Martin Eisenstadt Was Never My Source…

…though MSNBC has fingered him as a Fox News source.

As it turns out, Eisenstadt is as real as Barack Obama’s Hawaiian birth certificate is fake. (By that I mean, he is not real, at least not in that sense, while Obama’s birth certificate is, in just about every sense.)

But Eisenstadt is quite funny. Here is his blog. Here is the New York Times story explaining the hoax.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / The White House via Getty Images

    Political Picures of the Week, May 18-25

    TIME’s photo editors bring you the best pictures of the past week from the Beltway and beyond.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    From left: AP; ABACAUSA

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

  • chester9000

    English, michaelscherer! Do you speak it?! Cuz it’s sure hard to tell from this post.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    MS,
    You’d best be careful. You’re headline sounds remarkably like Nixon declaring “I am not a crook!”

    And I mean that in the kindest way possible.

  • michaelscherer

    ha. Of course you do, Paul.

  • http://pourmecoffee.blogspot.com pourmecoffee

    For the sake of those first two sentences, I hope Obama outlaws torture soon.

  • rose83

    That’s terrible. I heard the Wurzlebacher/Keating thing and assumed it was true. And it’s pathetic that MSNBC and The New Republic would fall for this after he had been revealed as a fake.

    Good for him for showing how gullible the media is.

  • exile500

    “English, michaelscherer! Do you speak it?!”

    What ain’t no country I ever heard of. They speak English in What? The irony is that Sarah Palin actually believes What is a country.

  • judgementz

    Well from watching Palin I am sure that she has inadequacies, however I am not going to condemn someone for that being that it has never been her responsibility. I as a Systems Administrator in several positions have never had to institute backups in my former jobs however, that does not mean that I am incapable of learning that role or does it just mean I have needed it as a job requirement. I am a quick study and when it becomes an issue it is in my best interest to learn that particular skill, however each job is different and may not require that to be a strong suite depending on the job requirements.
    ~
    I know that everyone seeking office should have a certain knowledge of world matters, however can anyone here consult from memory the gdp and top export of Namibia without looking it up? I doubt it. It is not a world issue. It is not a country of consequence so therefore, why would you know? Unless maybe you live there.
    ~
    I think that Palin will be a player in the republican party and I think like Geraldine Ferraro, and Hillary before her she got a bad shake by the media. I think that all news outlets are too critical of women, and as a man who was mostly raised by a single parent mother with ambition for success, I think these women are not getting their fair opportunity to lead. There is no one that I respect more than my mother for her accomplishments, and definitely removed my doubts that women can hold any office.

  • http://www.ghostnote.com Cookie Puss

    kill your television

  • rose83

    MS, I think now you’re just trying to write in a confusing way. And I’ve defended you from so many criticisms about your incomprehensible style! I understood the first sentence, but it did resemble an especially difficult GRE reading comprehension question.

  • rose83

    judgementz, wait… are you saying that you think Palin didn’t know Africa is a continent, and that’s okay?

  • michaelscherer

    Ok, my grammarian critics. I have changed the punctuation at the top, to be more clear. Though I am leaving the confusing simile, because I find it funny. No one said blog reading would be easy.

  • g_crush

    .
    Eeesh…”The Harding Institute” should have been a dead giveaway, but Google, the words “Eisenstadt Parody”, and 0.32 seconds should have been more than enough to figure things out. Sad.

  • Paul-no not that one

    ms, When you have lost Rose…

  • palininatowel

    judgementz,
    -
    Sarah Palin is not your mother. Judging by your writing abilities, I would guess that your mother’s genetics provided you with a native intelligence lacking in Palin’s genes. You should be grateful.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    Funny thing in the article is that it cited only tradmed sources who were fooled, despite referring to bloggers as being most frequently fooled.
    .
    I certainly hadn’t heard of this guy before.

  • Lulu Lulu

    Ah, Sarah Palin’s frequent manglings of the English language…the gift that keeps on giving.

  • palininatowel

    Michael,
    -
    Don’t feel bad. If you have even a cursory knowledge of the English language, you are one language ahead of Sarah Palin.
    -
    I know that is setting the bar very low, but she was a journalism major.

