedge at November 12, 2012 12:05 PM (xoSgg)

87 Because we control the House.
***
The Republicans control the House. Conservatives control nothing.

Posted by: 18-1 at November 12, 2012 12:05 PM (AUeaU)

88 If you are going to go over the cliff, you grab your enemies arm and take them over too.

Tax muni bonds. Tax Hollywood. Tax trust funds.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 12:06 PM (tuE4N)

89 He's dead Jim.

Burn it down.

Posted by: The KGB at November 12, 2012 12:06 PM (OjrK0)

90 I tend to agree with Kristol. The Republicans made their case and they lost. Democrats including Schumer, Biden, etc. multiple times have conceded that they will accept 1 million dollars as the cutoff. Get an entitlement cut in exchange and force them to come back after admitting that 1 million dollars won't raise any revenue.

Obama has been getting away with "millionares" and "billionares" while actually targeting 250k-inaires. Make the Democrats go back and beg for more money, they don't have the guts to go for 250k-ers right now.

I agree raising taxes is stupid but this is where we are. Americans think having a zero-tolerance tax policy is unreasonable.

Posted by: Jay at November 12, 2012 12:06 PM (kIH56)

91 Guy Fawkes was onto something

Posted by: Jones in CO at November 12, 2012 12:06 PM (8sCoq)

92 TIN

Talk Inflation Now

It's coming. It bitch slaps the middle class. Front run it.

Posted by: VA Gator at November 12, 2012 12:06 PM (ZZiTD)

93
Just raises taxes on Hollywood and all democrats who voted for Obama.
Leave the hard working alone.

Posted by: Fresh at November 12, 2012 12:07 PM (O7ksG)

94 Close the Hollywood Loophole and then- afterwards- I promise we'll consider it.

Posted by: t-bird at November 12, 2012 12:07 PM (FcR7P)

95 While we cancel our cable subscriptions and refuse to see Hollywood movies, might I suggest anyone who still subscribes cancels their subscription to "The Weakly Sauce?"

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 12, 2012 12:07 PM (XkWWK)

96 We have a lot of problems selling conservatism


Maybe it would help make the sale if we had a candidate who was a conservative instead of a big government liberal.

Posted by: Larsen E. Whipsnade at November 12, 2012 12:07 PM (6BgmB)

97 I like Obama's idea of a "balanced approach". I think taxes should be raised!

For example, let's tax transfer payment income at about 99% across the board.

Posted by: Tonic Dog at November 12, 2012 12:07 PM (X/+QT)

98 70 I agree completely.

Posted by: NCKate at November 12, 2012 12:07 PM (MsQkt)

99 I don't buy the stayed at home line.

-------------

Well that is because you assume that just because people hate the president, it means they will vote for the other candidate. The Dems made the same mistake in 2004. Romney exceeded my expectations for him, and I grew to like him a lot more than in the primaries. But I never really liked him. And if the base doesn't like your candidate, don't expect him to do well. I'm guessing everyone on this board voted for Romney, regardless of whether they had to hold their nose a little bit. But much of the base may not have. And if you can't get too excited about your candidate good luck persuading others.

There is still much analysis to be done about who voted, who stayed home, etc. But it does appear that Romney was unable to turn out the base sufficiently. Its not the sole blame, but it is one of the pieces.

Posted by: SH at November 12, 2012 12:07 PM (gmeXX)

100 I'll tell ya what: the Repubs pass a spending bill for very specific areas. When the Senates votes to pass and Barky signs into law, then we consider raising rates, say an additional 1 percent on those over $500,000.

To do what Bush 1 did in 1989 or 1990 (sign the tax increases into law, then have the Dems say, well, lookee here, there's nothing to cut) would be imperially stupid. I hope Cantor and Ryan can get Boehner and the squishes like Lindsay Graham to understand that, although I don't think I'll bet on it.

Posted by: mallfly at November 12, 2012 12:08 PM (bJm7W)

101 Tax Hollywood income on an annualized basis with surcharges. $5M for a 1-month film shoot? That's $60M annualized.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at November 12, 2012 12:08 PM (ZPrif)

102 71
I want a talent tax on journos, athletes, and actors.



You were just lucky to be born talented....you didn't build that. 20% tax.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 12:03 PM (tuE4N)



I'm gonna hope that's sarcasm

Posted by: BCochran1981 at November 12, 2012 12:08 PM (da5Wo)

103 I'm all for raising taxes...to give Obama and Democrats the rope with which to hang themselves...

Posted by: David of PA at November 12, 2012 12:08 PM (tPdIW)

104 We need to run through our 1970's British Fabian Socialism phase. Otherwise the young people will not learn that voting is not a hip choice of shoes.

Keep in mind back in the 60's and 70's you had music rock stars writing hit songs about TAXES.

You wanna change the culture?

Make those guys write those songs.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 12:09 PM (tuE4N)

105
The Clinton era tax hikes were not a panacea. They hit when the economy was booming.
Clinton ear tax hikes will kill a flailing economy.

CLINTON ERA TAX HIKES.

Posted by: Fresh at November 12, 2012 12:09 PM (O7ksG)

106 Then we should pay for Sandy Fuck's birth control because trying to
keep up with that cost will send us speeding over the fiscal cliff


Yep. The sooner its overwhelmed, the sooner it collapses. Hunker down, burn it down.

Posted by: The KGB at November 12, 2012 12:09 PM (OjrK0)

107 Kristol and others are playing the Washington game of "now is the time for us all to get along!" It's meaningless. It's the notion of a new (or reelected administration) getting a honeymoon period.

They have to say stuff like this. The alternative is they shut up, and they're not going to do that.

But go ahead, work yourselves into a tizzy listening to these chuckleheads.

Posted by: BurtTC at November 12, 2012 12:09 PM (BeSEI)

108 >>>What votes are we suddenly getting?

None, the election is over. Why compromise now that you lost?

Posted by: Fritz at November 12, 2012 12:10 PM (/ZZCn)

109 But neocons are really just liberals who went to the
right on foreign policy, right? And isn't that Kristol to a tee? Or am I
mistaken about that?


Posted by: Kensington at November 12, 2012 12:01 PM (znT2j)

A neocon is basically a Scoop Jackson Democrat. And yes, that is Kristol to a T.

Posted by: Vic at November 12, 2012 12:10 PM (YdQQY)

110 Romney ran a campaign that satisfied the preconceptions of the rightwing
punditry - avoid social issues, "it's the economy, stupid", fundraise,
fundraise, fundraise.

***
The Republicans decided to run an echo instead of a choice.

It was like choosing Bush 41 in 1980.

And now we will all pay the price.

Posted by: 18-1 at November 12, 2012 12:10 PM (AUeaU)

111 " Tax Hollywood income on an annualized basis with surcharges. $5M for a 1-month film shoot? That's $60M annualized."

Shoot in Canada? Still sell your product in America...pay up.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 12:10 PM (tuE4N)

112 I'm confused. Has everyone forgotten about the Bush
Tax Cuts?

Posted by: Kaitian


That's was this post is about. DrewM just wrote, "In the meantime, I remain "For Sequestration"."

People do realize they are expiring December 31, 2012? The
Democrats knows this and they want it to lapse so that they can fund
more of their stupid bullshit while running 1.5 trillion dollar deficits
every year.



The Dem's expressed strategy is to hold military cuts over keeping the lower brackets' rates and raising the upper brackets' rates.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at November 12, 2012 12:10 PM (SX6wc)

113 How much revenue would be gained if we charged admission to Ms. Fluke's va-jay-jay?

Posted by: Tonic Dog at November 12, 2012 12:11 PM (X/+QT)

114 And how'd that Fabian Socialism "phase" work out for the Brits? Cause the "phase" seems to have lasted half a century.

Socialism isn't a "phase" it's a permanent change. The ratchet effect in action.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at November 12, 2012 12:11 PM (ZPrif)

115 "Then we should pay for Sandy Fuck's birth control because trying to keep
up with that cost will send us speeding over the fiscal cliff"

==========

It's true; I go through A LOT of birth control.

Because I'm a SLUT! WHEE!

Posted by: Sandra Fluke at November 12, 2012 12:11 PM (znT2j)

116
Fuk me. Just saw the SCOAMTT on my tv screen for the first time since doom set in.
Anyhoo, the economy will still be the economy regardless of what people try to say it is, make it, tweak it, change it into.
Without knowing it for the mega-faceted engine that it is, attempted manipulations are, shall I say, stupid.

Posted by: Justamom at November 12, 2012 12:11 PM (Sptt8)

117 "what we should do...talk to average people." When you do, you will find that "average people" hate the rich and think their tax rates should be raised (and maybe all their "excess" wealth should be confiscated outright.) You will find that "average people" blame the rich for the financial panic, high unemployment and lower standard of living for the non-rich.

You will find that "average people" are economically illiterate. This is a natural result of our sh!tty schools, left-leaning and stupid teachers, and pop culture that demonizes business and wealth.

So forget about talking to "average people." Nothing will change until the whole system collapses.

Posted by: gp at November 12, 2012 12:11 PM (+Jpqc)

118 If they would invest more money in high speed rail.

Posted by: Butters at November 12, 2012 12:11 PM (NIZHJ)

119 It can not be said enough. We do not have a tax problem. We have a spending problem.


And Democrats have NEVER balanced a budget by raising taxes. They always increase spending by more than they raise taxes.

Posted by: Vic at November 12, 2012 12:12 PM (YdQQY)

120
Maybe it would help make the sale if we had a candidate who was a conservative instead of a big government liberal.
***
The last time a liberal/moderate Republican won the white house - 1972.

The last time a conservative Republican lost a presidential election - 1964.

And yet the Republicans followed McCain with Mittens.

BRILLIANT!

Posted by: 18-1 at November 12, 2012 12:12 PM (AUeaU)

121 99 -

I saw a number of names here on election night, people who haven't been around since Primary season.

Maybe the current regulars all voted, but there are some long-standing AoSHQers who stayed home. I guarantee it.

Posted by: BurtTC at November 12, 2012 12:12 PM (BeSEI)

122 You won't get Margaret Thatcher until you have a solid 8 years of horrible Fabian socialism.

We have to let the educated libs who claim economies soar when taxes are high to learn something.

Think of it like us learning not to invade Muslim countries unless absolutely necessary.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 12:12 PM (tuE4N)

123 Socialism isn't a "phase" it's a permanent change.

At least until you run out of money...

Posted by: Armando at November 12, 2012 12:12 PM (5iuEW)

124 "I've been saying this for a year. Give the Dems their taxes on the rich. But make rich = $1M. They could have done this and gotten something in return like Keystone. And it would have taken away the big Dem talking point.

So yes Bill, you're right. But about a year too late."

This. I don't think Republicans should fall on their swords for millionaires.

Posted by: Jay at November 12, 2012 12:12 PM (kIH56)

125 114
And how'd that Fabian Socialism "phase" work out for the Brits? Cause the "phase" seems to have lasted half a century.



Socialism isn't a "phase" it's a permanent change. The ratchet effect in action.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at November 12, 2012 12:11 PM (ZPrif)

THIS. Once begun socialism can stumble along for a long, long time. It takes a long time to destroy a great nation; the Brits just happen to be further along that curve than we are.

Posted by: joncelli at November 12, 2012 12:13 PM (RD7QR)

126 I like Obama's idea of a "balanced approach".

Me, too. You raised spending by $5 trillion? Ok, now you have to cut spending by $5 trillion.

