Boehner’s Economic Speech

House Minority Leader John Boehner today laid out five prescriptions for the Obama Administration on the economy and gave a flavor of what he might do if he becomes Speaker after the midterms. In a speech at Cleveland’s historic City Club, where every virtually president has spoken since Teddy Roosevelt, Boehner slammed the President for mismanagement of the economy, called on him to fire his economic team and said “it’s time to put grown-ups in charge.”

Boehner’s five-point plan:

1. Heading off an anticipated September debate on whether to extend George W. Bush’s tax cuts, Boehner made an emphatic case for extending all of the tax cuts. Democrats are proposing only extending those for the middle class – for those who make less than $200,000 a year. “Let me be clear,” Boehner said, borrowing a favorite phrase of President Obama’s, “raising taxes on families and small businesses during a recession is a recipe for disaster – both for our economy and for the deficit. Period. End of story.” Republicans argue that the Democratic plan would raise taxes on half of America’s small businesses. The tax hike would effect roughly half the revenue small businesses take in but much of that revenue is concentrated in a small number of high end companies such as hedge funds and law firms, which are taxed as small businesses.

2. Boehner asked that Obama veto any “job killing legislation” that Dems might pass during the lame duck session such as the pro-union Employee Free Choice Act or climate change. This point is a bit of a red herring, as I’ve written before, as Dems won’t have any more votes during the lame duck that they do now and they can’t get either of those bills through the Senate now.

3. Boehner did show some leg on policy, pushing back on the claim that the GOP is just the Party of No. He called on Obama to allow the repeal of the “the new health care law’s job-killing ‘1099 mandate,’” which requires some businesses to report any expenditure over $600 to the government. Boehner said this one provision alone costs small businesses $17 billion in the time to track and file such expenditures and the government another $10 billion to keep track of the filings.

Later in the speech Boehner also called on Congress to ratify Rep. Eric Cantor’s free trade proposal; endorsed legislation authored by Rep. Geoff Davis, a Kentucky Republican, that would require congressional approval of any White House expenditure of more than $100 million; and called on Dems to pass a plan by Rep. Dave Camp, the ranking Republican on the Ways & Means Committee, to give small businesses with less than 500 employees a 20% tax cut.

4. Though he praised Wisconsin Republican Rep. Paul Ryan’s $1.3 trillion in spending cuts and called on the government to return non-defense discretionary spending to 2008 levels – a move Boehner says would save $340 billion – Boehner did not outline any specific spending cuts. Instead, he called on the Obama Administration to send Congress an aggressive spending reduction package. “I’m not afraid to tell you there’s no money left,” Boehner said. “In fact, we’re broke.”

5. Finally, Boehner called on Obama to fire the rest of his economic team, though he provided no recommendations with whom the President might replace them (supply siders, one presumes?) or why they should be fired now versus any other time in the last 19 months.

“President Obama should ask for – and accept – the resignations of the remaining members of his economic team, starting with Secretary Geithner and Larry Summers, the head of the National Economic Council. Now, this is no substitute for a referendum on the president’s job-killing agenda. That question will be put before the American people in due time. But we do not have the luxury of waiting months for the president to pick scapegoats for his failing ‘stimulus’ policies. We’ve tried 19 months of government-as-community organizer. It hasn’t worked. Our fresh start needs to begin now.”

Dems were more than prepared for Boehner’s speech. The White House posted a prebuttal on its blog. And when asked if Boehner is, perhaps, measuring the drapes, Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz yesterday on a DNC conference call with reporters, responded: “I look at this as a smoking-the-drapes moment for John Boehner, not a measuring-them. I mean, he really is smoking the drapes if he thinks the policies that they adopted – that they championed, that drove us into the ditch — are the ones that we should return to, and that Americans, when given a choice, are going to say, ‘Yeah, that’s exactly where I want to back to! Let’s backslide toward the Bush era.”

Immediately following the speech, Dems unveiled a new web video mocking Boehner as the ultimate Washington insider:

Subscribe to Jay Newton-Small on Facebook
Related Topics: house minority leader john boehner, plan, speech, 2012 Election, Barack Obama, Budgets, Congress, Democratic Party, Economy, Republican Party, White House
  • Latest on Swampland

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, is the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, who Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

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

    Obama Stumbles? Why the President’s Right to Talk About Bain

    The meme of the day in journo-world is that President Obama has stumbled at the outset of the general election campaign. The evidence for this? Well, uh, there isn’t very much, really–except that a few Democrats have criticized his campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital and that Obama’s fundraising is merely humongous, instead of obscenely humongous. The two phenomena are linked, of course: Obama isn’t getting the usual haul from Wall Street because he has outrageously–outrageously!–tried to regulate the bankers who did so much to crash the economy in 2008. The handful of Democrats squawking are people who either (a) get money from private equity firms or (b) have retired and joined Mondo Casino. But there is another side to this story:

  • nflfoghorn

    Instead of “prebuttals” just make your case instead of letting Flox and Fiends twist your words!!!

  • deconstructiva

    Thanks, Jay. Ask Boehner how tax cuts create jobs. After all, the cuts are here so businesses should be hiring like crazy to stay ahead of their post-recession competitors? Yes? No? They’re not hiring? (I guess cheap money fueled by Greenspan drove the real estate / biz boom, not tax cuts, but I digress.)
    .
    Jay, I’m serious; ask him. If he ducks your pointed emails then pin him down in the Capitol lobby, literally. That would make a great “1000 words” too. Merci.

  • allthingsinaname

    Here is The Daily Kos take on point # 3
    .
    ” 3. Tell Democrats to support the GOP’s effort to repeal a provision of the health care law that Boehner claims would require businesses to itemize all expenditures over $600. (Note that Republicans actually blocked a vote to repeal the mandate in House and the small jobs bill in the Senate, currently being blocked by the GOP, is also a vehicle for repeal.)”

  • shepherdwong

    Republicans argue that the Democratic plan would raise taxes on half of America’s small businesses.
    .
    Do us all a favor then, JNS. The next time Boehner or any other Republican trots out that particular lie, would you remind them that taxes will rise as a result of the Republican decision – passed by Republicans under reconciliation – to make the tax cuts expire. No one but Republicans are responsible for any tax increase.

  • grape_crush

    So, Boehner’s five-point plan consists of (in order) one lie, one near-impossibility, one right-wing wish list, one abdication of responsibility, and one rather stupid demand.

    Does that sound about right?

  • allthingsinaname

    Point #4 ” NY TIMES”
    .
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/opinion/06krugman.html
    .
    Mr. Ryan’s plan calls for steep cuts in both spending and taxes. He’d have you believe that the combined effect would be much lower budget deficits, and, according to that Washington Post report, he speaks about deficits “in apocalyptic terms.” And The Post also tells us that his plan would, indeed, sharply reduce the flow of red ink: “The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that Rep. Paul Ryan’s plan would cut the budget deficit in half by 2020.”

    But the budget office has done no such thing. At Mr. Ryan’s request, it produced an estimate of the budget effects of his proposed spending cuts — period. It didn’t address the revenue losses from his tax cuts.

    The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center has, however, stepped into the breach. Its numbers indicate that the Ryan plan would reduce revenue by almost $4 trillion over the next decade. If you add these revenue losses to the numbers The Post cites, you get a much larger deficit in 2020, roughly $1.3 trillion.

  • sue_n

    Well, I’m all for replacing Geithner and Summers, though probably not for the same reason as Boehner.
    .
    And to echo deconstructiva, if the Bush tax cuts (and Republican economics in general) are such a magic bullet, then why are we still where we are, and how did we get here in the first place?
    .
    Finally, if he’s such a “grown up,” why won’t he lay out precisely what he intends to cut? Ryan’s an idiot, but at least he’s shown his cards. Where are Boehner’s? I’ve always thought being an adult meant making hard choices and telling unpleasant truths. If he’s so sure he’s got the answers, why isn’t he sharing them?
    .
    And why aren’t people who are paid to ask questions and uncover details doing that?

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

    I’m not afraid to tell you there’s no money left,” Boehner said. “In fact, we’re broke.”

    Which is of course why it makes perfect sense to continue to refuse to allow taxes to revert to their previous levels.

  • kevin

    Amen.
    .
    They’re out their campaigning against a plan that they created themselves. They got cute back in 2001, setting the tax cuts to expire in 2010 so they could hide the deficit-exploding nature of them, and now they’re trying to get cute again.
    .
    What’s even worse is that letting the tax cuts expire is the quickest and easiest way to make an immediate dent in the deficit, but they’re against it — all the while, berating the president for not doing something about the deficit they largely created.
    .
    They created the plan to let the tax cuts expire, and now they want to go back on their word. Don’t let them.

  • kevin

    Obviously! As any good Republican knows, if we just wish hard enough, the Magical Tax Cut Fairy will solve all of our problems. It’ll even give us all unicorns to ride!

  • allthingsinaname

    Which is exactly the GOP’s position. It is starve the beast.