  • judgementz

    Rose,

    I am saying that I think that she did. I have watched her and overtime I would find it hard to believe that she did not know. However, on the flip side I am saying that if she didn’t I am not as concerned about here knowing all 195 countries around the world. Do you know them all? I thought there were 168 till I googled it to be sure I had the total right. Can you name them all without help. Do you know the domestic issues in each of these counties?

    To be honest no I don’t think that is important. That is what I was pointing out. If you are governing a state then you need to only be competent at completing that task. Do you think Obama who has never run a business, has no governing experience; never offered real policy when it matters has the experience to lead this country through one of the worst economic disasters. Time will tell, however I am not doubting because of his lack of experience. He himself doesn’t possess the experience but, I believe that he will try to seek out the subject matter expert. As a Systems Admin I may not always have the answer but, what separates me is my ability to find the answer through study, or finding the correct information from another. This is not unlike the role of a politician or practically any leader in any field. It is not for one person to know it all that is impossible but, what separates leaders is their ability to find the answer to difficult problems that matter.

  • judgementz

    Palininatowel,
    ~

    My same response stands to your question as well.

  • jarais

    It amazes me that the same people who say Obama doesn’t have the relevant experience to be president have so much faith in a person who runs a socialist petro-state.

  • palininatowel

    judgementz,
    -
    You are obsessing on a triviality. Whether Sarah Palin did or didn’t know that Africa is a continent is not the issue. Who cares? The point is that she makes Bush look like Stephen Hawking.
    -
    If she is not reciting memorized facts/talking points or reading from a teleprompter, she is incapable of formulating a coherent sentence or a cogent thought. While you speak of your abilities to seek out answers and solutions to complex problems, she continues to exhibit a complete lack of intellectual curiosity, ala Bush. Only worse.

  • Matt

    Or he is as real as Joe The Plumber was a true undecided voter…

    http://www.political-buzz.com/

  • judgementz

    Palininatowel,
    ~
    By that rational can we not draw the same conclusion of Obama? I mean he had no governance experience, and picked a canidate that had 30 years of foreign policy experience to help him. Granted, that Joe has been wrong on several issues over the years, but at least he has experience to draw from. Also, he is trying to surround himself with as many economic experts as possible. Should that make us worry about his ability to lead?
    ~
    I find the argument moot and disingenuous to believe any leader that accepts the presidential office to be totally qualified. This is why it is important that they surround themselves by so many subject matter experts. Everyone needs help in certain areas, where she may be much more competent that he would about domestic governance, she may lack in foreign affairs, however she has actually done that job. I find that throughout history you can see this of Presidents that were governors as opposed to senators. Senators do nothing more than debate issues, vote, and debate policy however, they actually govern nothing. They set policy which is not actual governance. If you can provide me with the information to show that the senate actually governs and does not set policy and law I would be interested to see how they affect the daily governance of this nation.

  • rose83

    Rose,
    I am saying that I think that she did. I have watched her and overtime I would find it hard to believe that she did not know. However, on the flip side I am saying that if she didn’t I am not as concerned about here knowing all 195 countries around the world. Do you know them all? I thought there were 168 till I googled it to be sure I had the total right. Can you name them all without help. Do you know the domestic issues in each of these counties?

    judgementz, how do you get from not knowing all the countries of the world, or of Africa, to not knowing that Africa is a continent? Yes, I doubt I could list all the countries of Africa from memory. But I know it’s a continent. That’s the issue. BTW, I’m sure Palin did know it’s a continent. She’s ignorant, and not that intelligent, but she’s not that dumb either. Although she may not know that China is rapidly expanding its influence in the region, making Africa a likely economic – and perhaps military – battleground in future decades.

  • palininatowel

    judgementz,
    -
    What are you going on about? My point was that Palin has proven herself to be an incurious idiot. Period.
    -
    Obama, by any account, does not fit into that category.

  • Paul-no not that one

    I miss simple declarative sentences.