Posted by: t-bird at November 12, 2012 12:13 PM (FcR7P)

127 Gotta agree.

Marginal tax rates on top
earners are already over 40% in many parts of the country. At what point
are tax rates high enough for "the rich"? Enough already.

More
to the point, if the GOP doesn't stand up to higher taxes/lower
spending, then its completely worthless as a party. What the hell
happened to "limited government"?

If that's not a plank (correct THE plank) of the GOP, I'm done with it.




Posted by: Looking closely at November 12, 2012 11:54 AM (+PDlV)

You don't raise the rates...you zap the deductions and loopholes that people who aren't wealthy enough to hire snazzy tax lawyers and accountants can't afford, but that people like Warren Leftwing Fuckhead Buffet can afford.

Posted by: davidinvirginia at November 12, 2012 12:13 PM (qEkGZ)

128 121 -

I mean I saw these people show up to gloat. Not to wail and moan and gnash teeth like the rest of us.

Posted by: BurtTC at November 12, 2012 12:13 PM (BeSEI)

129 Here's an idea:

Arrange meetings between black church leaders and very articulate and persuasive GOP representatives. Just groups of four people meeting over lunch. Convince these black church leaders that conservative policies will lead to a more prosperous future for their church attendees, the wider community and the nation as a whole.

Has that ever been done?

Posted by: Serious Cat at November 12, 2012 12:13 PM (UypUQ)

130 Nuke and pave Sandra Flucks woman parts.

Posted by: Butters at November 12, 2012 12:13 PM (NIZHJ)

131
F*ck the Establishment GOP!

Not constructive, but felt good.

Posted by: meh at November 12, 2012 12:13 PM (W2qJe)

132 Also the "average" person is getting dumber and dumber.
I'm sure we'll get a huge boost in our engineer population from all the Somalis dumbfucks we are letting in.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at November 12, 2012 12:13 PM (ZPrif)

133 Let's let the executive committee of the Peoples Front of Judea draft up some hard-hittingResolutions ...

Posted by: Count de Monet at November 12, 2012 12:14 PM (BAS5M)

134 6 Fuck yeah. let's tax the super rich at 90%. Matt Damon, Beyonce, Harvey Weinstein, Jay Leno- time to pony up.
Posted by: Jones in CO at November 12, 2012 11:54 AM (8sCoq)

As Matt Damon said, he doesn't mind paying a little more.

Good. How about a LOT more, Matt? Like 'all of it'. Oh, and your wealth too. Not fair that you have worked partial years for your entire career and now have millions that average can never earn.

It's all about fairness, right?

Posted by: blindside at November 12, 2012 12:14 PM (x7g7t)

135
Here is my suggestion: Get rid of old, white guy strategists and pundits like Bill Kristol and George Will.

Also, don't allow old, white guy elected pols like McCain, McConnell, Boehneretc to even appear on the TV anymore. Instead use the Young Gun typeslike Rubio, Ryan and Kelly Ayotte and Susan Martinez. The public will thensee a new fresher face of theRepub party.

Posted by: AJ Lynch at November 12, 2012 12:14 PM (ASPsd)

136 @133: SPLITTER!

Posted by: SARDiver at November 12, 2012 12:14 PM (h25fc)

137 My post was off-topic.

Posted by: Serious Cat at November 12, 2012 12:14 PM (UypUQ)

138 Sub Mitt by Mark Steyn- bitly.com/SQaEUB


"In New Hampshire we didn’t have any senate races, but the same
phenomenon was observable downticket, including for both GOP House
seats. Statewide, Charlie Bass, who’s a classic RINO squish, and Frank
Guinta, who isn’t, drew about six per cent fewer votes than Mitt, and
both lost. Regardless of what kind of Republican you are, the electorate
was antipathetic to you.

In other words, whatever the weaknesses of a supposedly weak
candidate, the party was weaker. With hindsight, that first debate
performance appears to have made Mitt sufficiently likeable for a narrow
slice of voters to overlook the R after his name. The candidate was
less of a problem than the Republican brand."

Posted by: 80sBaby at November 12, 2012 12:14 PM (YjDyJ)

139 Here's an idea, rescind Affordable Care Act in its entirety or spending in excess of income ceases at 16T.

Posted by: Whatev at November 12, 2012 12:14 PM (2t6Gz)

140 I read some where that if we took every penny from every millionaire, we could run the US Govt for 90 days

Posted by: Jones in CO at November 12, 2012 12:14 PM (8sCoq)

141 A neocon also doesn't want any military cuts. I would rather not start the cuts there either, but with our spending levels, we must cut from everything. No sacred cows. Maybe we should just bring every troop home and port every ship. Leave Europe to Germany and Russia. Let South Korea and Japan deal with China. This is not my preferred route, but we must cut spending.

Posted by: SH at November 12, 2012 12:15 PM (gmeXX)

142 "To do what Bush 1 did in 1989 or 1990...would
be imperially stupid. "

==========

HELLO!

Posted by: John Boehner and Lindsay Graham Suddenly Barge Through the Door at November 12, 2012 12:15 PM (znT2j)

143 Look Vic, you really going to cut spending by one trillion dollars?

LOL.

That's not possible. There will be new taxes. Mitt was going to try tax reform, oil and gas, and deregulation.

Obama won't do that, so its over.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 12:15 PM (tuE4N)

144 @135: You forgot Jindal. Other than that, spot on.


Let it burn.

Posted by: SARDiver at November 12, 2012 12:15 PM (h25fc)

145 Margaret Thatcher didn't change jack shit about the permanent direction of Britain. She briefly paused the socialist onslaught.

Full socialism + a few years of Margaret Thatcher-type + back to 20 years of hard-core leftism.

Not a trade worth making.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at November 12, 2012 12:16 PM (ZPrif)

146 Dear GOP. Please tax me some more. I could use an incentive to accelerate my expatriation schedule.

Posted by: SpongeBob Saget at November 12, 2012 12:16 PM (SDkq3)

147 In last nights Evening Open Thread (#14 Palandine had an idea for a Big Bird card.

Here is a link to one for everyone to share on Facebook, Twitter, e-mail, post, and spread around. You can download it to your computer and print them to hand out to the unemployed Lefties in your life.

http://tinypic.com/r/2h5l55t/6

I will post this again in later threads as well.

Posted by: Redman Bluesate at November 12, 2012 12:16 PM (sRIFP)

148 Link again

http://tinypic.com/r/2h5l55t/6

Posted by: Redman Bluestate at November 12, 2012 12:17 PM (sRIFP)

149 Let's put a spit shine on the rims of this jalopy because, Compromise!

Posted by: Fritz at November 12, 2012 12:17 PM (/ZZCn)

150 @ 129

http://fearofablackrepublican.com/

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 12:17 PM (tuE4N)

151 >>>"Really? The Republican Party is going to fall on its sword to defend a
bunch of millionaires, half of whom voted Democratic and half of whom
live in Hollywood?"

We should, mostly because we're for all Americans rather than just our little slice of them. Unlike Dems. But really, those days are past.

Posted by: uterus cannon at November 12, 2012 12:17 PM (RLTt1)

152 I will say this regarding the GOP and taxes.

Soaking the rich does nothing for revenues and actually hurts the economy, but considering we fight this ridiculous caricature every election and we had a banker as our nominee, Romney should have done something populist and intellectually dishonest like propose a huge tax increase on billionaires.

It would have probably hit about 20 people, all of them likely Obama bundlers and been completely meaningless, but it would have swung a few dumb voters who were unhappy with the economy but weren't crazy about Romney. Everytime Obama opened that line, Romney could have said he plans to make sure Warren Buffet pays way more than his secretary.

Posted by: McAdams at November 12, 2012 12:17 PM (aVSeo)

153 Until we see a BUDGET that tells us exactly where all of this "revenue" is going to go, I say "Screw You".

They keep saying that we need all of this extra money to pay for all of these programs - well, just what, exactly, is all of this money paying FOR?

When I go to the grocery store, the prices are there for me to see. I know how much money I have to spend, and I make my purchases accordingly. If I don't have enough money that week, then the expensive cut of meat stays at the store, and we eat hamburger.

Why aren't people willing to tell the government that they have to do the same thing?

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at November 12, 2012 12:17 PM (P6H+d)

154 Dear Comrades,

Let it burn.


Posted by: Comrade Trainer at November 12, 2012 12:17 PM (QbdUW)

155 The Republicans offered a plan that would eliminate deductions, reduce the tax rates, and actually increase revenue. The Senate Dems shot it down.


They do not want increased revenue. Barky even said that. He wanted the evil rich to pay more even if it reduced revenue.

Posted by: Vic at November 12, 2012 12:18 PM (YdQQY)

156 We have no power or representation in government anymore. They're going to do what they want no matter what we say.

Maybe the reason why we didn't win the senate or make any gains in the House is because the repub leadership has given the average voter the impression that there's really no difference between the parties.

Secede. Let THEM burn.

Posted by: Soona at November 12, 2012 12:18 PM (00XQo)

157 A neocon also doesn't want any military cuts. I would rather not start the cuts there either, but with our spending levels, we must cut from everything. No sacred cows. Maybe we should just bring every troop home and port every ship. Leave Europe to Germany and Russia. Let South Korea and Japan deal with China. This is not my preferred route, but we must cut spending.
Posted by: SH at November 12, 2012 12:15 PM (gmeXX)


You people have to get over this idea that our overseas deployments are only to protect Europe of Japan. Most of our bases are not ( South Korea not included ) there to really protect anyone or any country but act TO OUR BENEFIT as FORWARD OPERATING BASES that without which our Military would be severely crippled. And our Military Budget has already had a hatchet taken it and this sequestration is just another BLIND hatched chop that could cripple it for ages to come. The concept of a Fortress America was obsolete by WW2 and is still today.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at November 12, 2012 12:18 PM (79ueO)

158 Actually, for all out pooh-poohing of "Class Warfare", it is actually going on...The Dems attack the Middle Class under the flag of the poor (but really on behalf of the rich) and the GOP defend the rich under the flag of the Middle Class (but really on behalf of the rich).

The Rich, meanwhile make sure that the government gets bigger and bigger and funnels profits to them.

Screw them. Raise takes on everyone making more than $250,000--slightly more than my household income BTW .

The Class War is on my Middle Class compatriots! Time we join the battle!!

Posted by: Kasper Hauser at November 12, 2012 12:19 PM (7x9pP)

159 Spending bill start in the house, where the public mandated Republicans take charge.

Obama has a mandate to not murder people, like Romney does. To lower unemployment. To create jobs. To uphold Roe v. Wade.

Obama never got a mandate to raise taxes on all of us (via increased prices, higher health insurance, 0% interest on savings, debasement of our currency)

Until the unicorns arrive (on back order for four years), Obama has no mandate.

Posted by: Illini bill at November 12, 2012 12:19 PM (iogmr)

160 @145

OK, buddy, you give it your best shot.

I will watch on the sidelines.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 12:19 PM (tuE4N)

161
The congress sets the tax code. Not the president.

Lets simplifiy the tax code to get more revenue. Tax hikes should be OFF the table.

Posted by: Fresh at November 12, 2012 12:19 PM (O7ksG)

162 "The last time a liberal/moderate Republican won the white house - 1972.

The last time a conservative Republican lost a presidential election - 1964."