  • groenhagen2

    With the possible exception of Rosa “Exidor” DeLaro, Rep. Carrie Wasserman-Schultz is probably the ugliest woman in Congress, so I say put her on to represent the Dems as often as possible.

    “I look at this as a smoking-the-drapes moment for John Boehner, not a measuring-them. I mean, he really is smoking the drapes if he thinks the policies that they adopted – that they championed, that drove us into the ditch — are the ones that we should return to, and that Americans, when given a choice, are going to say, ‘Yeah, that’s exactly where I want to back to! Let’s backslide toward the Bush era.”

    The problem with this ditch analogy is that the American people aren’t buying it. They know that the man-child Obama and his fellow Democrats were in control of Congress for a year and a half before they drove the economy into the ditch. The American people also know that the Democrats have had the keys while they drove the economy further into the ditch. The stimulus failed miserably and now the Democratic Socialists are telling us that we need to waste even more money. That message isn’t going to work.

  • m0mentom0ri

    “return non-defense discretionary spending to 2008 levels”
    .
    Emphasis mine.
    .
    Come on people, suck it up! 10% pay cuts for everyone. Those foreigners aren’t gonna bomb themselves! Screw your kids and and the environment! We need more bombers now!

  • groenhagen2

    Actually, Tom Daschle and the Democrats controlled the Senate when the tax cuts were passed in 2001, so it would be inaccurate to call it a Republican decision.

  • m0mentom0ri

    groen, you really need to back up your declaratives with some facts.
    .
    “The problem with this ditch analogy is that the American people aren’t buying it.”
    .
    * 36 percent of those said Republicans were more to blame, while 28 percent said Democrats were at fault. Some 28 percent said both parties were to blame.
    .
    “Rep. Carrie Wasserman-Schultz is probably the ugliest woman in Congress”
    .
    Megan Fox for Congress! Because, y’know, she purty!

  • nflfoghorn

    I’d hate to run government based on appearances. There’d be so few leaders left. And followers.

  • allthingsinaname

    I would like to know why it is that discretionary spending cuts seem to always mean cuts to SS and Medicare, which are not discretionary at all, but are taxed and paid for directly.
    .
    If anything is discretionary it is their pay and benefits.

  • groenhagen2

    momentairhead:

    “36 percent of those said Republicans were more to blame, while 28 percent said Democrats were at fault. Some 28 percent said both parties were to blame.”

    That adds up to 56% of Americans who blame Democrats. As time passes, more of the blame shifts to the Democrats, who actually had the keys when the car went in the ditch.

  • shepherdwong

    Tom Daschle and the Democrats controlled the Senate when the tax cuts were passed in 2001…

    Which is why Republicans had to ram it through using reconciliation rules. Democratic leadership fought aginst it tooth and nail. Don’t try to rewrite history here @sshole, we know what you are.

    “Democrats want tax relief that goes to every taxpayer,” Gephardt said. “This bill does not do that.” The minority leader said the middle class will not benefit enough from the tax cut and the wealthy will reap unfairly high benefits.
    .
    New Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-South Dakota, has said Congress will eventually be forced to revisit the tax cut, which he argues is too large, too generous to the rich and too expensive.
    .
    “I just know that at some point that reality is going to come crashing down on all of us and we’re going to have to deal with it,” Daschle said Wednesday.

    http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/05/23/senate.taxes/

  • porkdumpling

    It was actually a 6 point plan and his first priority upon hanging the new drapes is to join with Snooki to repeal the onerous tanning tax!
    .
    Orange people of America unite! No taxation for melaninization!

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

    I’m sorry, what legislation were you refering to that was passed by the 110th Congress over Bush’s veto?

    None?

    I guess that means your just making stuff up….

  • groenhagen2

    nflfoghorn:

    “I’d hate to run government based on appearances. There’d be so few leaders left. And followers.”

    Sadly, it’s a fact of life. The Democrats would be well-advised to find someone more pleasing to the eye than this Florida congresswoman to speak for them. The combination of an unattractive messenger and an unappealing message is not going to stop this November’s well-deserved bloodbath.

  • stuartzechman

    Well, to be completely accurate, the Third Way Democrats didn’t “fight it tooth and nail:”

    DLC | New Dem Of The Week | April 16, 2001
    .
    New Dem of the Week: Mary Landrieu
    .
    U.S. Senator, Louisiana
    .
    Committed to fiscal responsibility and debt reduction, Sen. Landrieu has also joined those in the Senate leading the way in bipartisanship negotiations over the President’s tax cut and budget resolution. She worked with fellow Louisianian Sen. John Breaux and a bipartisan group of Senate moderates in crafting a compromise between the President’s $1.6 trillion tax cut proposal and the Democratic alternative.
    .
    “Today I joined with Sen. Breaux in voting for a $1.2 trillion tax cut,” said Landrieu in a press release — “the product of a bipartisan team of senators working together to produce a tax cut that all Louisianians and Americans can be proud of, while leaving room for investments in defense, education and debt reduction.”

    http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=3255&kaid=103&subid=110
    .
    Ultimately, New Democrats control the Senate, as we’ve seen in examples too numerous to list here.

  • groenhagen2

    Paul Dirks:

    “I’m sorry, what legislation were you refering to that was passed by the 110th Congress over Bush’s veto?”

    The unemployment rate was at 5% as late as April 2008. What legislation passed by the GOP prior to the 110th Congress that caused the mess? And if this legislation caused the mess, why didn’t the Democrats do anything during the first 18 months of the 110th Congress to prevent the mess?

  • groenhagen2

    Paul Dirks:

    “Which is of course why it makes perfect sense to continue to refuse to allow taxes to revert to their previous levels.”

    So you would agree that the Democrats also should not have wasted $800 billion in failed stimulus spending? How about their plan to spend even more on health care? If we’re broke, we certainly cannt afford that new entitlement program.

  • sue_n

    “That adds up to 56% of Americans who blame Democrats.”

    Wouldn’t that same math mean that 64 percent blame Republicans?

  • virginiagentleman

    groenhagen2, re: this brilliant piece of analysis:

    “36 percent of those said Republicans were more to blame, while 28 percent said Democrats were at fault. Some 28 percent said both parties were to blame.”
    That adds up to 56% of Americans who blame Democrats.
    .
    Very true. Of course, that also means 64% of Americans blame Republicans. So you’re back at square one, Sparky, more Americans blame Republicans.

  • m0mentom0ri

    “What legislation passed by the GOP prior to the 110th Congress that caused the mess?”
    .
    The Glass-Steagall Act was repealed in 1999 under a Republican controlled Congress.
    .
    Glass-Steagal was the firewall between the speculators and the banking system. You can track a lot of our current problems back to its removal.

  • 3xfire3

    Jay,
    .
    I thought you and the rest of the swamp liberals might enjoy this post. No matter how hard you try to influence the results, the Democratic Party will lose VERY BIG in November.
    .
    I thought all you Liberals would like to hear about the Democratic Party choice for their Theme Song for the November Elections. It truly is fitting for all you Liberal Losers.
    .
    Democratic Theme Song….”Born To Lose”
    .
    Now no name calling, even though the truth hurts, I expect you all to be ladies and gentlemen.

  • groenhagen2

    “Very true. Of course, that also means 64% of Americans blame Republicans. So you’re back at square one, Sparky, more Americans blame Republicans.”

    I guess I have to explain the point for the moonbats. There is little difference between 56% and 64% and, again, as time passes Democrats are justifiably receiving more of the blame for the mess they created. So, again, the combination of an ugly messenger and a very unappealing message isn’t going to prevent the bloodbath the Democrats will experience on 11/2.

  • groenhagen2

    momentairhead:

    “The Glass-Steagall Act was repealed in 1999 under a Republican controlled Congress.”

    That’s an extremely weak example. And who was the president who signed off on the repeal?

  • freeinpa

    A proven blueprint for success– ask Obama except you need to add some zeroes to the 1 lie

  • stuartzechman

    If we’re broke, we certainly cannt afford that new entitlement program.
    .
    How’d you feel about Medicare Part D?

  • shepherdwong

    That’s because they’re “conservatives”. That’s what plagues this country, whether Republican or Democrat.

  • gingerpye

    Why is it that you can name call (“liberal losers”) and no one else can?

  • grape_crush

    Funny! This:
    .
    And who was the president who signed off on the (Glass-Steagall) repeal?
    .
    Was preceded by this:
    .
    Actually, Tom Daschle and the Democrats controlled the Senate when the tax cuts were passed in 2001…
    .
    Can’t have it both ways, groo.

  • m0mentom0ri

    “And who was the president who signed off on the repeal?”
    .
    Bill Clinton.
    .
    I’ve said before: There’s plenty of blame to go around. You’re the one saying the Republicans are blameless and its all the Dems fault. Just because you’re a partisan sycophant, doesn’t mean everyone else is. That’s called ‘projection’.

  • sy2d

    Another swing and a miss.