  • judgementz

    Rose, Palininatowel

    I am just saying that I am sure we can find the same inadequacies in any candidate if vested enough. I am not defending Palin on the fact that she knew or did not know that Africa was a continent. Only, I tried to point out that it is the leadership qualities that people that people elect. Leadership is not always that person that has the knowledge of everything. It is the person that can take a look at principle find the correct subject matter expert to inform them and then, take that information and lay out a particular agenda using their principles. Conservative or Liberal, Democrat or Republican, Neocon or Isolationist these are how policy measures are implemented by governing and their advisors. That is not to say that it is right just that is how it is accomplished. Not that anyone person can claim knowledge of everything, I don’t think even Jesus did that. I am just articulating that I think a lot of cynicism, criticism, and lack of confidence of Palin that could have been warranted of Obama given his very thin resume and accomplishments. The same arguments were not drawn against him for the the same if not more inadequacies.

  • rose83

    Leadership is not always that person that has the knowledge of everything.

    judgementz, agreed. But asking leaders to know that Africa is a continent isn’t exactly asking them to know everything. I would be appalled by anyone over the age of 10 who couldn’t name all the continents. Wouldn’t you be appalled if say, Keith Olbermann, couldn’t name all the continents?

  • judgementz

    Paul,
    ~
    Simple declaritive sentences lack substance, to define ones view points just like drive by media and their 20 second sound bytes to define a story. Without support for you arugement a one sentence declaration is worthless.

  • rose83

    Sorry for the clumsy double negative – Palin’s bad grammar is contagious!
    Here’s my question again: Wouldn’t you be appalled if Keith Olbermann were unable to name all the continents?

  • http://www.ghostnote.com Cookie Puss

    I disagree.

  • palininatowel

    judgementz,
    -
    Again, you’re missing my (obvious) point. “Experience” is not the question. The ability to think about problems intelligently and work toward solutions is the issue. Palin demonstrates every time she opens her mouth (without the aid of memorized talking points or a teleprompter) that she is not intellectually curious or able to grasp complex issues.
    -
    There is little doubt that Obama, regardless of his experience level, is fully capable of studying an issue, listening to experts, and developing a rational, coherent and intelligent plan to address the issue.
    -
    The voters decided on November 4 that they felt quite comfortable having Obama lead the nation during these very troubled times. And poll after poll has shown that nearly 60% of voters thought Palin unqualified to lead. This discussion has nothing to do with “experience” and everything to do with competency.

  • 53_3

    How about this “one sentance declaration”?
    .
    Palin has decried “extreme partisanship”!
    .
    Now, riddle me this, Batman:
    .
    Do you think that her statement will have anywhere near the impact that Colin Powell’s and John Lewis’s did?
    .
    Ahyuh! Ahyuh!

  • Cliff

    I am just saying that I am sure we can find the same inadequacies in any candidate if vested enough.
    .
    Have you been taking false equivalency lessons from Scherer?
    .
    Simple declaritive sentences lack substance, to define ones view points just like drive by media and their 20 second sound bytes to define a story. Without support for you arugement a one sentence declaration is worthless.
    .
    If you can state your position in a simple declaritive statement, you should do so. If you can back said statement up with more clear statements, that’s even better.
    .
    This isn’t poetry hour. Why should I have to wade through a paragraph of you circling around your point, when you could state it in a line or so?

  • Paul-no not that one

    I think I am being punked.

  • judgementz

    Agreed on that point I do feel that people should at least be engaged enough to name the 7 continents. However, does that constitute a disqualifier is all that I am debating. If that is a disqualifier then what other qualities constitute a disqualifier? Having run a business? Having served in the military? How many years served as a public servant? Being able to raise the most money? Having opinions that only agree with your own? Someone who is for removing free speech from the opposition? I am sure a lot of this is over the disdain of McCain advisors for loosing the election. I am not sure but, I think it would be hard to graduate college and not know Africa is a continent.
    ~
    I mean can you see where I am going with this? As someone who loves debate and the constitution I am worried that we have crossed into a new realm. Are any of those qualifiers in the constitution as required of the President? The answer is No. I do believe in the Constitution and it has worked since it became law for 225 years, and I like it just like it is. If you can find it in the Constitution that those arguments are disqualifiers then I would be more open to suggestion. However, you will note that since television all of the winning candidates have almost always been the most attractive. Does that sound like a qualifier for you?