==========

*cough*

Posted by: George W. Bush at November 12, 2012 12:19 PM (znT2j)

163 Rush makes a great point:

Do the Democrats, whenever they lose elections, ever discuss abandoning their core principles?

NO. They double down and blame the stupidity of the electorate and make excuses.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 12, 2012 12:19 PM (XkWWK)

164 Hey, at this point I don't see a problem with eating the rich.

Most of the fuckers support Obama.

The problem is 'the rich' to a Democrat means an up-and-coming entrepeneur.

They don't like can-do people. They need to die for Communism to come about.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 12, 2012 12:19 PM (u5ozF)

165 The only way you are going to convince any of the 53% that voted for Obama to change their minds it to make it hurt for them. Better to do that sooner than later. Let the Bush cuts expire on everyone, but really hit the blue-states the worst with the loss of the mortgage deduction on high-value homes, increased taxes on Hollywood profits, and anything else you can target towards where more rich liberals prosper.

Once they start hurting you will be surprised how quickly they come around to our way of thinking. Until then, the GOP can talk all they want. Fantasize about grand deals all they want. Dream of convincing hispanics to vote for them all they want.

Hurt them in the pocketbook NOW, not later. Then they'll work with us.

Posted by: TRO at November 12, 2012 12:20 PM (ad/F8)

166 Maybe the reason why we didn't win the senate or make any gains in the House is because the repub leadership has given the average voter the impression that there's really no difference between the parties.


This +1000

Posted by: Larsen E. Whipsnade at November 12, 2012 12:20 PM (6BgmB)

167 BTW, that 250K they keep talking about is "household income" not individual.

Posted by: Vic at November 12, 2012 12:21 PM (YdQQY)

168 New sure I am clear on DrewM's position on this subject. Can someone clarify?

Posted by: AndrewsDad at November 12, 2012 12:21 PM (C2//T)

169 How about a special tax on the lawyers take from lawsuits? Trial lawyers are all Dems.
Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 11:56 AM (tuE4N)

This would be PERFECT. There is a general HATE of trial lawyers. Show some of the big money they have charged and the rewards they reap - 10s of millions of dollars while the people who brought the suit get 10s of dollars.

People hate that shit. Put it in a bill, they demagogue the Democrats to death. Bring up one sad story after another about people who were screwed by these trial lawyers, and businesses who were screwed by them.

The 'base' of Democrat and liberal power is the lawyers. Time to go after them.

Posted by: blindside at November 12, 2012 12:21 PM (x7g7t)

170 32




Normal

0

Yeah love the hard ASCII breaks...not...

Posted by: jeanne, in full escapist mode at November 12, 2012 12:21 PM (GdalM)

171 "In last nights Evening Open Thread (#14 Palandine had an idea for a Big Bird card.



http://tinypic.com/r/2h5l55t/6"

==========

Outstanding! I will use this if the opportunity ever presents itself. Unfortunately I expect to lose MY job before any of the Obots lose theirs.

Posted by: Kensington at November 12, 2012 12:21 PM (znT2j)

172 "The congress sets the tax code. Not the president.

Lets simplifiy the tax code to get more revenue. Tax hikes should be OFF the table."

You have less than 2 months to do this. Good luck!

And then Obama will say NO, stop obstructing, and then we get blamed.

Seriously, if they had a viable tax reform in hand right now, then show it.
They don't becuase they want to negotiate it. (The GOP.)

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 12:21 PM (tuE4N)

173 We should definitely raise taxes. The free shit supply chain must keep flowing. Millions of people who refuse to work are counting on you.

Posted by: Butters at November 12, 2012 12:22 PM (NIZHJ)

174 sexypig is just a troll, fuck you buddy, you don't know jackshit about history.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at November 12, 2012 12:22 PM (ZPrif)

175 164 Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 12, 2012 12:19 PM (u5ozF)

If at all possible, we should do business as cash-only transactions.

"Hey, what happened to all our tax income?" I had relatives who were cabbies and lived VERY well. My mother used to warn them that they'd regret it when they retired because they would have no Social Security. But the way I see it, they gambled and won on that score.

STARVE THE PIG. LET IT BURN.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 12, 2012 12:22 PM (XkWWK)

176 171 "In last nights Evening Open Thread (#14 Palandine had an idea for a Big Bird card.



http://tinypic.com/r/2h5l55t/6"
==========

Outstanding! I will use this if the opportunity ever presents itself. Unfortunately I expect to lose MY job before any of the Obots lose theirs.

Thank you! More to come.

Posted by: Redman Bluestate at November 12, 2012 12:22 PM (sRIFP)

177 America gang banged. Thank goodness for Sandra Fluke and free protection.

Posted by: gracepmc at November 12, 2012 12:22 PM (rznx3)

178 I still don't get how these dumb fucks got rolled into agreeing that the military should shoulder 50% of the budget cuts.

Posted by: Waterhouse at November 12, 2012 12:24 PM (XMaKL)

179 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a malignant traitor.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 12, 2012 12:24 PM (8y9MW)

180 *cough*


Posted by: George W. Bush at November 12, 2012 12:19 PM (znT2j)
***In 1988 Bush 41 ran as Reagan term 3. In 1992 he ran on "we really needed to increase those taxes."

Posted by: 18-1 at November 12, 2012 12:24 PM (AUeaU)

181 'Ohioans’ food stamp aid to be reduced'

Still got my Obamapho though.

Posted by: RWC at November 12, 2012 12:24 PM (fWAjv)

182 "It's important that we focus on the disaster that the Romney campaign was in every way"

Pay no attention to the fact that all the alternatives were even more disastrous.

Posted by: The rest of the field at November 12, 2012 12:24 PM (A+/8k)

183 165 Hurt them in the pocketbook NOW, not later. Then they'll work with us.
Posted by: TRO at November 12, 2012 12:20 PM (ad/F


They'll still blame it all on Bush and the evil rich. 50 years of blacks living in squalor, misery and violence has only increased their zeal for voting Democrat.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 12, 2012 12:24 PM (XkWWK)

184 For my part, I'm all the way on the national sales tax train.

Maybe if someone had a blog, they could have a post explaining why they think any income tax at all is inherently tyrannical.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 12, 2012 12:25 PM (8y9MW)

185
"It's atrocious economics"


Well, I'm tired of that being a theoretical point that most dismiss. Bring on the suffering.

The only way to defeat leftists is to encourage them te implode.

Posted by: the lone lemon at November 12, 2012 12:25 PM (xXhWA)

186 I still don't get how these dumb fucks got rolled into agreeing that the military should shoulder 50% of the budget cuts.
____
/cries

Posted by: John Boehner at November 12, 2012 12:25 PM (AUeaU)

187 I still don't get how these dumb fucks got rolled into agreeing that the military should shoulder 50% of the budget cuts.
Posted by: Waterhouse at November 12, 2012 12:24 PM (XMaKL)

Because they are dumb fucks

Posted by: Nevergiveup at November 12, 2012 12:25 PM (79ueO)

188 Most of the fuckers support Obama.



The problem is 'the rich' to a Democrat means an up-and-coming entrepeneur.



They don't like can-do people. They need to die for Communism to come about. Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk


Aye. There's the rub; Voting to 'Stick it to dah rich!' gives the government a large club that the truly wealthy use to fend off competition and to secure their lots.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at November 12, 2012 12:26 PM (SX6wc)

189 I can't stand Bill Kyrstal, they only reason he claims to be republican is that republicans fought the wars he wanted to fight. Of course Krystal always had something else to do instead of participate in those wars. On everything else he's left of center.


I for one though am tired of defending tax cuts for millionaires even though I think republicans are right to do so economically. It isn't the 3.5% rate hike that will kill the economy though it won't help. It's the raise in captial gains to 30% that will put us back in recession.


Everybody fails to mention that Clintons booming economy happened after he cut captial gains by 29%, before that it was just a meh, average recovery after a mild recession.

Posted by: robtr at November 12, 2012 12:26 PM (rTgOf)

190 178
I still don't get how these dumb fucks got rolled into agreeing that the military should shoulder 50% of the budget cuts.


Posted by: Waterhouse at November 12, 2012 12:24 PM (XMaKL)


The answer is in your question......

Posted by: Tami at November 12, 2012 12:26 PM (X6akg)

191 If we're ever going to win another election, I think its time that the GOP starts taking vagina issues seriously. Demographically, half of the electorate have vaginas and we continue to ignore them at our peril.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at November 12, 2012 12:26 PM (QKKT0)

192 I still don't get how these dumb fucks got rolled into agreeing that the military should shoulder 50% of the budget cuts.


Posted by: Waterhouse at November 12, 2012 12:24 PM (XMaKL)

Another famous Boner deal.

Posted by: Vic at November 12, 2012 12:27 PM (YdQQY)

193 "***In 1988 Bush 41 ran as Reagan term 3. In 1992 he ran on "we really needed to increase those taxes.""
==========

What's that got to do with me?

Posted by: George W. Bush, You Really Don't Remember ME? at November 12, 2012 12:27 PM (znT2j)

194 9-9-9?

Posted by: Herm Cain at November 12, 2012 12:27 PM (hjRtO)

195 This is going swimmingly! Couldn't have planned it better, myself!

Posted by: Zombie Karl Marx at November 12, 2012 12:28 PM (vbh31)

196 Everyone, please, listen up. Last Tues. the United States of America in the form that it was since the Constitution was ratified has ceased to exist. So many of us were more correct on that than I really want to contemplate. This is awful. Get used to awful.

The virus innoculated into this nation's system during Wilson's term has taken over. Let's face it. In order for the host (the US Constitution) to survive, there's going to have to be amputations. Start getting used to the idea.

Posted by: Soona at November 12, 2012 12:28 PM (00XQo)

197 It is more important that taxes be raised on the rich for the sake of fairness than it is that poor people have jobs.

Posted by: Barky O'Genius at November 12, 2012 12:28 PM (QKKT0)

198 In 2004 Bush ran on the WoT, social issues, and taxes.

He ran as a conservative.

Posted by: 18-1 at November 12, 2012 12:28 PM (AUeaU)

199 "its atrocious economics"

If you ever try to reason with a lib, that's all the know and they think its AWESOME economics.

I think we are beyond reasoning now.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 12:28 PM (tuE4N)

200 What we need is an Art V convention that will set the income tax at a flat 10% on ALL income with no deductions and no credits.


And limit spending to no more than the taxes collected during the previous year unless there is a declared war.

Posted by: Vic at November 12, 2012 12:29 PM (YdQQY)

201 Hey GOP!
Take a look at us here in CA for an idea of how the squishy RINO stuff is working out. The handful of remaining squishy R's have been voted out (cuz everything's been all their faults you know) and we now have our blessed utopian Democratic super-majority. We'll show you how tax and spend really works if you and the rest of the country are ready to watch.

Posted by: Clutch Cargo at November 12, 2012 12:30 PM (Qxdfp)

202 I also agree with the notion that the only way America is going to get back to reality is if they stop hearing about liberalism in the abstract and instead get it shoved down their throat good and hard.

If House Republicans cut some deal where only millionaires get hit, 99% of the electorate is going to think Obamanomics works since it didn't hurt them.

Posted by: McAdams at November 12, 2012 12:30 PM (aVSeo)

203 "If we're ever going to win another election, I think its time that the GOP starts taking vagina issues seriously. Demographically, half of the electorate have vaginas and we continue to ignore them at our peril."