  • http://elvisberg.wordpress.com Elvis Elvisberg

    Gov’t borrowing at the insanely low interest rates is a great short-term thing to do to boost the economy, which is still way below potential GDP and full employment. Allowing tax rates on the top 1% of earners to relapse to their 1990s levels is a great way to address long-term budget issues. Simple, clear, obvious, and uncontroversial among professionals.
    -
    Needless to say, the Republican Party will fight it tooth and nail, from the lowliest sign-waving Tea Partier right on up to leaders and elder statesmen like Rush Limbaugh, John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, and Dick Lugar.

  • Ohg Rea Tone

    Boehner is the leader of the primates in the local Washington Zoo. But even primates understand fundamental concepts of decency.

    http://thefiresidepost.com/2010/08/24/inside-the-minds-of-rednecks-and-consequences/

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    Given that the Bush tax cuts are currently in effect and have been for quite some time, and based on what Boehner has said about the current economy, I can only conclude that he is proposing the country hold the line on high, and possibly higher, unemployment. He wants to lock in the same high rates of unemployment the Democrats do, for the long term.
    .
    That’s just great.
    .
    Getting economic advice from these guys is like asking the winos on the corner to design a new foreign policy.

  • stuartzechman

    The repeal of Glass-Steagall shows that is isn’t the party that’s important, it’s the political-economic philosophy.
    .
    In the case of Gramm-Leach-Bliley, we can see that both Gramm’s market fundamentalism and Rubin/Summers’ Third Way ideologies utterly failed the test of reality.
    .
    “Failed” meaning failed to serve the interests of most Americans, that is…

  • stuartzechman

    Do any movement liberals here want to refute Boehner’s claim that tax cuts always create jobs, and so the best way to stimulate the economy is to give wealthy people much more enormous tax breaks than they currently get?
    .
    Can we do that in a sentence or two without running into the problem of the Stimulus being 40% or so tax cuts –and not all for small businesses, either?

  • groenhagen2

    grape_crush:

    “Can’t have it both ways, groo.”

    Airhead, things changed between 1999 and 2001. You may have missed it, but we had an election in 2000. It was in all the papers.

  • groenhagen2

    momentairhead:

    “I’ve said before: There’s plenty of blame to go around. You’re the one saying the Republicans are blameless and its all the Dems fault.”

    Actually, I was disputing the ugly congresswoman’s contention that it was the GOP that drove the car into the ditch, but you moonbats were never big on reading comprehension.

  • ohiolibb

    Wait…he has a PLAN?!?!

  • m0mentom0ri

    “ugly congresswoman’s”
    .
    Stopped reading there. Grow up, groen, and drop the childish insults if you want to be taken seriously.

  • highcheef

    While I can appreciate cheerleading, “My team’s gonna whip your team on 11/2/10″, I thought we were all on the same team, you know, America?
    In case you have forgotten how our founding fathers set up “the worst political system except for every other one”, you tend to have to work with the other side to pass actual legislation; barring a super majority in both houses of Congress and control of the presidency. At best, the GOP will take the House; there are simply too many safe seats for them to take the Senate. That said, what do you think will happen for the next two years of Congress? That somehow, the GOP’s ideas of tax cuts to the wealthy, Cold War era military spending, and deregulation of all industries will actually result in legislation? Or do you realize that we will simply have gridlock and more finger-pointing in Washington while more Americans suffer?
    I can understand disappointment that you must feel since your side lost the big game in ’08. Dems went thru the same thing with W in ’00 and again in ’04.
    But this idea, that somehow in November all politicians with a ‘D’ after there name will cease to exist amazes me. You’re going to be in for a rude awakening on Nov 3, when, lo and behold, Obama is still president and the Dems still have control of the Senate (if not the House, too). With your expectations so high, you have set yourself up for a tremendous disappointment.
    On a sidenote, with the vitriol that you spew towards your fellow citizens, do you believe sometime of “winner take all” civil war is in our future? I ask because the manner in which you refer to your fellow American citizens would lead one to believe that you think of them as less than human and would be incapable of seeing them as bringing any type of positive benefit to American society.
    Thanks much…and I’ll take my answer offline.

  • allthingsinaname

    Stuart,

    Perhaps you could provide us with the names of Senators and Congresspersons you do support, I.E. are liberal enough for your blessing.
    .
    Thanks

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “Actually, Tom Daschle and the Democrats controlled the Senate when the tax cuts were passed in 2001, so it would be inaccurate to call it a Republican decision.”
    .
    “June 6, 2001: Senator Jim Jeffords, previously a Republican, declared himself an independent and announced he would vote with the Democrats, giving Democrats control in the Senate with a one-seat advantage. Democrat Tom Daschle became Senate Majority Leader.”
    .
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/107th_United_States_Congress#Major_events
    .
    “June 3, 2001
    PRESIDENT BUSH has fulfilled his promise that every American who pays taxes will send a smaller check to Washington. ”
    .
    http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/03/business/the-tax-bill-up-close-some-facts-some-tips.html?scp=6&sq=Bush+tax+cuts&st=nyt
    .
    You’re three days off.
    .
    The Senate was still split 50/50 when they passed the bill.

  • m0mentom0ri

    Not sure I qualify as a movement liberal, but here’s my pair of pennies anway:
    .
    Refutation: The 2003 tax cuts were supposed to generate 5.5 million jobs with in 18 months. Only 2.4 million were created.
    .
    That said: I don’t think the problem is job creation. I think the problem is a demand drought. Without an increase in demand, the jobs will never materialize. Simplified: If people aren’t buying things, then people won’t be hired to make things.
    .
    I can argue for middle-class tax cuts to help increase consumption, I have a harder time justifying tax cuts for the higher tiers when the wisest thing to do with that money is sit on it until demand increases.

  • freeinpa

    In the House 362 voted yes with 155 Democrats voting yes including Pelosi

    In Senate 90 Senators voted yes including Biden and Reid

  • 1farley

    With Boehners’ comment on how the last 19 months has gone should he have not mentioned the huge stone wall the Repubs have erected . Virtually every idea has been met with the trademark “NO” even proposals they have backed in the past get nixed and ridiculed. They’re refusal to help the 9-11 1st responders shows how desperate they are to regain power. This also shows their disregard for basic humanity and how far they’ll go to protect their special interests from paying their fair share.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “A proven blueprint for success– ask Obama except you need to add some zeroes to the 1 lie.”
    .
    Never, ever work for a wingnut like freeinpa unless you want to be called a liar day and night.
    .
    It is projected that insurance rates would not go up further than they would have. Since it is not yet 2025 and it will never be both 2025 in the universe where HCR did not pass and did pass to be side by side for Republicans to see, then it is called a “lie”.
    .
    Death panels? Oh, just a little fib.
    .
    There are WMD in Iraq?, A tiny bluff.
    .
    16,500 armed IRS agents? Oh, just joshin’ you.
    .
    “Mr. Freeinpa, if you don’t put oil in your car then your engine will seize.”
    .
    YOU LIAR!
    .
    If you don’t have this brain tumor removed, you will be mentally incapacitated.
    .
    YOU LIAR!
    .
    If/then statements are very confusing to wingnuts.
    .
    Complete and total BS just pulled straight from Limbaugh’s colon is fine, but an if/then statement is a complete lie according to wingnuts.

  • freeinpa

    We would be better off having the winos design foreign policy if you believe that that tax cuts that have been in effect for years are now the cause of high unemployment.

  • http://elvisberg.wordpress.com Elvis Elvisberg

    The modest tax hikes of Reagan (83) and Bush Sr. and Clinton (early 90s) preceded an era of growth and prosperity. The tax cuts of Bush Jr. coincided with a lost decade for the American economy. We’re talking about tax hikes of a couple percentage points for folks who are doing very well, and did very well even when tax rates were at their Clinton-era levels.
    -
    Reducing government revenue doesn’t magically make the economy better. There’s no reason to believe it does.

  • freeinpa

    Isn’t it amazing what you learn when you read something besides left wing loon bat rants

  • freeinpa

    “This also shows their disregard for basic humanity and how far they’ll go to protect their special interests from paying their fair share”
    =

    I love this nonsense liberals throw out. Tell me exactly what is “fair share” 30%? 50% 75% Or whatever liberals deem at the moment is fair?

    And better still, tell me who the hell you are to decide what is “fair” for me and my family or anybody else’s?

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    I now understand Groenhagen2!
    .
    He mistakes politics for pornography!
    .
    When he sees a woman running for office, he hopes she will take her clothes off, so, he votes for attractive women but hates less attractive women.
    .
    He, also, has a strong sexual attraction to George W Bush and Ronald Reagan.
    .
    I, myself, ask out attractive women and vote for intelligent people.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    So freeinpa, you believe extending the tax cuts will create employment? How soon could we expect full employment to return after they are extended? What is the real cause of the recession?

  • freeinpa

    No Rev Jim you are just a failed loser

  • sy2d

    Neither a movement liberal, nor a sentence or two:

    ZAKARIA: And now for our “What in the World?” segment.

    So, the American economy is stalling. Applications for unemployment insurance reached the half-million mark last week, the first time to cross this threshold since last November.

    The housing sector is weakening. Private business is not hiring. And the consumer is not spending.