  • 53_3

    Judgmentz:
    .
    I would say that if we zoom out to look at the forest, rather than one individual tree, we might just see aspects of leadership made appearant:
    .
    1. Ambition
    Though obviously Obama had an ambition to be President, he has tempered that with humility. At least publicly.
    .
    Not so Sarah Palin. It’s clear that her ambition is naked, and she makes no bones about it. “Blow” through doors, indeed!
    .
    Do I want a “leader” like that?
    Short answer: He11 No!
    .
    Knowledge:
    1. Obama not only has displayed a stong viable knowledge of most things considered, in the field of play, some of that knowledge has borne fruit. I point to Iraq and SOFA.
    .
    2. Palin is simply ingrown, and has a woeful lack of foreign policy experience, to the point where she doesn’t even know where things are on this planet, let alone what they are!
    .
    Now I call that simple incometency, where a lifetime of education has simply not stuck!
    .
    3. Coherance:
    Obama is clearly coherent, and almost never strays from his messages, clearly explains the reasoning behind them, and can discuss them in depth.
    .
    Palin, we get admit/deny couplets, like in her interview about her cloths, her actual contrafactual discourse, and sometimes rambling style. Evasiveness?
    .
    Yikes!
    .
    The campaign, and exercise of control Obama has shown at all times is far and away much more telling about just who is qualified and who is not.
    .
    This is like comparing nice plump juicy oranges to a bowl of steaming, yellowish-brown, stinking, er, um…

  • usesherbrain

    judgementz:
    .
    I think the point that others are trying to make is that the ability to think independently is a qualifier. I think that’s a reasonable demand of the leader of the free world.
    .
    Paul:
    .
    One sympathizes.

  • judgementz

    53,
    ~
    To answer your question I would have to allude to the point that arguments without structure are to use a metaphor like castles made of sand … worthless.
    ~
    If one cannot backup their arguments giving fact for those opinions held, become worthless.

  • 53_3

    In a way, Palin does think independently, but the problem is, that “independence” is from reality.
    .
    As for the constitution?
    .
    Well, she needs to at least two courses in civics and political science before she can even be considered a neophyte politician.
    .
    After all, if she doesn’t know what the Constitution says, then how can she “reform”.
    .
    She reminds me of Ellen Craswell here. Ellen Craswell was coherent, however, regardless of how far right she was…

  • Cliff

    However, does that constitute a disqualifier is all that I am debating.
    .
    What? Are you asking if not knowing all seven continents should be a disqualifier for office?
    Let me make it simple:
    YES!
    .
    Also, I’m confused how you went from naming the continents to years in the military.
    .
    Also, I wonder if perhaps you are using “disqualifier” for “qualifier.”

  • WisconsinLiberal

    @judgementz- speaking of structure, some commas would be incredibly helpful…

  • 53_3

    judgementz:
    .
    “If one cannot backup their arguments giving fact for those opinions held, become worthless.”
    .
    Do you mean we have to link to all those videos again, again, again?
    .
    I mean, Judgementz, you’re trying do divert. You don’t have to prove something over and over and over again something that is already captured on tape and widely distributed.
    .
    And I don’t mean FOX, fyi!
    .
    Ahyuh! Ahyuh!

  • Paul-no not that one

    Is this a debate on the qualifications of the candidates that stood for election 9 days ago?
    .
    I would say the voters made that determination.

  • 53_3

    I mean, if you want to be as domb as a box of rocks, be my guest. I’m sure that we all could relentlessly bury you in a literal firestorm of links if you really need us to go there…

  • 53_3

    Well, I think judgmentz is trying the “false equivalency” card and the concern troll thing.
    .
    I’m just not getting it, PNNTO…

  • usesherbrain

    Paul, I applaud your use of simple declarative and interrogative sentences.

  • 53_3

    Cliff:
    .
    I think he wants everyone to inspect this particular branch on this particular tree very, very closely.
    .
    Nevermind that the forest has already burnt down!

  • judgementz

    53,
    ~
    Coherence:
    To your point of staying on message reminded me of a very intelligent person who said “A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.” Not that during a campaign that is not the point, however I do not look on that as a qualifier for President.
    ~
    Ambition:
    I would say that given Obama’s background that you can say one who seeks out the most questionable of acquaintances to elevate ones political ambition is also cause for more scrutiny.
    ~
    Knowledge:
    One could point out that was what the media trended the conversation to and not fully vesting the candidate. It was wrong for McCain to keep her from the media and not give her a chance to speak out but, that is neither consequential now nor important. She will have her opportunity going forward to present herself good or bad. I just don’t think as I have stated above that most women candidates have been given fair opinion in the media, and have always focused on inadequacies that men are given passes or not fully vested on their knowledge.

  • rose83

    judgmentz, sure, I’m advocating a constitutional amendment that adds elementary school-level knowledge of geography to the current qualifications for the Presidency.

    Why can’t you simply admit that any functional adult, regardless of their political ambitions, should be able to name all the continents? I really don’t get why you’re trying to make this argument that expecting political leaders to know that Africa is a continent is one small step away from adding a constitutional amendment requiring all Presidents to have a military record. Frankly, it’s an absurd and unnecessary argument. There is no real evidence that Palin was ever unclear on the “Africa is a continent” issue; the Newsweek anonymous sources were factually inaccurate on the refusing to acknowledge the pro-choice NH Republican politicians story, and the explanation given by the foreign policy advisor who helped her prepare for the debate seems reasonable.

    This is the kind of thing that shows the truth of Obama’s comment about the GOP liking ignorance. There is absolutely no reason for you to make this pro-ignorance argument; Supporting Palin does not require claiming that it’s okay for Presidents to be unable to name all the continents. You can support Palin without making this amazing pro-ignorance argument, but instead you’re choosing to focus on the unimportance of basic knowledge.

  • Cliff

    If one cannot backup their arguments giving fact for those opinions held, become worthless.
    .
    All right, judgementz is sliding into Palinese.
    .
    To answer your question I would have to allude to the point that arguments without structure are to use a metaphor like castles made of sand … worthless.
    .
    I don’t know how you’re missing this: Our arguments have a lot of structure.
    We don’t constantly post links for our statements, because most commenters here share a certain set of facts: global warming, Bush’s inept government, the uselessness of the MSM.
    Every time I say, “Palin sucks because she doesn’t get global warming,” I don’t have to post links to evidence of global warming, because we all understand how much research has been done on the matter.

  • usesherbrain

    Judgementz: I think you mean “vetting,” not “vesting.”
    .
    In other news, I keep reading articles saying that the only way for the GOP to survive is to essentially become the same as the Democratic party.
    .
    In the quest for an interesting debate, do you think, if both parties divested themselves of their fringe membership and moved closer to the center (I’d argue that the Democrats have done that quite well recently), would we have an election more about the issues or less?
    .
    My initial thought is that instead of debating the issues (the differences in candidate positions would be slight), we’d be entirely reliant upon character and experience to determine our next president.
    .
    Thoughts?

  • 53_3

    judgmentz:
    .
    1. Coherence:
    You’ve attached “fanaticsm” to coherence. Clearly not true. And I guess, then, that begs the question then:
    .
    If one’s coherence is labeled “fanaticsm” (rhetoric), then we are supposed to choose someone who is incoherent?
    .
    Wowzer. Strike one.
    .
    Ambition:
    .
    The connections that you allude to are trivial at best, and really have nothing to do with ambition. An attempt at diversion, at best.
    .
    Strike two.
    .
    Knowledge:
    .
    She has shown a level of knowledge far below other female politicians, and, I might point out, women judge her more harshly then mend do! Your attempt to divert this into male chauvanism is another diversion.
    .
    Sarah Palin is to gender equality as Alan Keyes is to racial equality.
    .
    Srike three.
    .
    You’re outta there!

  • Cliff

    To your point of staying on message reminded me of a very intelligent person who said “A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.” Not that during a campaign that is not the point, however I do not look on that as a qualifier for President.
    .
    Here is a serious question: judgementz, have you ever encountered a statement that you didn’t immediately dissemble into useless mush?

  • 53_3

    His commentary has clearly shown judgementz for what he really thinks.
    .
    He isn’t trying to be impartial about it in the least. He’s trying to prop up the legitimacy of someone who clearly is a failure in nearly every respect as a viable candidate.
    .
    And I haven’t even begun to cover her “connections”…

  • 53_3

    Judgementz is still in the “Obama is a terrorist” stage of the campaign.
    .
    With people like him and the others, the GOP will soon become a force for stoopidity unleashed!

  • judgementz

    53,

    No you were basing your argument on coherence being the ability to stay on message not me. I was simply pointing out that staying on message is not a qualifier for President.
    ~
    Strike one.
    ~
    How is pointing out one’s questionable acquaintances as well as someone how would be denied a security clearance in the private sector being trivial at best?
    ~
    Strike two.
    ~
    Given most of the argument is not based about an actual quote but hearsay by a second party attributable as evidence that she doesn’t know these things? Basing fact on second hand information is never good. If this had been “from the horses mouth” so to speak, you could fire away you would have no argument from me.
    ~
    Strike three.
    ~
    ~
    Cliff,
    ~
    Maybe read above and follow the entire argument would be helpful as we are discussing qualifiers for being president. I don’t think that response was vague or not to the point.
    ~
    Rose,
    ~
    Is it Rose? I would point to several man on the street interviews that would differ that is elementary knowledge, it should be, but that is the state of government education. In a recent man on the street with Jay Leno most could not “Name the Person on the Susan B, Anthony dollar” after they were given the answer in the question. Not only that but, could not give the monetary value of the coin either. Reminder these people are voting. However, I do agree that those seeking presidential office should. I would like to restate though that taking second hand information from anonymous sources because, you want them to be true to back your argument is not being informed.

  • textee

    David Shuster is the leftist dupe/conspiracy theorist/useful idiot/fool who declared on May 8, 2006 on one of MSDNC’s unwatched freakshows that “Karl Rove will, in fact, be indicted.”

  • Cliff

    Maybe read above and follow the entire argument would be helpful as we are discussing qualifiers for being president. I don’t think that response was vague or not to the point.
    .
    Maybe follow the entire argument and realize I’ve been mixing it up in here since the start.
    .
    And yes, your argument was not to the point. You translated “on message” to “fanaticism” and then said it’s not appropriate for a President to be a fanatic.
    .
    53_3 clearly didn’t mean that Obama is a fanatic who brooks no argument. He means Obama addresses the questions posed to him.
    ie, if someone were to ask Obama about the Bush Doctrine, he’d say “I think A, because of X,Y,and Z.”
    .
    Whereas Palin mangles every answer she gives into incomprehensibility (defeating the point of answering the question), and has flat out refused to answer questions, instead substituting her own.
    .
    That’s incoherence and straying off topic.

  • judgementz

    53,
    ~
    Well I see that since we have resorted to name calling this is no longer a debate. Why let a little thing like logic stand in the way of ideology? I have presented nothing but arguments based in the confines of the qualifiers for being president, yet all you have done is state partisan retorts.
    ~
    If you think my statements are partisan then that is fine, however I feel your perception is much more clouded by your partisanship than mine. I don’t call any party as my representative but, it is clear who you call yours.

  • judgementz

    Cliff,
    ~
    Is not one who repeats the same message over and over without being open for suggestion a fanatic?
    ~
    He clearly has not answered several of his questions. The most important I feel was his comment of spreading the wealth around. Not to meantion he never answered the question of how he was going to give 95% of people a tax cut when 45% of the population does not pay taxes. So I have to disagree.

  • judgementz

    oops typo mention

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    when 45% of the population does not pay taxes..

    Rather than resorting to name calling judgementz prefers outright lies. While there may be people who after applying all allowable deductions to their meager incomes, ending up not haveing a Federal income tax liability, to suggest that such people “pay no taxes” is a delibarate lie. To suggest that they don’t deserve a break is even worse.

  • Paul-no not that one

    “oops typo mention”
    .
    Thank you for catching that one mistake.

  • Cliff

    Is not one who repeats the same message over and over without being open for suggestion a fanatic?
    ~
    He clearly has not answered several of his questions. The most important I feel was his comment of spreading the wealth around. Not to meantion he never answered the question of how he was going to give 95% of people a tax cut when 45% of the population does not pay taxes. So I have to disagree.
    .
    Again with the dissembling. You are a bad arguer. You make bad arguments.
    .
    Repeating the same message over and over again is not necessarily fanaticism. It may be symptom, but it is not the definition.
    .
    Obama does not repeat the same message over and over again when asked a question. Tucker Bounds does, and so does Palin to a certain extent.
    Obama answers many of his questions forthrightly and lucidly, without straying into unrelated topics. This is not fanaticism, this is what we expect and desire when we ask a person a question.
    .
    Palin strays onto different topics as she gropes around for an answer. Or she refuses to answer the question, and instead answers her own questions. There is video evidence of this.
    That is incoherency. There is no central message to her answers, just obfuscation.
    .
    And as Paul Dirks pointed out, the reason Obama doesn’t answer the tax cut question is because it’s premised on a lie.

  • Cliff

    I should add – because it’s premised on a lie, he should not be expected to answer the question.
    I know that’s pretty basic, but so far you’ve proven completely unable to infer basic conclusions from simple statements.

  • judgementz

    Paul,

    No, I am just for being honest. I appreciate honesty, saying that he is giving an income tax credit is a contridicting statement for someone who does not pay income tax is it not?

  • judgementz

    God is that simple enough for you.

  • Cliff

    Not to meantion he never answered the question of how he was going to give 95% of people a tax cut when 45% of the population does not pay taxes.
    .
    No, you are quite clearly saying that 45% of the population do not pay taxes, which is false. And yet you want Obama to explain how this falsehood affects his tax plan.
    .
    If you have proof that 45% of the population does not pay taxes, you should present it now.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Interesting reading:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_duckies

    http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/23631.html

    The pertinent paragraph in the WikI:

    Figures discussed in the previous section are sometimes misrepresented to suggest that the poor pay no taxes, which is not the case. This is suggested in the original Journal article, and in subsequent writings on the issue. For example, the Heritage Foundation writes that

    More and more Americans are receiving their education, their health care, and their retirement from the federal government. Yet fewer and fewer Americans actually pay income taxes. Are we close to a tipping point where the non-taxpaying class is larger than the group who pay taxes?[6]

    However, the federal income tax is only one of several taxes Americans pay. Other taxes, like excise taxes, sales taxes, and especially the payroll tax (a.k.a. FICA), are regressive — that is, the poor pay them at a higher rate relative to their income than do the non-poor. Just because somebody does not pay any federal income tax does not mean that they are part of a “non-taxpaying class,” or even that they pay a smaller percentage of their income in taxes than someone who does pay federal income tax.

  • judgementz

    Cliff,
    ~
    The same can be said for Obama please. When he is off telepromter as was in his first economic address I had never heard so many Ums, and it was basically just the same thing stated during the campaign.
    ~
    When finally given the opportunity to answer whether he would raise taxes on the top 5% he launched into a 3 min montage of put together talking points totally evading the question. So they same can be said for any candidate be real. There is video evidence of that too, give me a break. What about Biden don’t even get me started. I thought he was campaigning for McCain.

  • judgementz

    Sorry 45% don’t pay income tax.

  • judgementz

    Like someone said earlier earlier I thought you would be able to pick up on that since it was much of the campaign debate. I thought you would be able to parse that out however, I did state it correctly in the follow up.

  • Cliff

    When he is off telepromter as was in his first economic address I had never heard so many Ums, and it was basically just the same thing stated during the campaign.
    .
    All right, time for a little bit of subtlety.
    .
    Yes, Obama is not a perfect speaker, and like any politician he avoids certain questions.
    But to treat this as being equivalent to Palin’s “Continual Trainwreck” style of speech shows that either you are dishonest, or that you should restrict your arguments to crayon drawings.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Cliff, you are one patient man.

  • Cliff

    I am reaching the end of it, though.

  • judgementz

    Cliff,

    But wait, Bush was crucified all the time for being a inept speaker am I to understand that now that Obama has shown off teleprompter to be inept that now it is ok?

    I am just trying to understand how it is ok for Obama and not ok for Bush.

    I don’t think McCain was a good speaker either I think Palin was a much more effective speaker than McCain because she was able to follow the teleprompter. However, like Obama I don’t think that being able to follow it makes her a competent leader.

blog comments powered by Disqus