I have been vigilant to study the vagina on-line whenever possible. There are numerous websites where they have many videos you can use to learn about them.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 12:30 PM (tuE4N)

204 121 99- I saw a number of names here on election night, people who haven't been around since Primary season. Maybe the current regulars all voted, but there are some long-standing AoSHQers who stayed home. I guarantee it.

As long as people refuse to participate, the status quo will continue. These petulant and destructive attempts to teach "the Establishment" a lesson are unlikely to change anything. Politicians pay little heed to those who refuse to lift a finger to attempt to change their government.

Posted by: 80sBaby at November 12, 2012 12:30 PM (YjDyJ)

205 "And limit spending to no more than the taxes collected during the previous year unless there is a declared war."

The Swiss have something like that. We needed it a long time ago.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 12, 2012 12:31 PM (tuE4N)

206 "Leave Europe to Germany and Russia. Let South Korea and Japan deal with China."

Brilliant and original!

Posted by: uncleJoeandAdolf at November 12, 2012 12:31 PM (WR5xI)

207 New thread

Posted by: weft cut-loop at November 12, 2012 12:32 PM (SX6wc)

208 They are "Officially" ending the odd even gas rationing thing as of 6PM today in NJ. No matter, no one was paying attention to it anyway for the last 5 days as things got better

Posted by: Nevergiveup at November 12, 2012 12:32 PM (79ueO)

209 194 9-9-9?

No, 6-6-6.

Posted by: Niac Namreh at November 12, 2012 12:32 PM (Qxdfp)

210 Here's a reminder for the republican party, the base remembers when you raise taxes. There is a way to pin this onto the Dems. Pass legislation that extends the tax rates for one year to allow for a "Grand Bargain" or for the appearance of a Grand Bargain. Let Obama and the Senate Dems veto this. If not, the rates go up for everyone. Obama will blame this on the GOP and the media will follow. But the base will remember. Raising taxes on any group now will surely backfire on the GOP. Its not good policy, nor good politics. I'm all for trading politics for policy or policy for politics, but not just ceding both.

Posted by: SH at November 12, 2012 12:33 PM (gmeXX)

211 We will NEVER out spend, out amnesty, or out pander the Democrats. That will only succeed in entrenching their bad ideas further.
At this point in the battle for the American electorate, we need to call in a strike that is "danger close".
Let the sequestration happen, let ALL the Bush tax cuts expire, and sit back and watch the Democrats explain why those millions of Obama voters are out of work and/or back on the Federal tax rolls. Follow that up with a proposal for a surtax on "windfall income" like movie and concert salaries. Bring the battle to the enemy.

Posted by: Chris at November 12, 2012 12:33 PM (/l7+K)

212 So we wait for Obama to put forth a plan. Assuming he does...
The line of attack must be that all the 'cuts' are all really increases in spending.
"We're spending X on program Y. In Washington the President is suggesting that we spend 2% more on X and he calls it a cut. In America the people call it an increase. They also call it Bullshit."

Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at November 12, 2012 12:34 PM (SO2Q8)

213
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another

Like when "another" is batshit crazy I would guess


Posted by: T.Hunter at November 12, 2012 12:34 PM (EZl54)

214 As long as people refuse to participate, the status quo will continue.
***
Romney was chosen as the leader. He failed to get 51% of the electorate to follow him. He failed - and those who chose him failed.

And we will continue to fail as long as the same people who have now made the same mistake two elections in a row continue to make the same decisions.

How many elections are we going to throw away on McRomneys?

Posted by: 18-1 at November 12, 2012 12:35 PM (AUeaU)

215 "When you do, you will find that "average people" hate the rich and think their tax rates should be raised (and maybe all their "excess" wealth should be confiscated outright.) You will find that "average people" blame the rich for the financial panic, high unemployment and lower standard of living for the non-rich."

Drew, I agree that this outreach to the average people has to be part of the R plan going forward, but it's only a small part of the equation. I hate to say it because a host of factors played into the losses. But Ido now believe that when you have one party giving fish away by the boatload to their favored friends and urging others to vote for them and become one of their favored friends, well...it's a tough sell toget someone to vote for you based on yourshowing them how to fish instead.

Posted by: RM at November 12, 2012 12:35 PM (TRsME)

216 191 If we're ever going to win another election, I think its time that the GOP starts taking vagina issues seriously. Demographically, half of the electorate have vaginas and we continue to ignore them at our peril.
---
I've never ignored a single vagina that i've ever met.

Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at November 12, 2012 12:35 PM (SO2Q8)

217 8 out of the 10 riches counties in the United States voted overwhelmingly for Obama. Lets find out who those people are and tax the shit out of them.
Posted by: Matt at November 12, 2012 11:58 AM (c4UpU)

I'm for this. Starve the beast. At least they won't have as much money to throw at us next election. I'm tired of picking hills to die on and getting shot in the back.

Posted by: JollyRoger at November 12, 2012 12:35 PM (t06LC)

218 The time to be blamed is now.

Posted by: edj at November 12, 2012 12:35 PM (+QKfp)

219 If at all possible, we should do business as cash-only transactions.


It's rapidly becoming almost impossible to do that legally. For example, there's a big sign up at my local Ed McKay explaining how it's now the law in NC that any cash payout over $10 must be done by check and cannot be paid in cash. Your choices are check or store credit, nothing else. Oh and you must show official government id in order to make a trade. Isn't is Alabama, maybe Arkansas, that was going to ban cash transactions for scrap metal in order to have a paper trail to follow the copper?

Yeah, that whole legal tender for all debts public and private thing is becoming more and more theoretical every day.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Coming not nearly soon enough. at November 12, 2012 12:35 PM (VtjlW)

220 Hey, Boss, I just bought a big house, so you gotta balance that out by doubling my salary.

Posted by: t-bird at November 12, 2012 12:37 PM (FcR7P)

221 Republicans could use this entire situation for some serious political juijitsu if they so chose. If raising taxes is a good idea then lets go full bore commie and tax property (25% annually) and earnings (75%) punitively for those making over $1MM a year. Introduce it in the House and let the Dems vote it down. Then introduce it again - and let the Dems vote it down. Rinse and repeat.

Go after their meme strength by forcing them to defend said meme. That tax increases are fabulous until they aren't. Go on offense for once - we lose because we're always on trying to defend the status quo. However, that would require that Boehner had some stones and foresight, which to date have been blatantly missing.

Posted by: volfan at November 12, 2012 12:37 PM (RTb48)

222 I'd support a 4% across the board tax hike.I'd like to see the moocher class have to part with some of their cash.

Posted by: JustLikeDavidHasselhoff at November 12, 2012 12:38 PM (71iUa)

223 What we need is an Art V convention that will set the income tax at a flat 10% on ALL income with no deductions and no credits.And limit spending to no more than the taxes collected during the previous year unless there is a declared war.
Posted by: Vic at November 12, 2012 12:29 PM (YdQQY)


-------------------------------------------


Good luck with that. Too much of the electorate have no idea what that is or even care. FREE SHIT!

There's a growing number of states that get it, though. The power is in the states. We need to convince those repub governors to either ignore DC or separate from DC.

Ignore the liberal rulings of fed courts too. He didn't know what he did, but Barky gave us that precedent.

Posted by: Soona at November 12, 2012 12:38 PM (00XQo)

224 Take a look at us here in CA for an idea of how the
squishy RINO stuff is working out. The handful of remaining squishy R's
have been voted out (cuz everything's been all their faults you
know) and we now have our blessed utopian Democratic super-majority.
We'll show you how tax and spend really works if you and the rest of the
country are ready to watch.


Posted by: Clutch Cargo at November 12, 2012 12:30 PM (Qxdfp)



The same thing happened in Illinois. There's not enough Republicans to do anything and it's still their fault. Or Blago but he doesn't seem to have belonged to any political party

Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 12, 2012 12:38 PM (1Jaio)

225 Serious question: Are the GOP 'leaders' out of step with us OR are we out of step with the rest of the people who voted that leadership in?

How much of a minority are 'we' compared to the rest that voted the same as us?

Related question: who are the deus ex machina god-like candidates coming up through party of Stupid's ranks which will save us?

Posted by: Tonic Dog at November 12, 2012 12:39 PM (X/+QT)

226 All right folks. I've had enough bitching and whining. My own and yours. You want to let it burn? Fuck You! I and my family still live here, and even if I wanted to,and I don't, I couldn't afford to leave. My kids deserve a chance at what only this country can truly offer. That being a chance to have it better than I ever did or could make it. You don't like the way the country is going? Well I don't either. But after sitting and moaning for a day and a half I finally looked at my kids and realized just how pathetically selfish I was being. They need me, just like a lot of Y'alls need you, to quit bitching and get on with the work of kicking the SOB in the White House to the curb. It's not going to be easy to change the direction this country is heading, but I'm damn sure going to try! So man up and do what you KNOW is right.

Posted by: joethefatman™ (@joethefatman1) at November 12, 2012 12:40 PM (MnSla)

227 Starve the beast? How do you do that when the EPA is paying lawyers/out-side groups to sue the EPA - and no-body cares?! FFS!

If the mouth-breathing citizens of the fine country don't care about that type of behavior.....

Posted by: Tonic Dog at November 12, 2012 12:41 PM (X/+QT)

228 So...if you're a conservative, and if you believe in small government and balanced budsgets...and if you don't like raising taxes.
Where do you start cutting the budget? Overseas military bases? Eliminate medicare and social security? Eliminate food stamps and welfare? Eliminate federal funding ofpublic schools? Wherewould YOU start? Do you slash the DHS and TSA or do you completely eliminate them? Do you stop all foreign aid? ...or do you keep giving money the programs you like (meaning that you support big government and budget deficits, no matter what you declare to the contrary), or do you onlyslash theprograms supported by your political opponents? What about highway funds> All excpet for ['postal roads'? The Post Office? The SEIU and public employee unions? Do you eliminate all 501(c)3's and begin taxing all other not for profit tax free groups and their properties?
If you believe in true entrepreneurship, are you willing, and able, to slash all of the red tape, regulations - and even zoning laws - in order to encourage and enable the average joe to start a business, from scratch, from the ground up, w/o resorting to venture capital Angels and/or bank loans? (keeping only parts of OSHA, mebbe.) How do you go about changing or eliminating the obstacles in his/her way?
We've got a very practical problem. What you need to look at are practical and pragmatic solutions.
Right now, everyone's arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin...when they can't afford to buy any pins to begin with.

Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at November 12, 2012 12:41 PM (WwR1j)

229 I'm for raising taxes on every luck fucker who gets a pay check. All those fuckers should suffer.

Posted by: Typical Obama Voter at November 12, 2012 12:42 PM (j2McS)

230 How many elections are we going to throw away on McRomneys?

As many as it takes to facilitate the collapse. There's nothing to be saved at this point.

Posted by: The KGB at November 12, 2012 12:43 PM (OjrK0)

231 if taxes must be raised do it at the one million dollar level.
250k-1m=reps
1m+=dems

Posted by: avi at November 12, 2012 12:43 PM (40anC)

232 Soona at 223 is right. The most power we have right now is the 30 Republican governors. We can use them to push back at Washington. The Feds are too broke to stop a wave of state disobedience.