    But meanwhile, there is a major global economy that’s booming. No, it’s not China or India or any other emerging market. It’s Germany, the world’s fourth largest economy, which grew at 2.2 percent last quarter. That was its best quarter in 20 years, and it blew the other major EU economies out of the water.

    Germany, you might say, isn’t that part of old Europe that Americans always make fun of, high taxes, big welfare state, strong unions, lots of regulation? None of that sounds conducive to economic growth. But Germany is powering ahead, bouncing back from the financial crisis and the economic recession.

    So how did they do it?

    First, the German consumer was prudent and didn’t spend more money than he had. While much of the rest of the first world was on a spending spree in the last decade, especially the United States and Britain, Germans held back. They never maxed out on their credit cards. They never took out home equity loans.

    One reason that American consumers aren’t spending right now is that they are still working off mountains of debt. The average American has a debt load that is 122 percent of his annual income. The German average is a more manageable 100 percent.

    Second, Germany has a strong manufacturing sector that exports products around the world. The United States and many other rich countries have essentially outsourced their manufacturing over the last three or four decades. It’s cheaper to have things made in China or India.

    But Germany managed to keep a lot of its manufacturing right there in Germany. It maintained technical institutes, apprenticeship programs, and in many other ways has encouraged and built and sustained manufacturing. So when it sells a Porsche or a BMW, that money comes right back into Germany.

    Germans are also attentive to the risks of losing technical skills. So while U.S. businesses shed jobs the minute they see the demand for their products drying up, German businesses are more careful. They are more likely to keep their workers, perhaps on half time, or even quarter time, rather than fire them. They believe that this retains the workers’ skills and his loyalty so that when the economy revives, the company has trained workers ready to ramp up.

    Finally, reform. The Germans have reformed their pension system, they’ve raised the retirement age, they’ve trimmed workers’ benefits, they’ve freed up their labor market, and of course they have an affordable national health care system, one that costs half as much as ours. So their workers are actually a lot less expensive to their businesses than American workers are to theirs with the huge pension and health care costs that come along with them.

    The result of all this, while the U.S. this week announced another round of bad unemployment figures, German unemployment fell in July for the 13th straight month. Germany has now regained almost all of the jobs it lost during the recession.

    Maybe we could learn something from what’s going on across the Atlantic in another high-wage, high-tax, high-regulation economy.

    http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1008/22/fzgps.01.html

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    “Do any movement liberals here want to refute Boehner’s claim that tax cuts always create jobs, and so the best way to stimulate the economy is to give wealthy people much more enormous tax breaks than they currently get?”
    .
    I find reality has a way of measuring theories. However, for me, it isn’t whether to have tax cuts or not, the question is who should get them. Personally, I think they ought to be targeted at job creators, because I find it hard to separate demand creation from employment. It is people who have jobs who tend to spend. Many economists believe the Bush tax cuts stimulated China, more than anything else, because they make a lot of cheap crap.

  • grape_crush

    Airhead, things changed between 1999 and 2001. You may have missed it, but we had an election in 2000. It was in all the papers.
    .
    Don’t blame me for your issues with following simple logic, groo…You’re trying to blame a Dem president for signing off on the neutering of Glass-Stegall out of one side of your mouth while trying to absolve a Repub president of any responsibility for signing off on tax cuts.
    .
    The more honest interpretation is that the Big Pointing Finger of Blame is angled toward policymaking that grew out of decades of flawed right-wing economic theory by politicians of both parties.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    Here’s the new Tea Party theme song.
    .
    The rights were just purchased from Cobain’s estate today:
    .

    .

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “The repeal of Glass-Steagall shows that is isn’t the party that’s important, it’s the political-economic philosophy.”
    .
    Bulls eye!
    .
    You’ve nailed that point down perfectly!
    .
    This means split-the-baby third way Democrats are not going be helpful and may continue the harm and all Republicans, marching in lockstep towards more economic failures will do us harm.

  • freeinpa

    “Gov’t borrowing at the insanely low interest rates is a great short-term thing to do to boost the economy, which is still way below potential GDP and full employment. Allowing tax rates on the top 1% of earners to relapse to their 1990s levels is a great way to address long-term budget issues. Simple, clear, obvious, and uncontroversial among professionals”

    =
    Among professionals? Professional what? Loons?

    Rates will turn up and eat up an increasing portion of the budget. Higher taxes on fewer people working with increasing spending will only end up with higher deficits.

    Interest payments are 11% of the budget now and even with Obama’s rosy GDP forecasts (already seriously wrong) it grows to $840 billion or 15% in 2020 and that doesn’t include the off balance sheet nightmare known as Freddie and Fannie which the taxpayer is on the hook for now.

    Uncontroversial among the professionals who told us the porkulus plan would stop unemployment at 8%.

  • freeinpa

    Keeping tax levels stable at current levels will certainly produce an economic environment than raising them. If raising taxes was the answer why haven’t the Dumos raised them? Survey says: It kills the recovery!

    The real cause of the recession was a real estate bubble caused by a misguided policy from Washington that began in the 1990s. It took 20 years to build and it may take that long to repair.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “Do any movement liberals here want to refute Boehner’s claim that tax cuts always create jobs, and so the best way to stimulate the economy is to give wealthy people much more enormous tax breaks than they currently get?”
    .
    I’ll try to make it brief:
    .
    Spending = job creation.
    .
    Low income = high percentage of income spent.
    .
    High income = low percentage of income spent and more tossed into secondary markets (stock market, bonds, futures, derivatives – things which do not themselves create jobs but are tied to the business cycle.)
    .
    Stimulus = salaries to previously unemployed people (low income) and big spending creating many other jobs.
    .
    Tax breaks for wealthy = large amounts put into secondary markets creating stock market bubble and/or inflated real estate prices with low spending and low job creation.
    .
    Job creation is caused by businesses having a large number of clients spending money on them. New investment is almost always from retained earnings and, considering what a small percent of businesses are on the stock exchanges, almost no new investment comes from IPOs.
    .
    So, hire people to work on government projects creates spending which creates the need for more private sector employees to handle all of the new government employees which cycles again to create more jobs.
    .
    Give a tax break and a very small number of people get hired for serving these wealthy people and a huge amount goes into overpriced real estate and overpriced stocks and bonds.
    .
    Sorry, big ideas require many words.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “The real cause of the recession was a real estate bubble caused by a misguided policy from Washington that began in the 1990s. It took 20 years to build and it may take that long to repair.”
    .
    The real estate bubble as the dotcom bubble were caused by a huge amount of savings by the wealthiest.
    .
    People making $10 an hour are not inflating real estate prices, but, they are spending about $9.99 for every hour worked getting others hired.
    .
    Deregulation allowing banks to engage in predatory lending is why it was residential real estate and not the stock market this time.
    .
    (Commercial real estate fluctuates with the unemployment rate – low unemployment means busy commercial realtors and high unemployment means I have time to debate wingnuts.)

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “Actually, I was disputing the ugly congresswoman’s contention that it was the GOP that drove the car into the ditch…”
    .
    Put your pants back on or at least go to a porn website where looks are everything.
    .
    Right wing policies drove this economy into a ditch.
    .
    Some were approved by third way Democrats much to my own disappointment.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “And better still, tell me who the hell you are to decide what is “fair” for me and my family or anybody else’s?”
    .
    We, sir, are the majority.
    .
    It’s called Democracy or rule by the people.
    .
    We, the voters decide if we vote for somebody who helps the rich get richer and drives the poor into greater poverty or if we vote for people who help make class mobility possible.
    .
    Majority rule tells us who pays what.

  • kevin

    Stopped reading there.
    .
    You should have stopped reading when you saw his name.

  • apr2563

    Laying aside my vow to not address the reactionaries on this site, I have to ask groenhagen2 if he considers himself a Christian? He didn’t answer last time I asked.

  • http://liberalspin.wordpress.com darkskinned

    @patricksartor

    “We, sir, are the majority.”

    Enjoy that for about 10 more weeks.

  • http://liberalspin.wordpress.com darkskinned

    @stuartzechman

    “How’d you feel about Medicare Part D?”

    Is that a new entitlement program

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    freeinpa I didn’t catch your job growth projections. What do you see happening over the next 3 quarters, if the Bush tax cuts are extended?
    .
    With respect to the housing bubble argument. You seem to have excluded the financing and insurance elements of that bubble. Any particular reason, or just an oversight? I imagine you blame gov’t for that too, do you?

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “a failed loser”
    .
    Failing to be a loser?
    .
    That would be an accidental success just as you and Groenhagen are accidental successes at comedy.