Posted by: JustLikeDavidHasselhoff at November 12, 2012 12:43 PM (71iUa)

233 230 How many elections are we going to throw away on McRomneys?


yeah, Santorum and Newt woulda won big

Posted by: avi at November 12, 2012 12:44 PM (40anC)

234 Look at all this cool stuff I bought! Time for you to pay your fair share...

Posted by: t-bird at November 12, 2012 12:45 PM (FcR7P)

235 yeah, Santorum and Newt woulda won big
***
Romney lost an easily winnable election.

Yeah, the other two probably would have won. As would Pawlenty, Cain, or hell anyone outside of Trump and Norlaup.

Posted by: 18-1 at November 12, 2012 12:46 PM (AUeaU)

236 This "job creators" line is a myth, Drew.. pure bullshit when you are talking about earners above a million dollars.

Yes.. small business owners at the $250k level would struggle. So, it should be over 1 million. But high earners would not miss a dime, nor would businesses suffer as far as productivity or jobs go.

Conservatives are no different than liberals when it comes to their sacred cows.. we can never cut spending on Defense.. but we also don't really care that we have financed two wars by borrowing. It is very hypocritical.

If we are not willing to raise taxes, then we have to cut not only entitlements but defense as well. If we choose to be the policemen of the planet, we should be willing to pay for it. If we are not willing to pay for it, we need to scale back and let the rest of the planet fend for themselves.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 12, 2012 12:47 PM (f9c2L)

237 Where do you start cutting the budget?

Dear Helpful Troll,

Ax Obamacare, the DOE (Energy or Education. No, make that both.), and the EPA.

You're welcome.

Posted by: t-bird at November 12, 2012 12:49 PM (FcR7P)

238 I strongly disagree with the Romney and McCain comparisons.

McCain's campaign was truly disgusting, anyone remember him cutting an ad during telling how swell he thought Obama was during the Democrat Convention? Or trying to cancel his campaign when Lehman Brothers fell? Or not going after Rev Wright (the biggest chink in Obama's armor) Or in a debate saying he wanted the federal government to bail out homeowners that were underwater? or touting his amnesty plan? Also, McCain's entire career had been made undermining conservatives for his own political benefit, I never got that impression from Romney.

Romney played to win, and he debated Obama well in every debate. I would have liked him to have gotten "rougher" on Benghazi, but you saw the media flip out, even our own side blasted him for it. Romney also didn't want to come off as a Bush/Kristol NeoCon that was eager to engage in another meaningless war in the Middle East.

Romney lost for a lot of reasons that weren't his fault in my opinion, Akin and Mourdock were probably the two biggest reasons that made the electorate focus on the abortion issue instead of the economy, that along with Santorum wanting to have a national dialogue about the dangers of birth control dovetailed nicely with the War on Women. The auto bailouts were a gordian knot, good luck winning Ohio when 1 out of 8 jobs are in the auto industry and being opposed to the bailouts. Hurricane Sandy probably cost him at least a point as well.



Posted by: McAdams at November 12, 2012 12:49 PM (aVSeo)

239 No, a tax hike will ALWAYS only target the middle class. You have to go after PROPERTY AND HOLDINGS. Net worth of 20 million dollars or more puts you in the 50% property-taxation crosshairs. Everybody else lives tax free for a year. That's your stimulus.

This certainly makes more sense than the alternative minimum tax which badly hurts the middle class, and doesn't help squat with the economy.

Posted by: Mick McMick at November 12, 2012 12:50 PM (l+MMl)

240
And by the way and only slightly off topic, but was driving yesterday and listening to Larry Kudlow's radio talk show.

The topic was Immigration/Amnesty. The "New Republicans" were all about getting rid of those stupid and mean ideas from the "Pat Buchanan" wing of the party (those guys are the REAL haters!), and make all nice with the undocumented immigrants, who are really nice guys and might vote Republican someday.

Listening to this drivel, which Kudlow agreed with, based on Reagan signing the Simpson-Marzoli "amnesty" bill of 1986, is the new "winner" for Republicans. Because surprisingly (and this was NOT discussed), was there were enforcement measures that were in Simpson-Marzoli that were subsequently gutted or ignored by.........Democrats.
Because while I think that the Democrats are not particularly brighter than Republicans, they definitely know what is in their Party's best interest in getting and keeping power.
This was discussed the other day here, with numbers showing how we have permanently LOST California. And now we can permanently lose Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and maybe Texas.

Good luck with all that.

Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at November 12, 2012 12:50 PM (RFeQD)

241 So, who are the lazy and detestable scumbags who didn't bother voting in the battleground states?

Better question, what happened in those PA polling stations where the GOP poll watchers were kicked out and replaced with Dem ballotbox stuffers?

Crickets.

Posted by: Mick McMick at November 12, 2012 12:53 PM (l+MMl)

242 Here's a quick revenue enhancement:

Sell California. Highest bidder.

Could net us a few thousand dollars.

Posted by: Mick McMick at November 12, 2012 12:54 PM (l+MMl)

243 As I recall the Romneybots during the primaries were all about how Romney was "the electable one". A lot of us warned that a lot of people would not vote for him and he would kill turnout.


I thought he had turned that around but alas, no he didn't. But I though it would be the South that spurned him. It was VA and OH that spurned him.

Posted by: Vic at November 12, 2012 12:55 PM (YdQQY)

244 The most power we have right now is the 30 Republican governors. We can use them to push back at Washington. The Feds are too broke to stop a wave of state disobedience.
Posted by: JustLikeDavidHasselhoff at November 12, 2012 12:43 PM (71iUa)


----------------------------------------------------


If we can push this, we'll find out just how powerless DC is without us. A good teaching moment for everyone.

The military, even if it were inclined to side with Dear Leader, isn't big enough right now to enforce state resistance if the repub governed states hang together. This could turn into that double-edged sword that they dread.

Posted by: Soona at November 12, 2012 12:57 PM (00XQo)

245 "We should talk about how energy from the ground is the manufacturing of
the 21st century. Not everyone wants a high tech job and people don't
want to hear about how helping their boss will someday help them, talk
directly to these people."

That is the most sensible piece of new writing (had to qualify in order to exclude "In Flanders Fields" and "The Gods of the Copybook Headings") I've read since November 5, at least. It is positively Augustinian* in its elegant simplicity.

*St. Augustine of Hippo, not Octavian the Politician
In essentials, unity
In nonessentials, liberty
In all things, charity.

Posted by: Ken at November 12, 2012 12:58 PM (7yb9x)

246 GOP should come out with a 3 point plan:

- top marginal rate of 90% on income above $200K
- no mortgage deduction for any mortgage above $250K
- $2 a gallon gas tax increase

Pass it unanimously.


Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at November 12, 2012 12:58 PM (HDgX3)

247 Let the Donks lead the charge for higher taxes. Whisper in their ears that Mitt's cafeteria plan for selecting deductions - with a cap - is a swell idea. (Well, it actually is, sorta). Its unfair to Joe the Plumber that he subsidizes huge mortgages on the coasts. It would be an interesting graphic to overlay average mortgage and blue voting counties and states. Hey, it's also unfair to disallow expensing corporate executive salary/compensation above $1 million and not do it for the movie and sports industry stars as well as executives in general. Let's bring back Truman's 20% surtax on entertainment products that was used to pay down the WWII deficit.
And after privately supporting them all the way, vote against it. And look shocked and indignant doing it. Operation Lucy van Pelt....

Posted by: chuckR at November 12, 2012 12:59 PM (UGxsK)

248
Virginia spurned Romney because of changing demographics. The northern part of Virginia is growing because of the growth of the Federal Gov. That is their rice bowl, and nobody is going to take it away.

Not sure why Ohio turned against/spurned Mitt. There were several reasons.
1) Turnout in rural counties that did support Mitt but just not enough
2) Great turnout in urban areas (hint, hint) that went heavily for Obama
3) And what will happen to that irregular voting in those "urban areas"?
4) The Public and private Unions flexed their muscles and also "turned out the vote" for Obama
5) Very, very heavy negative adds by Obama and his PACS against Romney. This is the basic fodder for the low information voter
And still, Turnout was about 500K less than expected.


Something interesting happened in Ohio last Tuesday, but the turnout was the key. And the crooked voting, with a Republican Secretary of State, no less. Heh.

Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at November 12, 2012 01:01 PM (RFeQD)

249 This "job creators" line is a myth, Drew.. pure bullshit when you are talking about earners above a million dollars.

Yes..
small business owners at the $250k level would struggle. So, it should
be over 1 million. But high earners would not miss a dime, nor would
businesses suffer as far as productivity or jobs go.

_____________________________________________________

This is the stupidity of liberal thinking in a nutshell. High earners would not "miss a dime"? That's not the point. Every dime earned by high earners is used to do 1 of 2 things. Spend. Or invest. So that dime confiscated by the govt is not spent or not invested. If it's not spent, then the provider of a good or service is hurt. If it's not invested, there is one less dime available out there for another business who needs to borrow money. In either case someone else - most likely a non evil rich white person - is hurt financially.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at November 12, 2012 01:02 PM (HDgX3)

250 214 Romney was chosen as the leader. He failed to get 51% of the electorate to follow him. He failed - and those who chose him failed. And we will continue to fail as long as the same people who have now made the same mistake two elections in a row continue to make the same decisions.

I would argue that the primary reason Romney lost- and barely, I might add- is because the GOP is losing the culture war. America's chief religion is moral relativism and the people of this country place instant gratification above freedom and celebrity above traditional values. As for those who feel staying home and throwing a temper tantrum is the answer to our problems, they are guilty of the sins of idolatry, pride, and apathy in the face of evil. Elections are always about a choice between the lesser of two evils, and one candidate will lose and the other win. Those "conservatives" and "Republicans" who refuse to select a choice at the ballot box are essentially endorsing the other side and their policies through their silence.

Posted by: 80sBaby at November 12, 2012 01:03 PM (YjDyJ)

251 As long as the left controls the media, we are fighting with one hand and leg tied behind our backs.

Posted by: Hard Right at November 12, 2012 01:03 PM (uhftQ)

252 "The topic was Immigration/Amnesty. The "New Republicans" were all about
getting rid of those stupid and mean ideas from the "Pat Buchanan" wing
of the party (those guys are the REAL haters!), and make all nice with
the undocumented immigrants, who are really nice guys and might vote
Republican someday."

What I find amusing is, if you poll people, the "Buchanan" position is incredibly popular, far more popular than planks like being pro-life. Amnesty during 8% unemployment SHOULD be suicide, but the GOP is scared shitless to blast Democrats for it.

If you legalize 20 million illegal aliens (which is inevitable once you can longer deport them) Democrats will get 60% of 20 million new voters instead of 70% of 8 million voters. That would be the case scenario FOR US! You've just injected about 15 million new Democrat voters for life, that's like adding a new Blue State the size of Ohio.

Does the GOP understand that you win elections by getting the most votes, not by doing better with abstract percentages of certain demographics?


Posted by: McAdams at November 12, 2012 01:04 PM (aVSeo)

253 yeah, Santorum and Newt woulda won big
***
Yeah, the other two probably would have won. As would Pawlenty, Cain, or hell anyone outside of Trump and Norlaup.



Posted by: 18-1


You are either barking mad or a moby.

Posted by: cool breeze at November 12, 2012 01:05 PM (A+/8k)

254 251
As long as the left controls the media, we are fighting with one hand and leg tied behind our backs.

What I don't understand is, why don't wealthy conservatives simply but media outlets? The Koch Brothers or Adelson could easily buy up a bunch of newspapers or local networks, that be FAR more bang for your buck than giving hundreds of millions to Karl Rove every cycle. Hell, you might even turn a profit on it.

Posted by: McAdams at November 12, 2012 01:06 PM (aVSeo)

255
Hey joethefatman, you and your kids are out of luck. We're $16 trillion dollars in debt, and climbing fast. We just votedthe sametax and spend lefty back into office that set a record for spending. As unfortunate as it is, your children will NOT be growing up in the same America you and I enjoyed-period! Educate them and prepare them for the upcoming sh!tstorm that we're going to experience, regardless of who won the presidency.
We've deluded ourselves into thinking we could manage our national debt. It's obvious that the majority of Americans believe we're on the right course. I don't know how they've come to this conclusion. Compounding interest rates must be beyond most people, as well as, monetizing our debt. It's inconceivable[channeling my inner Vicini], that the majority of Americans don't see what's coming in our near future.
We actually believe that we can meet our energy needs with renewables(wind and solar), by bankrupting theour cheapest and most aboundantenergy sources. I mean, what the fuck could go wrong?
We've cut off the water supply to one of our nation's largest agricultural region because a bait fish may go extinct.
Can you honestly say that you believe we can give your children a better life than you and I had? I wish it was true, but I think you're fooling yourself.

Posted by: echo $MEH at November 12, 2012 01:08 PM (BHM5V)

256 Let. It. All. Burn.

Mew

Posted by: acat at November 12, 2012 01:08 PM (4UkCP)

257 Every dime earned by high earners is used to do 1 of 2 things. Spend. Or
invest. So that dime confiscated by the govt is not spent or not
invested. If it's not spent, then the provider of a good or service is
hurt. If it's not invested, there is one less dime available out there
for another business who needs to borrow money. In either case someone
else - most likely a non evil rich white person - is hurt financially.
.........
This is where you are wrong.

Investing in stocks does not help businesses in any way. The only investment in stock that help a business is during the IPO.

If I were to go buy 100 shares of Apple today, how does that affect Apple? It doesn't. I have traded my $6000 for some other private investor's shares. Apple was only involved at the IPO or selling their own shares.

I will grant you that I would rather have money in the hands of private individuals than government, but not to the extent of running a deficit. All the idiots clamoring for a balanced budget amendment seem to think that means only the spending side will be cut. It won't.. taxes will necessarily be raised as well.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 12, 2012 01:11 PM (f9c2L)

258 I second acat's "let it all burn" motion.

Posted by: echo $MEH at November 12, 2012 01:12 PM (BHM5V)

259 We are an irreconcilably divided nation. We're fighting a losing battle if we think we can convince 47% of America-hating citizens and more than 50% of an illegal foreign people of US Constitutional law.

The quicker we realize this, the quicker we can start working to salvage what is left of this nation.

Posted by: Soona at November 12, 2012 01:13 PM (00XQo)

260 How bout we start with taxing John Kerry's yacht?

Posted by: Mick McMick at November 12, 2012 01:18 PM (l+MMl)

261 It's just made me realize that what I have suspected for a very long time is true. The " brilliant conservative thinkers" in the media are actually not brilliant, not thinkers, and definitely not conservatives.

Posted by: Christmasghost at November 12, 2012 01:21 PM (CkK+I)

262 250 ETA- My comment regarding idolatry refers primarily to the Paulians but also to those who are too proud to vote for certain candidates. They expect nothing less than perfection and want to be the first to say "I told you so". As for apathy, as citizens of this nation we have certain duties to perform, and voting is one of those.

Posted by: 80sBaby at November 12, 2012 01:25 PM (YjDyJ)

263 Help me out. I read (I think in Wikipedia), that Sequestration was only a cut in growth, and not cut in baseline. Truesies?

Posted by: Duhgee at November 12, 2012 01:28 PM (26gda)

264 Hey Bill I aim to let barack obama raise taxes...the Bush tax cuts are evil?

Not a fucking problem.

No representation without taxation.


Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 01:31 PM (LRFds)

265 259 Soona,

If the secession petitions do not take off this cycle we must have 25,000 in each state to force thematter to the surface who will be prepared to take the punishment it'll carry.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 01:32 PM (LRFds)

266 At this point I view America like a petulant child that hates being told "not to put their hand on the stove burner". Despite repeated warnings, a majority of voters in America are bound and determined to put the countries "hand on the proverbial burner", to see for themselves. And sooner or later (as we all know) they will see the result of being on the path we're on. Then and only then will the usurpers of our Republic will be driven out.

Until then, rest assured the Republican party didn't do anything wrong. (Yeah maybe some technical communication issues) but.. it's just hard to beat Santa Claus. "Free" will always win. Even though nothing is free.

This free comes at the expense of Liberty. But these days liberty is undervalued by many. That's why Obama won.
Also having a compliant media on your side, is worth at least a few million votes.

Posted by: Mikey at November 12, 2012 01:32 PM (db4pz)

267 If that is where we go hell I'm not even sure but if the Blue are convinced they are going to England us with juan I aim to ponder leaving with the state I am in at least.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 01:32 PM (LRFds)

268 I'm in agreement with some of the others.... Let the 52% own it all. Let em have the cake and Obama phones for all with the free healthcare and everyone just working for Uncle Sam.

Posted by: Odel Roo at November 12, 2012 01:33 PM (MSW07)

269 250 80sBaby,

Thanks...no sincerely about as politely as you can try to nuke my "let it burn i quit" response.

They can't take it if you don't make it ma'am.

They want worker's paradise well I aim to let Alec baldwin pick up more of the bill per 10,000 earned than me.

Santa Govt is immoral and I will not strive for evil.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 01:35 PM (LRFds)

270 You are either barking mad or a moby.

***

Don't worry, once you put down the mantle of defending McRomney you'll see just how bad of a choice he was.

Posted by: 18-1 at November 12, 2012 01:36 PM (AUeaU)

271 All this talk about tactics is putting the cart before the horse. If this election made anything clear, it's that two generations of one-party control of major institutions - academia, media, unions - have given democrats the upper hand, strategically. There's no point in discussing how to win the next election unless you can address the strategic imperatives that will counterbalance democrat dominancein these arenas. And that requires more than simply holding the line on taxes and pretending to care about overspending.

Posted by: Caninepundit at November 12, 2012 01:37 PM (PlKIC)

272 Taxes on millionaires is a stupid hill to die on.
For one, it's incredibly stupid on optics.
Two, it shows we're not seriously about deficit spending.
Three, it fails to recognize we can make other measurable tax reforms (i.e., get rid of Hollywood tax subsidies) in exchange for one small item.
Four, if you don't like all the above, include it as part of the let it burn strategy.

Posted by: msmulan at November 12, 2012 01:37 PM (vSWyU)

273
I would argue that the primary reason Romney lost- and barely, I might add- is because the GOP is losing the culture war
***
Romney ran away from the culture war. In fact, he didn't really take a stand on anything.

And yet with 16% unemployment he lost.

If the public wanted a leftist technocracy the Republicans gave them a chance to switch an incompetent technocrat for a competent one.

The public said no.

Posted by: 18-1 at November 12, 2012 01:38 PM (AUeaU)

274 Even if the GOP caves on "tax cuts for the rich", the Dems will blame the GOP and "the rich" when the economy tanks. Reason: "the rich" will be vilified as unpatriotic for "sitting on all that money" (as Yawn Williams says) , and since "the rich" are all GOP fat cats, ergo the GOP will get the blame for the tanking.

It's Dem Politics 101: always blame the rich and the GOP, whatever happens.

Better to oppose the whole deal, go off the cliff, and say I told you so to the Dems, and the country.

Posted by: Jim Sonweed at November 12, 2012 01:38 PM (YwXwp)

275 I disagree. I say the GOP state outright that they think raising taxes is a bad idea, that it will hurt job growth, but agree to do it out of the spirit of compromise and because Obama won reelection.

As a tactical matter, we have lost this fight. If the GOP in the house sticks to its guns on this, it will lose the p.r. battle (which it already did - most of the country believes it is the GOP's fault for not being willing to compromise. I just had an eye opening weekend with my sister and brother-in-law, both of whom are fairly conservative and always vote republican. Both well educated and fairly well informed. Both believe that the GOP is at fault for not negotiating in good faith and not being willing to compromise. So, regardless of the truth, that is what most of America believes).

We simply cannot fall on the sword on this. I say agree to raising the tax rates back to pre-bush on those making over $500,000. Then challenge the Democrats to balance the budget, cut spending, reform entitlements. And, when these tax increases do not result in huge windfalls of revenue and the economy continues to not grow, we point out the failure of the dem's only answer to anything, which is raise taxes on "the rich".

The GOP, and thus conservatives, are not going to be able to win people back until we get past this one stupid issue. Yes, raising taxes is not good policy - but the people want it. Give it to them all the while pointing out that it will not solve anything and may actually do harm.

and, once we have compromised on that. Challenge the Dems to accomplish something on all of the other pressing issues.

but, if we keep fighting on this front we are not going to win. The vast majority of voters simply do not have a grasp of economics or policy and don't understand why it would be so bad to simply increase taxes on "the rich". Let's give them a lesson in why it is merely a class warfare tactic by the dems. Give them the tax increases out of a "spirit of compromise" and then point out how it accomplishes nothing - which everyone knows it will end up accomplishing nothing.

That will force the dems to be honest and come back looking for more taxes on the middle class or to actually engage in real policy proposals about reducing spending and reforming entitlements. Or else be demonstrated as the useless idiots they are.

Posted by: Monkeytoe at November 12, 2012 01:39 PM (sOx93)

276 272 msmulan,

again there is NOT a revenue problem....

this is a math problem indexed to wild spending and free shit army.

If the GOP caves on class wafare we are truly donk lite and I truly quit.

I will not be socialist marxist light witgh my money or effort.

I backed Romney with money and my vote despite the fact he is not what I want.

You let the Rino New England gang steal this party and in doing so allow the Blue Hispanics to steal this nation I quit....I'll either go out of country or out of politics entirely and found the "Capitalist Amish sect" of the Saint Adam Smith Church of God.

NO

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 01:40 PM (LRFds)

277 274 Jim Sonweed,

damn skippy yell at him rage at him....real reform or nothing.

I won't raise rates on the poor but we need stabilization and investment oriented code or we'll just let the evil Bush tax cuts you renewed die off.

You want Clinton era taxes i want clinton Era spending barry it was a team effort.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 01:42 PM (LRFds)

278 "We should be the party that not only stands for the Joe the Plumbers
of the world but also the guys he hires. Talk directly to them about
what conservatism means for them. Right now we're reaching them
indirectly, . . . and people don't want to hear about how
helping their boss will someday help them, talk directly to these
people. Hell, we might even manage to connect with some Hispanic and
even black voters in the process without sell our souls in the process."

I agree, we can spell out how this benefits everyone without pandering to specific groups. Too many buy into the zero-sum, class warfare belief that if someone profits, it's necessarily at another's expense.

Posted by: venus velvet at November 12, 2012 01:42 PM (bJOih)

279 Joethefatman.

It's going to burn, one way or another. Your kids are fucked. Thank the democrats.