  • 3xfire3

    Ohg,
    .
    Now if a Conservative had said that about Obama, all Liberals would be up in arms calling them a Racist and an example of how evil all Conservatives really are.
    .
    Yet liberals say these kinds of things all the time about Conservatives and think it’s OK.
    I think the word is HYPOCRITE.
    .
    As they say if the shoe fits, wear it. Why are most Liberals Anti-White? The only reason that makes any sense is that most must have “White Guilt”.
    .
    White Guilt has no place in our Democracy today. It causes more harm to minorities than it helps.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    150 days until January 20th 2011, not ten weeks and the Republican majority in either much less both houses is not set in stone.
    .
    Repealing Bush’s tax cuts was both a campaign promise of Obama’s and of many Democrats in both houses and Americans LOVED that campaign promise since it meant not spending our grandchildren’s money and not slashing and burning government to become so small that it could not stop oil companies from being so unsafe that they would ruin the Gulf and an SEC so castrated that it couldn’t even investigate Bernie Madeoff.
    .
    If you want to pay lower taxes but have your income ruined, go ahead and see if you can get a Republic Party majority.
    .
    We’ll see.

  • freeinpa

    No Rev Jim you are a successful loser: College dropout, failed taxi driver, used car sales and reject from public service and just generally a burden to society.

  • http://liberalspin.wordpress.com darkskinned

    “Repealing Bush’s tax cuts was both a campaign promise of Obama’s ”

    … and so was “Not raising taxes on anybody making less than $250000″

    So, what happended to that? Selective Amnesia?

  • 1farley

    I guess it is much better to borrow from China and pay whatever rates they want than have us pay any taxes. They’ll be happy to finance us in attacking any country that poses a minimal threat (so long as they have oil). That way we’ll be able stuff our offshore accounts full of tax free money and no one will be able tell us what to pay. I wonder who’ll pay the Chinese though.

  • freeinpa

    So little time so many imbecilic liberals!
    =
    “The real estate bubble as the dotcom bubble were caused by a huge amount of savings by the wealthiest.
    .
    People making $10 an hour are not inflating real estate prices, but, they are spending about $9.99 for every hour worked getting others hired.
    .
    Deregulation allowing banks to engage in predatory lending is why it was residential real estate and not the stock market this time.
    =
    Rev JIm you are too stupid for words. Yes it wasn’t the day traders and small retail investors that drove up dot.bomb companies it was only the wealthy. But you may be right liberals call anyone with an income wealthy. That explains Spitzer and the suits against the retail brokers because grandma lost her entire savings. She was a billionaire who put in all in one stock.

    And all of those foreclosed houses now are from millionaires. That’s why they had subprime mortgages from Freddie and Fannie. Over 1/3 of the exisiting home sales were foreclosures and short sales with average sales price of $182,600. unless those homes lost 90% of their value I doubt if “the wealthiest” were buying these houses.

    And it was not deregulation but government meddling that forced banks to lend to unqualified. Another brilliant example of liberal social engineering which liberals now deny. Just as Barney Frank now denies (despite video tapes) that he interfered with reigning in Fannie & Freddie. You can keep repeating otherwise but it doesn’t make it true. It just adds to your growing list of failures.

    =
    “freeinpa I didn’t catch your job growth projections. What do you see happening over the next 3 quarters, if the Bush tax cuts are extended?”

    As long as the looney left keeps spending and adding stranglehold regulation and mandates like HC, the tax cuts if extended will struggle to keep unemployment where it currently is. Businesses will not invest any money on growth with growing costs hanging over their heads. That may be rectified in November.

    As for the housing bubble, yes it was the financing led by government threats that started with the Clinton administration playing the race card and forcing underwriting requirement to evaporate. Any lender that did not have sufficient high risk mortgages got a visit from Janet (Bigfoot) Reno and the DOJ.

    You and Rev Jim can keep in denial but it doesn’t change it.

  • freeinpa


    .
    We, sir, are the majority.
    .
    It’s called Democracy or rule by the people.
    .
    We, the voters decide if we vote for somebody who helps the rich get richer and drives the poor into greater poverty or if we vote for people who help make class mobility possible.

    =
    Hold onto that memory. The people who were hoodwinked (lied to) by the Demos who ran as Repubs to get elected then voted for massive spending, taxes and regulation are mad as hell and will tell you what the majority wants very soon.

    They know quite well that you don’t build up any class by tearing down another.

    You are still a failure and your political philosophy will soon be shown to be the same. Have mom take your shoelaces and belt and stay away from open windows.

  • robotguy1

    If you think about it, most of the Bush years were prosperous to America. Millions of NEW jobs (not “saved jobs”) were created.

    Did the economy slip later in his second term? Yes it did.

    Was it a cyclical occurrence or did the economic recession have more to do with the Dems 2006 rise to power? Probably both.

    But remember, it was the Dems who wanted everyone to own a house. What does this mean? Welcome to the sub prime mortgage world. Also known as the catalyst for the housing bubble and mortgage meltdown.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    I am not a failure of any of those things and work in a job which averages a very high pay rate in the best city in the world.
    .
    And you fix air conditioners in rural PA and call ME a loser?
    .
    Sniff. Sniff.
    .
    I think I smell the pot calling the kettle black.

  • shepherdwong

    Do any movement liberals here want to refute Boehner’s claim that tax cuts always create jobs, and so the best way to stimulate the economy is to give wealthy people much more enormous tax breaks than they currently get?
    .
    There’s no need, that’s what we have data for (as imperfect as it may be). The most stimulative thing the government can do is provide food stamps and continued unemployment benefits which will be spent immediately, returning more than $1.60 of economic benefit for every dollar of spending. OTOH, tax cuts for corporations and the rich lose about 70 cents for every dollar wasted on them.
    .
    But what the government needs to do more than just stimulate economic activity is provide jobs to the unemployed, either through direct government employment on infrastructure (roads, bridges, water and sewer, the electrical grid, communications, etc.) or through public funding of public-private projects (which still returns more than $1.50 for every dollar of spending). We simply can’t prosper as a nation with one out of five people unemployed or severely under-employed on a perpetual basis. In fact, it could destroy us.
    .
    http://mediamatters.org/research/201007020030

  • apr2563

    Groan2: I again I break my vow. I would like you to post your picture on this site so we can decide whether you are worth reading based on your looks.
    .
    Also, please answer my question? It is important. Are you a Christian?

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “Yes it wasn’t the day traders and small retail investors that drove up dot.bomb companies it was only the wealthy.”
    .
    Day traders never drove up long term prices.
    .
    A day trader would sell within minutes or hours and would, at most, cause minor fluctuations within a day.
    .
    Of course you know how many McDonalds workers saved up every penny that they earned for the past three years and did not live in a home or pay rent to have $30k to $100k to do day trading.
    .
    No, those day traders were not well off. They were janitors and other paupers.
    .
    “That explains Spitzer and the suits against the retail brokers because grandma lost her entire savings. She was a billionaire who put in all in one stock.”
    .
    If Grandpa worked in a non-union factory, Grandma has a stock portfolio of $0.
    .
    These were middle or upper income people. These were not the poor.

    “And all of those foreclosed houses now are from millionaires.”
    .
    No, the dopes who saw the description of an interest only loan a no doc loan and said “sure, I’ll put $10,000 into that” were not people making under $30 per hour.
    .
    The dopes who kept on buying the mortgage backed bonds no matter how flimsy the loans were are the ones who caused the bubble. If nobody bought these absurdly risky bonds then there wouldn’t have been predatory lending.
    .
    “And it was not deregulation but government meddling that forced banks to lend to unqualified..”
    .
    With both Chris Dodd, half of the Democrats and every Republican in their pocket banks smiled along and got forced into losing money and smiled the whole way?
    .
    It was that banks could hire credit agencies to give anything mortgage backed a triple A bond rating and that investors with more money than brains (as well as brokers/financial advisers) who never realized that they were buying loans that were worthless was the cause.

  • stuartzechman

    I would just like to say thank so much for all of the excellent responses so far.
    .
    There are some interesting variations, all of which seem to arise from reality-based methods of thinking. That in and of itself is a phenomenon worth looking into.
    .
    Before exploring what is or is not likely to be supported, or looking into source data for some of these claims:
    .
    I wonder if it’s possible to counter the GOP mantra “Tax cuts create jobs; with more money in their pockets to spend, businesses will hire” with any of the concepts included in these responses.
    .
    What’s to be said in return, if movement liberals were given the chance to have a voice?
    .
    …in two sentences?

  • shepherdwong

    Three word will do it: “it’s a lie.”

  • shepherdwong

    Three words will do it: “it’s a lie.”

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “The people who were hoodwinked (lied to) by the Demos who ran as Repubs to get elected then voted for massive spending, taxes and regulation are mad as hell and will tell you what the majority wants very soon.”
    .
    So, now George W Bush, George HW Bush and Ronald Reagan, all huge spenders are now Democrats?
    .
    “They know quite well that you don’t build up any class by tearing down another.”
    .
    Your strategy is to starve the poor to save the rich from taxes on money they will no longer be making since the poor can not buy food or shelter from the rich and you lecture us on class warfare?
    .
    No, give an unemployed man $15 per hour, what does he do with it?
    .
    He takes it a business owned by a wealthy man and gives him the money for food, shelter, clothing and, maybe, internet service.
    .
    Stop things like the stimulus and benefits for the poor, the wealthy will not be able to sell anything nor hire the poor or middle class.
    .
    Quit projecting!
    .
    You are against the old Lyndon Johnson War on Poverty and are, instead, on a war against the poor even if it bankrupts the wealthy to make sure that the poor and middle class get nothing.

  • juscause

    Funny name, Boehner! Phonetically sounding it out, I just don’t end up with a word like Bayner. However, I think it accurately describes his stance against Obama and his administration as well as his level of intellect. Let’s just call him by his name and be done with it. I think it says it all!

  • shepherdwong

    … and so was “Not raising taxes on anybody making less than $250000″
    .
    So, what happended to that?

    .
    Republicans happened to that. They wrote and rammed through the law that raises those taxes, not Barack Obama or the Democrats.

  • freeinpa

    Rev Jim no surprise you dropped out.
    =

    “Your strategy is to starve the poor”

    This is standard liberal meme. Starve the poor, take SS from the old and hate the brown skins. One scare tactic after another.
    =
    “He takes it a business owned by a wealthy man”

    Wow every business is owned by a wealthy man. Proving once again liberals believe that anyone with any cash left after taxes is wealthy.
    =
    “You are against the old Lyndon Johnson War on Poverty”

    That war is now 50 yrs old. When do liberals declare their solutions a failure?? They wanted Bush to have a date certain withdrawal date against a devious opponent but nary a word about an end date for LBJ’s war.
    =
    “even if it bankrupts the wealthy to make sure that the poor and middle class get nothing.”

    I am sure the voice in your head that came up with this stupidity thought this made sense but this is even idiotic for you.

    Still a failure. Mon and dad must be sooo proud!

  • maverick2k9

    Agent Orange has got one thing right (needless to say, for the wrong reasons):
    -
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Summers#Losses_on_financial_derivatives

    During Summers’ presidency at Harvard, the University entered into a series totalling US$3.52 billion of interest rate swaps, financial derivatives that can be used for either hedging or speculation. Summers approved the decision to enter into the swap contracts as president of the university and as a member of Harvard Corp., “the university’s seven-member ruling body” which bears “the school’s ultimate fiduciary responsibility.” By late 2008, those positions had lost approximately $1 billion in value. This forced Harvard to borrow significant sums in distressed market conditions to meet margin calls on the swaps. In the end Harvard paid $497.6 million in termination fees to investment banks and has agreed to pay another $425 million over 30–40 years. The decision to enter into the swap positions has been attributed to Summers and has been termed a “massive interest-rate gamble” that ended badly.
    -
    At a time when the entire economy has been run into the ground by investment banks (with help from Repugs/Blue Dog Democrats), I have no idea why President Obama would want as his economic advisor, someone who ran Harvard into the ground with derievative gambles!!

  • http://liberalspin.wordpress.com darkskinned

    “Republicans happened to that. They wrote and rammed through the law that raises those taxes, not Barack Obama or the Democrats.”

    That’s golden, you, just like Obama, continues to pretend that Rebublicans still control both houses of congress.. Too bad for you (and Obama), people are not blind anymore.

    Pocket change can only excite so many people for so long.. guess they are waking up:D

  • http://liberalspin.wordpress.com darkskinned

    Obama also sounds funny to most people, guess, the WH is scared sh!t about that these days!

  • shepherdwong

    “That’s golden, you, just like Obama, continues to pretend that Rebublicans still control both houses of congress.”
    .
    The law was written by Republicans in 2001, moron. A brand new law would be required to change it. Now please go back to the kiddie pool, we have enough children in over their heads here as it is.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “Wow every business is owned by a wealthy man.”
    .
    Fine, a person with more wealth, not wealthy per se.

    The point being that the flow of money goes from the poorest to the wealthiest and if the money does not flow, then the wealthy have nothing.
    .
    “That war is now 50 yrs old.”
    .
    Wrong, that “War lived to be 27 and in 1981 eliminated by Ronald Reagan.
    .
    “I am sure the voice in your head that came up with this stupidity thought this made sense but this is even idiotic for you.”
    .
    It’s called Econ 101.
    .
    If nobody can afford to buy anything at Walmart, the wealthiest family in America, the Waltons, will go broke.
    .
    Before then the person who owns one single store, if not already driven under by Walmart, will have gone out of business since the poorest do not have a $10 per hour job to buy anything from them.
    .
    Sorry that Econ 101 is over your head. Maybe you were too busy guzzling sour mash in college.
    .
    I wasn’t.

  • http://liberalspin.wordpress.com darkskinned

    “A brand new law would be required to change it.”

    So, what’s holding up your bosses to pass a new law and extend those tax cuts, I guess they still control the congress, right?

    .. so, kiddie pools are where HomoCrats like you hangout and prey :D

  • http://liberalspin.wordpress.com darkskinned

    @patricksartor

    .. still waiting for your response to my previous post, or, did you conveniently miss that?

  • http://liberalspin.wordpress.com darkskinned

    “It’s called Econ 101.”

    I guess that’s Econ 101 they teach at liberal arts school. Most people see it differently, talk about being out of touch!

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “Yet liberals say these kinds of things all the time about Conservatives and think it’s OK.
    I think the word is HYPOCRITE.
    .
    As they say if the shoe fits, wear it. Why are most Liberals Anti-White? The only reason that makes any sense is that most must have “White Guilt”.”
    .
    There has been, due to the fact that black people have origins in Africa, very many racists who compare blacks to primates for no reason.
    .
    Therefore, thing that is an ethnic specific insult.
    .
    Nobody called any right wingers racist when they called him a Chicago gangster since Chicago gangsters were Italian.
    .
    if you said that about an Italian-American, then it would be an ethnic slur.
    .
    About half of all Democrats preferred either John Edwards or Hilary Clinton, but, like Obama’s ideas far, far better than anybody on the Republican side.
    .
    My favorite was John Edwards. Does that mean I have “black guilt” despite the fact that I am Caucasian?
    .
    Think about what would have happened if somebody called Condoleezza Rice or Colin Powell racist names?
    .
    If we have “white guilt” then we should have been all voting for Bush since he had Powell and Rice.
    .
    You just have no ability to see anything outside of your own point of view and demonize anybody who disagrees with you.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “I guess that’s Econ 101 they teach at liberal arts school. Most people see it differently, talk about being out of touch!”
    .
    Correct that:
    .
    “I guess that’s Econ 101 they teach at college. Right wingers who never took Econ 101 see it differently, talk about being out of touch!”
    .
    Either the pattern money flows is from consumer to business owner or it is not.
    .
    If you went to college all things studying people rather the objects (known as science if it is the study of objects) is called “liberal arts”.
    .
    All Economics is a both an exact science and liberal arts. Calling the department anything other than “liberal arts” would be like studying Chemistry in the theater department.
    .
    “Liberal Arts” has nothing to do with being political. Conservative economists are, also, studied in the “Liberal Arts Department”.
    .
    You have shown me that you do not even know what a college campus looks like and then try and tell me that you have “street smarts”.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “”Repealing Bush’s tax cuts was both a campaign promise of Obama’s ”

    … and so was “Not raising taxes on anybody making less than $250000″

    So, what happended to that? Selective Amnesia?”
    .
    It was $200,000 and, instead, Obama changed it to under $250,000.
    .
    He is keeping his promise and exceeding it by, instead of $200,000, making it $250,000.
    .
    I guess Obama is too conservative for you.
    .
    I presume this was your question since your other comments were about gay people and pedophiles.
    .
    I am not a priest, I am a commercial realtor. I have sex with adult women.

  • apr2563

    That does it:
    .
    Groanhagan must be a jihadist. After being asked 3 times, he, like the apostles, by his silence has denied Jesus. He is no Christian.
    .
    After being asked to post a picture of himself, he has not responded. He must be ugly. Therefore, by his standards, we can’t seriously consider anything he says.

  • diecash1

    I wonder if it’s possible to counter the GOP mantra “Tax cuts create jobs; with more money in their pockets to spend, businesses will hire”

    Again, there’s no need. As Shep mentioned, there is data for that. Businesses are hoarding record levels of cash right now as this Fortune article points out:

    It isn’t for a lack of resources. Non-financial companies in the S&P 500 index reported $837 billion in cash at end of March, a hefty 26% increase over the previous year’s $665 billion, according to S&P. These are unusually high levels — companies are holding cash reflecting 10% of their value today. Since 1999, companies on average held cash equal to 6.6% of their value.

    http://money.cnn.com/2010/08/02/news/economy/corporate_cash_hoarding.fortune/index.htm

    Those supporting this “tax cuts create jobs” mantra that you mentioned must answer this question: Exactly how much cash must a business hoard before it starts to hire additional employees?
    ..
    Of course the answer is, business tax cuts won’t create jobs in the current economic environment. Business aren’t hiring due to a lack of demand, not a lack of cash.
    ..
    For the staunch supporters of tax cuts, a better approach would be a targeted payroll tax cut where the business incurs no payroll tax expense for a set period of time for each additional employee (in the U.S.) that they hire.

  • maverick2k9

    After being asked 3 times, he, like the apostles, by his silence has denied Jesus. He is no Christian.
    -
    Good grief, nobody would accuse GroanMachine of being an apostle.
    -
    I guess you meant “apostate”. But to me, GroanMachine sounds more like the frustrated and misguided soul, Silas, from the “Da Vinci code”.

  • diecash1

    So, what’s holding up your bosses to pass a new law and extend those tax cuts, I guess they still control the congress, right?

    Oh, I dunno, maybe the $3.1 trillion that extending the Bush tax cuts would add to the debt over the next 10 years but neither you or Boehner care about that, do you?
    ..
    BTW, you’ve been defecating all over the Swamp all day. Maybe it’s time for a well-earned nap.

  • diecash1

    Millions of NEW jobs (not “saved jobs”) were created.

    You’re kidding, right? You must be. W had the worst record of job creation of any administration since the Great Depression. That fact must have slipped your mind.

    Did the economy slip later in his second term? Yes it did.
    Was it a cyclical occurrence or did the economic recession have more to do with the Dems 2006 rise to power? Probably both.

    Did the economy slip? Well, no, not exactly. I wouldn’t call the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression a mere slip. It was an unmitigated disaster. Only someone utterly clueless could call it a slip.
    ..
    Yeah, somehow you must be right. Those tricky Democrats must have allowed 9/11 to happen, started two unfunded wars, passed two massive tax cuts that primarily benefited the wealthiest members of society and then passed a massive and unfunded expansion of government, Medicare part D, all while ramping up the spending.
    ..
    You should obviously give up “analysis” of politics or economics as a hobby because you are completely daft.

  • edismeiamhe

    Three Cheers for Boehner…at last some clear headed thinking.

    Perhaps the professional Community Organizer will listen to some reason, and stop listening to the man behind the curtain, suggesting we do all this with smoke and mirrors.

    The Presidency of the United States is no place for On The Job Training.

    Then there is know-Joe nothing Biden ruffling his feathers and taking his foot out of his mouth long enough to try and stick Boehner’s honest efforts and suggestions onto their favorite whipping boy, George Bush.

    When are they going to give up on that tired old ploy?

    Where were the Demos during the eight years of the Bush Administration while all this debt was being piled up? Were ably assisting in the process or where they cowering in a corner aghast at such wasteful spending, or were they as usual sucking up the cash and feeding even more entitlements or, more likely, dragging the pork home to buy more votes?

    No politico alive in Congress at that time could claim to be lily white. There is more than enough blame to go around.

    Go Boehner…at last, a voice for reason speaking to an administration gone mad.

    OK,,,all you libby leftys, my flack jacket is buttoned up, and my helmet is on…let’s have it.

  • piper1
  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “The Presidency of the United States is no place for On The Job Training.”
    .
    That remark sounded so damn familiar:
    .
    “In April 1999, Quayle announced his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination for 2000, attacking front-runner George W. Bush by saying “we do not want another candidate who needs on-the-job training”.”
    .
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Quayle#Post-Vice_Presidency
    .
    Here’s a good quote:
    .
    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
    Albert Einstein
    .
    http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/26032.html
    .
    For thirty years now Republicans have been saying that cutting taxes on the wealthiest, the biggest businesses, removing regulation put in place to protect workers, consumers and investors from fraud or exploitation will lead to everything falling into place perfectly.
    .
    Obviously things are not working out so well for the thirty year old conservative experiment since, according to conservatives, taxes are still not low enough on the wealthiest (less than half of what it was thirty years ago) regulations on businesses are so shoddy that the MMS could not prevent BP from doing a huge amount of harm to the Gulf of Mexico, that the SEC missed Bernard Madeoff and many other Ponzi schemes but the solution is always the same.
    .
    Did you ever know an alcoholic?
    .
    They’ve got good news: they need a drink.
    .
    They have bad news: they need a drink.
    .
    They had a boring day: they need a drink.
    .
    They had stressful day: they need a drink.
    .
    They had a great day: they need a drink.
    .
    It’s hot out: they need a drink.
    .
    It’s cold out: they need a drink.
    .
    Republicans are addicted to destroying our government and using up as much of our grandchildren’s money as possible.

  • perrywhite1

    Plus, he sounded drunk. “Bobama”? Nice one, Bo-Boehner.

  • gingerpye

    apr, I clicked on the link above to groan’s facebook page. It says he’s Christian. Hard to believe, huh? Not too hot in the looks department, either.

  • nflfoghorn

    If he ever says he is, I’ll take his word for it. ;|
    .
    And her name is DEBBIE! And her husband must like the way she looks. Do you have something against Jews, too??

  • 3xfire3

    Patrick,
    .
    Back to the desert for another 40 years. You will be 80 before Liberals will ever have a chance to ruin our country again.
    .
    Don’t forget to take your totally inexperienced Leader with you. Never in the history of our country has a person become president with so little experience of running anything but his mouth. Patrick that must be why you love him so much. You have so much in common.

  • allthingsinaname

    No Stuart?

    Didn’t think so, just winging it I suppose cruse around find something that fits your meme and make a big deal out of it.

    Or perhaps you can’t find too many that you support?

    Ah well I thought I would give it a shot.

  • apr2563

    Thank piper. That answers my question. I can stop taking him seriously. Besides he seems to have a relationship with that statue.

  • apr2563

    No apostle he. They did deny Jesus 3 times at the Garden of Gesthmane, however. Much as Groan has denied him 3 times by not answering my question.
    .
    Piper sent a link to his Facebook page. He appears to be lonely. Maybe his inability to appreciate women for their abilities makes him less than desirable. He is communicating with a statue. His appearance does not allow me to take him seriously.
    .
    And, I’m sorry, he needs more proof of his Christian bona fides. He looks like a jihadist to me.

  • allthingsinaname

    Care to tell us what you think a movement liberal is and, who exactly fits that description. Only looking for a name stuart. I’d like to see how they vote.
    .
    Should I hold my breath waiting? No? I didn’t think so.
    .
    I’ll give you time to cut and paste and, add your emphases.

    Thanks

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “Besides he seems to have a relationship with that statue.”
    .
    You’re mistaken, apr. Groenhagen is like Medusa, the mythological Greek monster. If you gaze directly upon her eyes would turn onlookers to stone. But with Groenhagen if you listen to his voice too long you turn to stone.
    .
    That statue was his brother-in-law.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “Never in the history of our country has a person become president with so little experience of running anything but his mouth.”
    .
    Dwight Eisenhower, good president (my favorite Republican) never even voted before he ran for president. He was far less qualified.
    .
    George W. Bush, never in the Senate or the house and spent only one term as Governor of Texas.
    .
    John F. Kennedy was only in the house for a few years and the Senate for a short time. His credentials were about the same as Obama’s.
    .
    I could dig back further and further, but, your statement is way off.
    .
    “Patrick that must be why you love him so much. You have so much in common.”
    .
    So, you’re saying that I was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review, teach constitutional law at the University of Chicago (home to the most conservative school of Economics BTW) after working for a prestigious and very high paying law firm?
    .
    I told you that I liked John Edwards better, but, a man in his fifties who looks like he is 25 years old and can’t handle the temptation would have been Clinton Impeachment Part II. (Of course nobody knew that Edwards would cheat on his ill wife when he was seeking the nomination.)
    .
    If you asked me in 2003, before anybody outside of Illinois (where I have never lived and only once been to) what I wanted a president to do, about 90% of it is what Obama promised.
    .
    Then along came Obama promising to do what I have wanted a president to do. I do find him selling out to the right far too often, but, you wouldn’t understand that since you are so skewed.
    .
    BTW: I have not gone to law school much less become the president of the Harvard Law review and do not have the disadvantage of being black.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “You will be 80 before Liberals will ever have a chance to ruin our country again.”
    .
    Talk about projecting.
    .
    First, this is the aftermath of the financial meltdown as a reaction to right wing policies of the past 30 years.
    .
    Second, you will be 78 the next time a Republican has a chance to win the White House since Joe Biden is unlikely to win the nomination and Hillary Clinton will, likely, have given up her presidential aspirations.
    .
    You’ll be between the ages of 78 and 86 when we next see a Republican in the White House.
    .
    I’ll be 80 in 2051. You’ll either be the oldest man who ever lived or pushing up daisies by 2051.

  • sy2d

    I wonder if it’s possible to counter the GOP mantra “Tax cuts create jobs; with more money in their pockets to spend, businesses will hire” with any of the concepts included in these responses.

    Three sentences:
    *
    1. History has proved that voodoo trickle down economics just doesn’t work.
    *
    2. How dare Republicans propose a bail-out / give away for the wealthiest 5% rather than constructive ideas for actually stimulating our economy. Eff’ them.

  • 3xfire3

    “Dwight Eisenhower, good president (my favorite Republican) never even voted before he ran for president. He was far less qualified.”
    .
    Patrick,
    .
    Your examples show how little you personally know about managing anything.
    .
    Eisenhower managed probably the most complex organizations in the world consisting of millions of people spread over multiple continents. To say that Obama was more qualified then Eisenhower shows you have little knowledge of reality.
    .
    Your personal lack of experience shows how ignorant you really are and your biggest problem is that you don’t even realize it.
    .

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “Eisenhower managed probably the most complex organizations in the world consisting of millions of people spread over multiple continents.”
    .
    First, Eisenhower was on one continent at a time, almost exclusively Europe.
    .
    Second, managing one organization does not ensure competence in managing a totally different organization. Eisenhower, being very, very versatile was, also, president of Colombia University. Would you say that, since she managed Harvard Law school well that Elaina Kagan would be an ideal CEO?
    .
    Since I see managing a military, a college, a business and a government as distinctly different, I would not say that Elana Kagan is prepared exclusively due to her being the dean of Harvard Law school to be a mayor, a governor, a general or a CEO.
    .
    Third, and most importantly, running an elected democracy involves both knowing how to get a consensus and knowing the specific individuals and their own agendas. So, if, say, John Boehner,had one particular project very close to his heart you would know what to offer him to gain his cooperation. So, experience in that particular legislative body is very important.
    .
    This reminds me of two other presidents less experienced than Obama:
    .
    Woodrow Wilson, spent only two years as governor of New Jersey and was former president of Princeton University.
    .
    Herbert Hoover, a brilliant engineer and businessman never served in elected office but had been on the cabinets of a few presidents beforehand when he became president.
    .
    So, GW Bush, Eisenhower, Wilson and Hoover are all less qualified than Obama was when he was elected president while Kennedy was not much more qualified and Harry Truman never attended college at all.
    .
    The very most qualified president would be a man who was in the House, the Senate, twice vice president before becoming president: Richard Nixon.
    .
    Close behind would be a longtime Senator and congressman who had been vice president for three years: Lyndon Johnson.
    .
    In other words, never judge a book by it’s cover.
    .
    Obama beat GW Bush’s qualifications significantly and, always projecting like a magaplex, Republicans want to attack Obama’s qualifications.
    .
    If you believe that management is management is management, please run for mayor (first selectman, or whatever title it is) of your town and tell us how similar or dissimilar it is.
    .
    From there, you will have your own police force so using your real name will not be a problem since any police chief who wants to keep his job will protect the mayor from any threats or perceived threats.
    .
    Here is our difference in philosophy: I believe in highly specific expertise. You believe that all people put in a position of management can trade off with mayors, CEOs, Generals, university presidents and Senators.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “He appears to be lonely. ”
    .
    Well if his idea of making new friends is to go to a politically centrists blog and insult everybody, I don’t think he will ever have any new friends.
    .
    What’s up with a macho man wearing shorts?
    .
    Maybe it’s just me because I haven’t owned a pair of shorts since I was a child, but, aren’t shorts anti-macho?
    .
    (Sure, most guys do own a pair of shorts, but, the uber-macho ones and me don’t. Also, according the the Sopranos, a mafia don, among other macho guys, should never wear shorts in public.)

  • robotguy1

    “You’re kidding, right? You must be. W had the worst record of job creation of any administration since the Great Depression. That fact must have slipped your mind.”

    I never said that Bush had the Best job growth of that last 75 years. I said he had positive job growth. Which considering the events of 9/11 is quite remarkable. After all, he did not have to spend 250,000 dollars an every job “saved” or created.

    On to your part about democrats allowing 9/11 to happen, I have no idea where this comes from.

    Finally, tax cuts for the rich. Hmmm…poor people do not pay taxes, so they are out. Middle class people do pay taxes, and they got a 5% cut, which is good. “Rich” people got a 4.6% cut, which is better than nothing considering how much they pay.

    Why is that everybody wants to punish the wealthy by stealing their money? They have certainly carried this country for long enough!

    Maybe you should acquire some independence and understanding. The govt is not your friend, they intrude on people’s lives way too much and democrats have yet to deliver an a promise yet…other than wealth confiscation and re-distribution.

  • 3xfire3

    Patrick,
    .
    Again you show your total ignorance about management experience. Every President you mentioned had more management experience then Obama. He never managed anything. Not even a lemonade stand. His management experience is Zero.
    .
    Your total ignorance about management experience and management skills borders on comedy. That you actually believe the stupidity of your argument is almost insane.
    .
    If you are an example of what liberal think about managing an organization; it is understandable why the Obama administration is so totally inept.
    .
    94% of Obama’s key advisors have no real world business experience. These are the people advising him on the economy. It is no wonder that the economy is a mess with Obama having zero management experience and only 6% of his advisors with any real world business experience.
    .
    Anyone who thinks this is a formula for success; I have so swamp land in Florida that I’m sure you would be intested in.

  • diecash1

    I never said that Bush had the Best job growth of that last 75 years. I said he had positive job growth.

    No, you said

    most of the Bush years were prosperous to America. Millions of NEW jobs (not “saved jobs”) were created.

    which is an even more ridiculous statement.
    ..
    My comments regarding the Democrats were facetious as those deeds were done by the Republicans.
    ..
    As to your position regarding the tax cuts: You must be kidding. Do you realize how much $3.1 trillion is? It’s the height of fiscal irresponsibility to extend these tax cuts permanently and only the truly craven and/or clueless could support such a stance in the face of the facts.

    Why is that everybody wants to punish the wealthy by stealing their money?

    More ludicrous commentary. Taxes are not theft, they are the price of living in a modern society.

    The govt is not your friend, they intrude on people’s lives way too much

    Hey, if you want to go Galt, be my guest but instead of whining about taxes and the government while living comfortably (in the U.S. I presume), why don’t you move to a free-market paradise like Somalia where you and your cohorts can be unshackled and able to pursue your dreams without taxes or government intervention.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    3X,
    .
    I find your explanation very comical myself.
    .
    A hospital needs a president. Candidate A has been at the hospital for ten years including head of surgery and in charge of the pediatrics division while candidate B spent thirty years as a president of a trucking company.
    .
    With your logic, it is candidate B, since he had been a president before.
    .
    The Police Department needs a new commissioner.
    .
    Candidate A is a superintendent who worked his way up from patrolman through two different detective squads over a 20 year period and candidate B spent 30 years managing a bank.
    .
    Your logic would have you pick candidate B while I would be candidate A.
    .
    The Army needs a new general. Candidate A spent 20 years after Officer’s Candidate school in the Army is lieutenant general in the same army where they need a general and candidate B joined the Army at age 34 after making millions of dollars founding a dotcom company.
    .
    I would choose candidate A and you would choose candidate B.
    .
    The Catholic Church needs a new Bishop. Candidate A spent 20 years as a priest, ten of those years as a pastor and five years as an administrator for the archdiocese. Candidate B just got ordinate this week and has just repented after spending 30 years as teh owner of a chain of strip clubs.
    .
    I would choose A and you would choose B if apply your logic.
    .
    If Herbert Hoover spent 30 years managing private companies and never once campaigned for office while Barack Obama spent ten years in elected office and never managed a business, Obama is ten years more qualified than Hoover was.
    .
    If we followed your reasoning, judges, police commissioners, bishops, mayors and CEOs of all different businesses would be trading jobs at random since being in charge is being in charge no matter what you are in charge of.
    .
    That’s completely laughable.
    .
    How about the mafia don? From what I read, a don is charge of 500 made men with a huge amount of responsibility. By your reasoning, he is more qualified than a state senator – since state senators do not manage – to be governor.

  • maverick2k9

    Apr, thanks for the clarification.. Apostle GroanMachine it is.
    -
    Also, note that Groan lists Shannity and Blenn Gleck as his fav TV shows. No wonder he has lost his sanity.
    -
    Oh.. He also lists seniormonthly.net as his website!! Is that his latest business??

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “I have so swamp land in Florida that I’m sure you would be intested in.”
    .
    If I had a Florida license I would tell you that for more than $1 an environmental group might very well want it. I don’t know the going rate for Florida Swamp land, but, I bet it is far more than $1 an acre.

  • maverick2k9

    Oh.. I wonder what 3X is gonna say when Sister Sarah becomes President:
    -
    But Patrick, they are all White Presidents. Don’t you know that we have a different yardstick (aka Jim Crow) for measuring the competencies of a Black President?
    -
    Only experience Sis Sarah has of running is:
    * Running from college to college in search of an easy way to get a degree, any degree.
    * Running away from home to elope with First Dud Todd.
    * Running away from Governor’s chair halfway thru the term.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    maverick,
    .
    Let’s be fair. She was a perky sports caster in Alaska.
    .
    Now if she can announce sports, she clearly must be able to make decisions for a country with more than half of the military expenditures worldwide, three hundred million citizens and one fifth of the world’s total gross domestic product.
    .
    See the connection?
    .
    Like I said in a later thread, Republicans are no longer thinking with their head, they are thinking with their Boehner.

  • robotguy1

    I do live here comfortably, as I should I pay my way…along with that of others.

    If this is the cost of living a modern society, why doesn’t everyone pay the same amount?

    In this modern day we should have figured out by now how to get everyone to pay their fair share.

    Finally, why should I have to leave? I just want the America that is free. Where you do not have to worry about govt doing what “they” think is best for you.

    This is not what the Framers had in mind. If liberalism and socialism are the answer then change the constitution. After all, it is amendable.

blog comments powered by Disqus