Posted by: GMan at November 12, 2012 01:47 PM (sxq57)

280 276, sven10077

Your attitude is why we lost--American voters believe the GOP is on the side of the rich, even though nothing could be further than the truth. Americans HAVE TO LEARN they can't keep asking for free crap without economic consequences, or eventually having taxes raised on the middle class.

Also, conservatism is not pegged to a specific tax rate--failing to realize that, you miss the forest through the trees.

Posted by: msmulan at November 12, 2012 01:58 PM (vSWyU)

281 280 MsMulan,

I was taxed when I was 14 years old.

I paid tax as an adult starting at 15 since I was emancipated.

Frankly fuck free shit army.

You'll get it at discount but not free.

Reform it or totally repeal it but I am NOT letting ogabe shake down the rich because rich is ALWAYS defined down.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 02:01 PM (LRFds)

282 Also, conservatism is not pegged to a specific tax rate--failing to realize that, you miss the forest through the trees.

Posted by: msmulan at November 12, 2012 01:58 PM (vSWyU)

This is a great point. Look - I agree that raising taxes on "the rich" is not going to accomplish anything as it will raise to little revenue to make a dent in the deficit let alone the debt.With that said, the tax rates proposed on those "making over $250k" were in effect during the Clinton years and did not destroy the country. At this point, we are cutting off our nose to spite our faces. do I think raising taxes is good policy? No. However, I don't think resisting increasing taxes on those making significantly more than the median or average income is the hill to die on. As I said in a comment further up, agree to this increase (while keeping the remaining tax rates as is) out of a "spirit of compromise" but continue to point out it is bad policy and will accomplish nothing.Then fight on and try and get the dems to come to the table with real spending cuts and entitlement reform. Once you have allowed them to spend their sole bullet (raising taxes on the rich) - you can force the ball into their court to actually do something regarding spending and entitlements or else get Americans to wake up and realize that they are bankrupt of ideas. The longer we keep the focus on "tax cuts for the rich" the more we lose. As terrible as it is, class warfare demagogy works with a vast swath of the electorate (and the media).

Posted by: Monkeytoe at November 12, 2012 02:06 PM (sOx93)

283 273 Romney ran away from the culture war. In fact, he didn't really take a stand on anything.And yet with 16% unemployment he lost.

Both Romney and Ryan quite forcefully addressed cultural issues on the campaign trail, especially during the homestretch, but that fact will not and does not matter to you because you always hated Romney more than you did the SCOAMT.

Posted by: 80sBaby at November 12, 2012 02:08 PM (YjDyJ)

284 282 Monkeytoe,

great then since nobody was hurt by the tax rates in the "glorious beautiful bestest ever" Clinton economy we can all go back and we can nuke the credits too.

Fuck Bush...yeall it loud GOP Fuck Bush!

Who needed the higehr revenue anyway why did fucking bush just burn money on nothing it is not like there was anything that led to higher spending!

Nancy pelosi took a flow I hated and made it a fucking waterfall fuck freeshit army.

Fuck 'em...all or nothing or I quit.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 02:09 PM (LRFds)

285 1
Give them what they voted for.

Yes! What other choice do we have? If we let it go to sequestration, the GOP will be blamed.

How is that a win?


Posted by: PJ at November 12, 2012 02:09 PM (ZWaLo)

286 Kristol is right. Why? There are idiots out there who believe that all we have to do is increase taxes on the rich in order to avoid flying over the fiscal cliff. Raise taxes on the rich, I saw, and demonstrate that this certainly not a fix for a fiscal problems.

Then, when faced with the stark choice of having a low government spending / low tax regime vs. a high government spending / high tax regime (in which the middle class must necessarily pay for it), we win the debate.

Posted by: Spike at November 12, 2012 02:12 PM (wtnmC)

287 285 PJ,

Obama's deal there champ or is this is another "let's just blindly embrace the media fairytale of the week?"

Fuck Bush it's not like the Bush tax cuts did not do exactly what they were designed to do which is raise revenue....

you cede this argument they keep moving the goalposts down so that the 50.1% eat the 49.9% on a long enough timeline.

We're the party of class warfare for stupidity and lower revenue now?

"okay" well then go on ahead and follow through on the rest of the Sven 2016 GOP retard agenda....,.


1) you can marry anything you want in whatever number

2) abolish the INS

3) free shit for all!

Graham/Christy 2016 Why have a fucking GOP?

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 02:12 PM (LRFds)

288 286 Spike,

Bullshit then it'll be "you didn't close enough loopholes"

You want this answer learned everyone who works needs to feel the pain and see the failboat.


Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 02:13 PM (LRFds)

289 281 sven10077 You really you are preaching to the choir don't you?
"Reform it or totally repeal it but I am NOT letting ogabe shake down the rich because rich is ALWAYS defined down."

Exactly. When people see that 250K isn't enough, and the Dems start talking $150K, $100, they'll friggin wake up.

Posted by: msmulan at November 12, 2012 02:14 PM (vSWyU)

290 Confiscatory tax rates on movie stars would be fine. Because it's not about how much revenue you raise, it's about the "fairness". At least that's what Obama told Charlie Gibson back in 2008.

Posted by: OCBill at November 12, 2012 02:19 PM (YJvVE)

291 Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 02:09 PM (LRFds)

No - the point is that conservatism is not a philosophy against all taxes all the time. You have to pick the battles that will gain you ground. Standing firm on this issue right now will not help the cause but will hurt it.

We stood firm for 4 years on the tax cuts issue. And here we are. We lost seats in the Senate, lost the presidency to the most corrupt, incompetent person imaginable, and have to seek a way forward to gain ground. Keeping the fight focused on the GOP not allowing "tax cuts for the rich" to expire is not going to gain us anything and will hurt the GOP (and therefore conservatism) for the near future.

I agree that we need to hold the GOP's feet to the fire on spending, on immigration and pretty much everything else. this is one area where I think we give the public what it wants and then point out how it accomplishes nothing. But keeping the fight on this issue is not going to accomplish anything other than a likely loss of the house in 2014. Do you really think the GOP is going to gain voters between now and 2014 fighting on this issue?

And, of course, your answer is "who cares" let it all burn. Well, I prefer that it doesn't all burn, b/c the reality is that we will simply move into more socialism. there isn't going to be some abrupt cataclysmic event where everyone realizes liberalism is wrong and converts to conservatism. Instead it will be a long, slow death march toward European socialism or worse. I would rather continue to fight it where we can and attempt to reverse the progress the left has made than throw a tantrum.

We have to pick our battles and this is not a battle that will gain us anything.

Posted by: Monkeytoe at November 12, 2012 02:19 PM (sOx93)

292 282 Monkeytoe,
"The longer we keep the focus on "tax cuts for the rich" the more we lose."

Exactly. We should save our bullets by making Obamacare as painful as possible to implement, by cutting the subsidies and repealing IPAB in return for raising tax rates. Obamacare can strangle Dems if we play our cards right. They're not the only ones that can take advantage of a crisis.

Posted by: msmulan at November 12, 2012 02:21 PM (vSWyU)

293 Exactly. We should save our bullets by making
Obamacare as painful as possible to implement, by cutting the subsidies
and repealing IPAB in return for raising tax rates. Obamacare can
strangle Dems if we play our cards right. They're not the only ones that
can take advantage of a crisis.

Posted by: msmulan at November 12, 2012 02:21 PM (vSWyU)
Exactly. Obama/dems have survived the past 4 years on offering nothing but "let's increase taxes on the rich" and we have opposed that (rightfully), but allowed them their class warfare schtick. Let's take it away from them and force them to support Obamacare and explain the lack of budget, the increased defect, etc.Look - we all know the GOP is going to cave on something. I would much rather it be this than immigration or spending.

Posted by: Monkeytoe at November 12, 2012 02:26 PM (sOx93)

294 If it's true (and maybe it isn't) that the wealthy went for Obama, then fuck em. Let 'em pay. Put up a bit of a fight and then cave. If it tanks the economy, then who owns it?

Posted by: DCD-in-Indiana at November 12, 2012 02:30 PM (B0/4L)

295 #235 - Delusional
#243 - if R depressed turnout you would see it in every state. As noted elsewhere R performed much better than most of the R senate candidates. You point to VA and OH as evidence - don't you think O focusing all his negative advertising on these states for 6 months had an impact?

Posted by: NoBama12 at November 12, 2012 02:31 PM (ykY2u)

296 289 MsMulan,

No they won't they'll do what they did now and say 'well the media says it's okay what's on dancing with the stars."

Politics is personal or indifferent these days.

Nuke the cuts and Bush credits rules and bring the pain

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 02:49 PM (LRFds)

297 Only a lunatic fringe nut would hold out for sequestration. Who do you think will get the blame for "failing to compromise?" Will the media spread it around? Will Obama and Reid step up to take their share of responsibility?

Sheer genius - about the only way to hand the House back to the Democrats in 2014.

Obama won. Give him his tax hike, get what we can, publicly state we object to the policy and don't think it will work but in the spirit of unity blah blah blah. Then the Democrats own the economy and the coming crash.

Posted by: Adjoran at November 12, 2012 02:50 PM (ZHQvg)

298 291 Monkeytoe,

I'm tired cranky as hell and am not trying to flame you so please don't take offense.

You don't know what you're talking about or you don't get it.

The United States you think will wake up is a memory.

We can if the pain is wide enough likely at best get to where Canada is at right now a grown up soft socialism that uses its resources and industry for as free a market as can be had supporting a socialist model that is socialist light.

That is the BEST we can get but we will never get it if we use half measures.

This first year of this congress is literally our last chance to save this version of the US then it is done.

Let it burn b/c even if they do everything correctly they will at best have a 50% chance to save yesterday and frankly no chance.

Sorry if I was an asshole.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 02:53 PM (LRFds)

299 297 Adjoran,

Right b/c the media has shown that they will be as receptive to letting us cast blame as they are to not even needing carney since they are all Barry's employees.

No hit the cliff, don't increase the ceiling and rage at them.

We are either the party o growth and increased revenue or we're not.

We're losing 2014 in all likelihood anyway.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 02:54 PM (LRFds)

300 Sven

You don't know what you're talking about or you don't get it.

The United States you think will wake up is a memory.

We
can if the pain is wide enough likely at best get to where Canada is at
right now a grown up soft socialism that uses its resources and
industry for as free a market as can be had supporting a socialist model
that is socialist light.


I posit that you don't know what you are talking about. The idea that there is going to be pain enough to bring people to their senses to be more like Canada is both a strange argument and wrongheaded.

First, you are missing the point entirely. If the GOP continues to refuse to allow taxes to be raised on those making over $250k, the GOP is going to lose big in the mid-terms. Where you think that will get us is wholly delusional. What do you think the dems are going to do then? Start taking entitlement reform seriously? Lower taxes? Decrease spending. So, in 10 years we are even more bankrupt then we are today, and what? What exactly do you think is going to happen?

You are merely throwing a tantrum with no solutions and no responsible strategic thinking. Your answer is what? Do nothing, let the dems win everything and eventually somewhere down the road what? Enough people come to understand liberalism/socialism doesn't work? how has that worked out in Greece? Italy? Ireland? Portugal? France?

You are making claims that history shows to be completely untrue. there is going to be no magical awakening where people come to grips with reality. Instead, the can will continue to be pushed down the road.

I am thinking strategically on how to fight back and try and slow and eventually stop the leviathan. You are thinking emotionally about how to piss in the soup - to what purpose is unclear. It may give you release to throw the tantrum but it accomplishes nothing and advances nothing.

If there is some strategic or tactical argument you are tying to make, you have not done so with any lucidity. Simply claiming "screw them' or "no compromise" is not an argument. It may feel good to you, but it is not helpful to anyone else. Perhaps somewhere in there you have a point, if so I'd like to see it rather than ranting.

Posted by: Monkeytoe at November 12, 2012 03:03 PM (sOx93)

301 Monkeytoe,

Whatever you win I quit....can I sen you my bills to pay the donations I amde this cycle or at least the part outstanding?

You think this is a simple "tantrum" ok.

I gave 24 years to this party hard.

I know Canada fella b/c my Grandpa had holdings there and I watch her like a hawk.

Canada is the best economy in North America right now and POSSIBLY Mexico is second.

Barack win and I quit.

SHOW ME BARRY!

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 03:13 PM (LRFds)

302 Oh and yeah 250,000 a year is a successful small fucking business sole proprietor....

you fuck them like this you lose them because Barack is a shakedown artist risen to power with a secret police or five.

Okay I am offering no strategic vision?

Evidently i need to take a nap.

I have said repeatedly the only way to make Barry own this is to spread the pain and bombard Harry reid with the targeted cuts you say you want and a stabilized tax Code so we can avoid these every 2 year jousts.

Ok....I am without a doubt a total retard, and hey i must be i was a Perry guy who backed Mitt to the hilt from loyalty.

Fuck it show me.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 03:15 PM (LRFds)

303 Here is what will happen if the dems retake the house in 2014:

Illegal immigration amnesty
passing bills to allow felons to vote
passing bills making voter ID illegal
Card-check union rules (i.e., no more secret ballot for union organizing votes)
carbon tax
cap and trade
across the board tax increases
increased spending (above what even the GOP currently allows)

And that is just off the top of my head. I'd like to prevent the Dems from winning the house in 2014. Allowing sequestration to occur because we refuse to allow tax increases on those making $250k is not good policy. It is terrible, terrible policy because it leads to so much more worse policy.

Conservatism is not based solely on the idea of low taxes. Yes, low taxes is an important part of the idea of small gov't and free markets. But it is not the end all be all of conservatism. And, there is no specific tax rate that is the magic rate that is "conservative". We believe in the Laffer curve. While I don't think raising taxes on those making more than $250k will accomplish anything or that it is good policy, it is not such an enormous principal that conceding it will destroy conservatism forever in the U.S. Particularly when we know that fighting this battle inevitably lead to significant increased gov't when the GOP loses the house in 2014. It just makes no practical sense to fight on this hill.

Posted by: Monkeytoe at November 12, 2012 03:15 PM (sOx93)

304 303 Monkeytoe,

there is NO goddamned fight in this.

What logic what sense can be made of barack making a demand this hard for NO CONCESSION we get no gain when "defeat" is merely letting the fucking thing sunset out?

Whatever dude sincerely you win I am going to sleep a bit.

Have at it.

Don't count on another quarter century of 'we'll get 'em next time tiger.'


If this party is a class warfare party now I quit....I make for familuy adjusted AGI ~71,000 or so this year.

At peak I was about 145g

I aim to make it my goal to get noble and make about 54g soon and if they fire wife we will make ~24-35g.

They can't take it if you won't make it.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 03:21 PM (LRFds)

305 besides right there is an inherent fucking nobility in poverty...barry's fans in the social sciences told me so....I didn't see a lot of nobility in it when I was there as a kid so i climbed out....

I don't want to fall all the way back, but you know how many toys do i really need?

In needing less toys I will add to the empl....fuck it who cares


i quit.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 12, 2012 03:23 PM (LRFds)

306 The option is another collapse - and nationalization of two or three additional industries and fairness and sponges.
I need deeper think.





Posted by: Mountains Landbarons and Serfs at November 12, 2012 03:38 PM (Xx7iB)

307 27 Question, could Republicans in the House demand that these tax increases pay the deficit down to 0?
The deficit doesn't need to be "paid down." Neither does the debt, immediately or whenever, really. Getting the economy growing again will take care of that.
Saying that, I'm somewhere in between "how 'bout no growth for a couple years" and "let it all burn." Who'll suffer first, and harder?

Additionally, how do you have a budget deficit when you have no budget?

Posted by: BuddyPC at November 12, 2012 04:11 PM (jfUIE)

308 Hey, the Dow's up four points today.

Forward!

Posted by: BuddyPC at November 12, 2012 04:12 PM (jfUIE)

309 thirteen28 at #32 nails it.
A lot of people still have to learn. The hard way.
Let the lessons commence.

Posted by: BuddyPC at November 12, 2012 04:14 PM (jfUIE)

310 Add annual federal excise taxes on all vehicles, including bicycles, to the direct revenue pool.

Posted by: BuddyPC at November 12, 2012 04:28 PM (jfUIE)

311 More to the point, if the GOP doesn't stand up to
higher taxes/lower spending, then its completely worthless as a party.
What the hell happened to "limited government"?


Posted by: Looking closely at November 12, 2012 11:54 AM (+PDlV)

In case the papers are slow getting to where you live, the American people voted against "limited government" last Tuesday. They voted for higher taxes. I say, let's stand back and let the Democrats give that to them. Starting with letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire.The problem I have with Bill Kristol is that he only wants to let Democrats raise taxes a little bit. I believe that Republicans should stand back and let Democrats raise taxes a whole lot. I believe that a political compromise can be worked out where Democrats can raise tax levels to what they were during the Eisenhower administration and Republicans will not oppose them but simply vote "present".

Posted by: Obnoxious A-hole at November 12, 2012 04:30 PM (dGtaD)

312 Let all tax rates revert to Clinton tax rates. Let the FICA tax loophole expire.

The people feel no pain. They put the pain on their children and the responsible.

The people need to feel pain or there will be no change.

Posted by: jukin at November 12, 2012 04:35 PM (WGm5T)

313 33
In the meantime, I remain "For Sequestration". The people voted for irresponsibility last week, let them have it.





Except that will damn near cripple the Military

Posted by: Nevergiveup at November 12, 2012 11:57 AM (79ueO)

Sadly, a crippled military also seems to be needed to get the attention of the people who voted for four more years. Iran will get nuclear weapons which will result in the Saudis and the gulf states also getting nukes. Turkey is in the general area and has asperations of being a leading power in the Muslim world so they will get some too. Even though Greece cannot afford them, they will get some nukes. Italy certainly can't be shown up by Greece so they will get nukes as well. Switzerland can afford nukes and will make their own. At some point Germany will say, "What the hell" and assemble their own nuclear arsenal. Being abandoned by the US and in between nuclear Russia and Germany, Poland will also get nukes.At some point one or more of those nukes is going to wind up in an American city and a whole lot of people are going to die. This may happen either before or after the folks living near the Persian Gulf use some of their nukes on each other.Maybe, and this is only maybe, after an American city goes up in a radioactive fireball the people who voted for Obama will start taking this shit seriously.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-hole at November 12, 2012 04:46 PM (dGtaD)

314
If GOP doesn't stand for small government, does it stand for ANYTHING AT ALL?




Posted by: Looking closely at November 12, 2012 12:02 PM (+PDlV)

See, I'm one of those guns and abortion issue guys who thinks that the government is much too big and should be smaller but while I believe that raising taxes at this point is a remarkably stupid idea, it is not really a moral principal. For years I've watched as one part of the conservative coalition has been willing to sacrifice my principals for votes and yet I and many others have stayed loyal to the GOP because the alternative is a lot worse.We have defended the interests of the richest people in America, despite the fact that they vote overwhelmingly for Democrats, because doing what Democrats want will cause enormous financial damage. During all that time we have been demagogued by Democrats and the cumulative effect was experienced last Tuesday.
So now let them have what they asked for and see how much they like it. It is better if it happens sooner rather than later so that Barack Obama and the Democrats get the full credit for it.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-hole at November 12, 2012 05:20 PM (dGtaD)

315 Repeal the Hollywood tax cuts.

The left has built into law and practice lots of unfair privileges for institutions that belong to it, starting with Hollywood. Plenty of privileges are non-financial, such as immunity for sources, but only if you are an official (left-wing-educated) journalist rather than a mere blogger. But many are financial.

Instapundit would gladly slash them all, and he's correct.

It is easy to defend going after such unjust privileges, and hard to defend them. It is even harder to defend them while pretending to be neutral, and that groups like Hollywood big-wigs and official journalists are neutral and not all that connected to you. The right would be profitable for the Republican Party not only when it was won but all the time it was being fought.

Many on the right would not do it, because they act as if they were awed by big business and the wealthy, and wouldn't touch them, even though these are enemies that work every day for socialism, and can push for harsher taxes and anti-free-speech laws because they know they won't be the victims. That's foolish.

Repeal the Hollywood tax cuts. For a start.

Posted by: The Lightworker at November 12, 2012 06:14 PM (00xTL)

316 Skinnydipinacid: "You know, maybe Bill Kristol should just staple his nuts to his purse since he's doesn't feel like using them."

Posted by: skinnydipinacid at November 12, 2012 06:53 PM (WuCLB)

317 Any time Bill Kristol speaks, remember him insisting that Iraqis are secular, and religion could not be a problem in invading and occupying Iraq. Bill Kristol had inside sources and absolute knowledge on this.

Bill Kristol is a liar and a bluffer. He will lie about the most high-stakes issues. The truth is not in him, and if he's saying something is a good thing, you should think it might be a terrible mistake.

Bill Kristol: it's OK to agree to higher taxes.

The Lightworker: now we know for sure the Republican Party has to hold the line on taxes.

Posted by: The Lightworker at November 12, 2012 07:52 PM (00xTL)

318 Republicans SHOULD consider raising taxes, dude, all fucking kinds of taxes:

1) A new tax on movie stars. Any salary for any movie above $1 million is taxed at 100%.

2) A new tax on Harvard University. All profits from Harvard's $35 billion endowment are to be taxed at 100% until such time as Harvard makes tuition free for all students.

3) A new tax on PBS. PBS is not a "non-profit organization." It's government propaganda. Tax such organizations at 100% of their gross receipts.

4) Eliminate the tax exempt status of all non-profit organizations which locate any offices in or within 1,000 miles of Washington, D.C.

The problem with Republicans is that they're against ALL TAXES when they should be FOR TAXES that primarily strike out at Democrat constituencies.

That's the problem with Republicans. They have no idea how to fucking cut a jugular.

Posted by: someguy at November 12, 2012 08:42 PM (sEXZ/)

319 "People should have been camping out to vote against Obama. Clearly they weren't."

Look at the choice they were presented with.

Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at November 12, 2012 09:03 PM (F3HO3)

320 Axelrod's plan for the election worked. Wonder what his plan for the second term is? Bet there is one.

Posted by: Emily at November 12, 2012 11:32 PM (FicFv)

321 Bill Kristol should gargle with lye

Posted by: TexasJew at November 13, 2012 12:17 AM (F3WsD)

322 #321 I could not agree with you more. I tire of pretend Republicans.

Posted by: burt at November 13, 2012 11:25 AM (8kEad)

323 Game over man!


Posted by: Hudson at November 13, 2012 02:45 PM (U4ceb)






Processing 0.04, elapsed 0.07 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0305 seconds, 332 records returned.
Page size 208 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat