RSS

Category Archives: 2012 Election

Latest 2012 Presidential Polls (14 Oct 11 Edition)

A new Rasmussen Reports poll conducted 12 Oct 11 has been released concerning the Republican Tea Party (GOTP) nominating circus; there are no big surprises except it validates Cain is a real contender – for now – and everyone (Gingrich, Perry, Paul, Bachmann, Santorum and Huntsman) except Romney is out of the contest.

The current Rasmussen Reports poll results are:

Herman “Pizza Man” Cain 29; Mittens Romney 29; Newter Gingrich 10; Reverend Rick Perry 9; Ronny Paul 5; Michele “Krazy” Bachmann 4; Jon “I can’t believe it’s not butter” Huntsman and Ricky “The Ric” Santorum 2

What’s really interesting with this poll from Rasmussen (which notoriously slants to the far right) is who does Rasmussen want to win it all? The Pizza Man is still riding high at the end of the week tied with Crown Prince Mittens perhaps still proving he’s more than just Palin’s “flavor of the week”; Perry’s plummeted off the scope, along with Newter (who was never a serious contender); Paul and Krazy continue sharing a rubber room in political purgatory; while Huntsman and Santorum are still consistently bringing up the rear.

In Iowa, there’s no change; the PPP (D) poll conducted from 07 – 10 Oct 11: Cain 30; Romney 22; Paul 10; Perry 9; Bachmann and Gingrich both 8; Santorum 5 and Huntsman 1…

A new Magellan Strategies (R) poll conducted 12 – 13 Oct 11 shows Mittens pulling a little further in the lead in New Hampshire (news is NH primary may move up to as early as 3 December to counter Florida’s attempt to become the first primary); the Magellan Strategies (R) poll results: Mittens 41; Cain 20; Paul 10; Gingrich and Huntsman 6; Bachmann 4; Perry and Santorum 2 while Gary Johnson trails with 1.

No change since adding South Carolina Primary this week – a poll conducted by Winthrop from 11 – 18 Sep 11 shows a very tight race up front: Perry 31; Romney 27; Cain 8; Gingrich 5; Bachmann and Paul 4; Huntsman and Santorum both 2.

According to a new Time poll conducted 9 – 10 Oct 11, if the general election were held today:

President Obama 48/Romney 44

President Obama 50/Cain 38

President Obama 51/Perry 40

The PPP (D) poll conducted 7 – 10 Oct 11

President Obama 50/Gingrich 39

President Obama 47/Paul 39

President Obama 50/Bachmann 38

Still can’t fathom why Rasmussen Reports conducted a poll 2 – 3 Oct 11 to see how Santorum was doing:

President Obama 45/Santorum 34

No new results concerning Huntsman

President Obama/Huntsman

It’s still appears that where a match up with the President is concerned pollsters appear to have decided Huntsman’s done (was he ever in it?); of course, truth be told, so are Santorum, Bachmann, Perry, Paul and Gingrich. Sometime soon we’ll begin to see these “candidates” begin to drop out as they simply won’t have the funding necessary to continue. There’s a chance Bachmann is egotistical and “Krazy” enough to try for a third party run, but the others will pack it in and support whoever wins.

Pizza Man continues to annoy Mittens by being anywhere close to the top, much less tied for first – look for Mittens and the others to really go after Cain in the next debate as none of them want to see him as the nominee.

So, if the GOTP clown car had finally stopped spinning, and the general election was held today, Pizza Man or Mittens would now be the GOTP candidate, and would have lost to President Obama.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on October 14, 2011 in 2012 Election

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Latest 2012 Presidential Polls (12 Oct 11 Edition)

Holy grab me by the throat and slap me with a stick, a PPP (D) poll conducted from 07 – 10 Oct 11 has stood the Republican Tea Party (GOTP) nominating circus on its head.

The current PPP (D) poll results are:

Herman “Pizza Man” Cain 30; Mittens Romney 22; Newter Gingrich 15; Reverend Rick Perry 13; Ronny Paul and Michele “Krazy” Bachmann 5; Jon “I can’t believe it’s not butter” Huntsman 2 and Ricky “The Ric” Santorum 1

So, the Pizza Man delivers an upset in the polls perhaps proving he’s much more than just the “flavor of the week” while Mittens tumbles – perhaps only temporarily from his throne; Perry’s freefall continues, plummeting off the scope, while Newter gains some traction; Paul and Krazy continue floating in political purgatory; while Santorum is upstaged by Huntsman.

In Iowa, a new PPP (D) poll conducted from 07 – 10 Oct 11: Cain 30; Romney 22; Paul 10; Perry 9; Bachmann and Gingrich both 8; Santorum 5 and Huntsman 1…

There’s some movement in the middle of the pack, as a fresh New Hampshire poll from Harvard/Saint Anselm conducted from 2 – 6 Oct 11 indicates: Mittens 38; Cain 20; Paul 13; Gingrich 5; Perry and Huntsman 4; Bachman 3 while Santorum and Gary Johnson both have 1.

This week I’m adding polling concerning the South Carolina Primary – a poll conducted by Winthrop from 11 – 18 Sep 11 shows a very tight race up front: Perry 31; Romney 27; Cain 8; Gingrich 5; Bachmann and Paul 4; Huntsman and Santorum both 2.

According to a the PPP (D) poll, if the general election were held today:

President Obama 45/Romney 45

President Obama 49/Perry 40

President Obama 48/Cain 42

President Obama 50/Gingrich 39

President Obama 47/Paul 39

President Obama 50/Bachmann 38

For some strange reason Rasmussen Reports conducted a poll 2 – 3 Oct 11 to see how Santorum was doing:

President Obama 45/Santorum 34

President Obama/Huntsman

Unfortunately for Huntsman – where a match up with the President is concerned – pollsters appear to have decided it’s time to stick him with the proverbial fork – because he’s done; of course, truth be told, so are Santorum, Bachmann, Perry, Paul and Gingrich.

If the GOTP nomination circus – and the general election – had both ended today, Pizza Man would now be the GOTP candidate, and he would have lost to President Obama.

So, somehow the Pizza Man’s managed to move up on top; but Mittens has seen this song and dance before in this race; Perry held the lead for about six weeks this summer and has now disappeared from the top bracket, and it’s entirely possible if he just sits back and waits it all out – he does have a bit of time to do that – he’ll emerge on top when all the saw dust settles. That’s unless of course Cain’s for real – then Mitt could be playing the part of the best friend in the ugly pink taffeta dress – always a bride’s maid but never the bride.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on October 12, 2011 in 2012 Election

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

GOTP wanabees gather and get it wrong in debate – again

The Crazy Eights gathered again to “debate” one another and to try to outdo each other on who could tell the biggest fabrication; this time the hopefuls sat around a great big dinner table and pounded and pontificated while Charlie Rose, who turned in an abysmal performance as moderator, tried to keep it going. As debates go, this was primarily a yawner – but there were some moments.

The Republican Tea Party (GOTP) contestants were not exactly on “accurate” on their so-called facts, as was evidenced in the oft repeated attacks on how the poor wealthy job creators were over burdened with regulations. Calls of, “REPEAL, REPEAL, REPEAL!” rang through the hall.

Mittens threw down on this topic claiming, “All of the Obama regulations, we say no. It costs jobs.”

Reverend Rick’s thoughts were that regulations “are strangling the American entrepreneurship out there.”

While Ricky “the Ric” Santorum pleaded from somewhere near the bottom of the polls that if elected he’d, “Repeal every regulation the Obama administration put in place.”

Unfortunately for these guys the United States Department of Labor data clearly shows only a very – and I do mean very – small percentage of companies experiencing large layoffs cite government regulation as the reason. In fact – a word the GOTP seldom uses – since President Obama took office, there’s been just two-tenths of 1 percent of layoffs claimed to have been due to government regulation.

Mittens, Perry and Santorum all know this, and yet it’s popular with the far right to blame too much government for the economic fact consumers just aren’t buying enough of what’s being manufactured. This is not economic rocket science.

On the popular Tea Party subject of banging ObamaCare, Michele “Krazy” Bachmann took a swing at the issue declaring, “We have a big problem today when it comes to Medicare, because we know that nine years from now, the Medicare hospital Part B Trust Fund is going to be dead flat broke.” She also charged that “President Obama plans for Medicare to collapse, and instead everyone will be pushed into Obamacare.”

First, Krazy doesn’t seem to know any more about Medicare than she does about who was born in her hometown.

Second, Part B is not for hospital payments, it’s for outpatient care, and on top of that, it’s pretty much impossible for Part B to go broke because it’s financed by the federal government’s general fund and by beneficiary premiums.

Third, Part A is the hospital trust fund, and it’s projected to become insolvent in 2024, 13 years in the future, not the nine Krazy is claiming, and even then it would be able to pay 90 percent of its obligations, so it’s not now and never will be “dead flat broke.”

Furthermore there’s absolutely no evidence – as in zero – to support Krazy’s charge the President is planning for Medicare to collapse; his health care law envisions nothing like that. In fact, a Republican budget – which Krazy voted for – would make far larger changes to the program for the next generation, converting it to a voucher-like system.

When taxes were thrown into the mix Herman “flavor of the week” Cain touted his 9-9-9 plan so often it sounded like a Dominoes commercial. He claimed his plan is a “bold” overhaul of the tax code that would get the economy back on track, and be embraced by the nation.

While no one can argue Cain’s plan is audacious, it’s unlikely that the millions of American families who would face significant tax increases (low and middle class) will embrace it. No doubt whatsoever that the wealthy (Romney, Cain, Huntsman etc) would probably love it because they would get big tax cuts.

The low and middle class would see their taxes go up under Cain’s plan, while the wealthy would get tax breaks. Perfect plan if you’re a rich former pizza executive.

Cain’s plan would eliminate the payroll taxes funding Social Security and Medicare, essentially throwing the poor and the elderly under the bus – or pizza delivery car – while replacing the progressive federal income tax with a flat 9 percent tax on income. He’d lower the corporate income tax from 35 percent to 9 percent, and impose a new 9 percent national sales tax. All of which would significantly lower tax revenues, requiring severe cuts to domestic social programs at the same time giving significant breaks to the wealthiest 2% – again.

These are just three more very viable reasons why voting for any of these so-called candidates is a bad idea; either they’re deliberately manipulating facts – lying – or they’re woefully ignorant of reality. Now, I may argue the former is probably true for Romney and Huntsman, for the rest the latter is no doubt the real deal.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on October 12, 2011 in 2012 Election

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Christie throws weight behind Romney in GOTP presidential nod

The Associated Press (AP) is reporting that Republican Tea Party (GOTP) darling New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has endorsed Mittens Romney for the GOTP presidential nomination, sending a signal to the skeptical GOTP establishment to fall in line behind the former Massachusetts governor.

“I’m here in New Hampshire for one simple reason: America cannot survive another four years of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney’s the man to lead America and we need him now,” Christie said, standing alongside Romney.

There’s speculation Christie’s endorsement could influence groups Mittens has struggled to win over – a core segment of the GOTP establishment that isn’t enthused by him, and the Tea Party, many of whom view him as insincere on issues they hold dear, and who don’t like him because he’s a Mormon, and since a large portion of the Tea Party is made up of uber-conservative evangelical Christians that’s a big deal.

The AP is reporting Christie has closer ties to the former Massachusetts governor than to other candidates. Romney endorsed Christie when the former U.S. attorney ran for governor in 2009. And in January, he became the first Republican presidential contender to visit Christie at the governor’s mansion in Princeton.

On a conference call later in the day, Christie addressed a supporter’s suggestion that he become Romney’s running mate.

“That’s going to be Governor Romney’s choice,” Christie said. “I’ve told him my only interest is helping him get elected and serving my state.”

He added that he has “every expectation” that he’ll serve the remainder of his term as governor, which expires after the presidential election at the end of 2013.

And now we come to probably the biggest reason for Christie’s support – Romney’s going to name him as his VP choice. Christie will bring support to the ticket Mittens can’t get any other way; Bachmann won’t bring it; Perry won’t bring it; Cain won’t bring it; Santorum won’t bring it and Rubio won’t bring it …

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on October 11, 2011 in 2012 Election

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Latest 2012 Presidential Polls (11 Oct 11 Edition)

WP/Bloomberg/PSRAI poll conducted from 06 – 09 Oct 11 shows that Mittens Romney is now firmly in the lead of the Republican Tea Party (GOTP) nominating circus.

The current WP/Bloomberg/PSRAI poll shows:

Mittens Romney 24; Herman “Pizza Man” Cain 16; Reverend Rick Perry 13; Ronny Paul 6; Michele “Krazy” Bachmann 4; Newter Gingrich 3; Ricky “The Ric” Santorum 1 and Jon “I can’t believe it’s not butter” Huntsman 0 …

So, Mittens is – it appears – firmly ensconced in the lead; “Herb” Cain still appears to be the “flavor of the week” while Perry is now plummeting of the scope; Paul, Krazy and Newter are floating in no-man’s land; Santorum is stuck in neutral and Huntsman’s campaign has stalled once again.

In Iowa, a new PPP (D) poll conducted from 07 – 10 Oct 11: Cain 30; Romney 22; Paul 10; Perry 9; Bachmann and Gingrich both 8; Santorum 5 and Huntsman 1…

There’s some movement in the middle of the pack, as a fresh New Hampshire poll from Harvard/Saint Anselm conducted from 2 – 6 Oct 11 indicates: Mittens 38; Cain 20; Paul 13; Gingrich 5; Perry and Huntsman 4; Bachman 3 while Santorum and Gary Johnson both have 1.

This week I’m adding polling concerning the South Carolina Primary – a poll conducted by Winthrop from 11 – 18 Sep 11 shows a very tight race up front: Perry 31; Romney 27; Cain 8; Gingrich 5; Bachmann and Paul 4; Huntsman and Santorum both 2.

According to a PPP (D) poll – conducted from 07 – 10 Oct 11, if the general election were held today:

President Obama 45/Romney 45

President Obama 49/Perry 40

President Obama 48/Cain 42

President Obama 50/Gingrich 39

President Obama 47/Paul 39

President Obama 50/Bachmann 38

For some strange reason Rasmussen Reports conducted a poll 2 – 3 Oct 11 to see how Santorum was doing:

President Obama 45/Santorum 34

Unfortunately for Huntsman, pollsters have decided it’s time to stick him with the proverbial  fork – because he’s done; of course, truth be told, so are Santorum, Bachmann, Perry, Paul and Gingrich.

President Obama/Huntsman

If the GOTP nomination circus – and the general election – had both ended today, Mittens would now be the GOTP candidate, and he would have tied with President Obama.

However, there’s still (even more now than before) the reality that evangelicals are generally not going to vote for a Mormon; so, if Mittens wins the nomination it is probable that a large section of the GOTP base will likely vote for someone else (a third party candidate – like a Bachmann) or just stay home. Romney has a huge credibility issue due to some major flip-flops on issues, and his inability to know fact from fiction on national defense questions, or the so-called job creation while he was governor of Massachusetts – amongst other things …

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on October 11, 2011 in 2012 Election

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Romney lied to Cadets at The Citadel?

According to the Associated Press (AP) Republican Tea Party (GOTP) presidential candidate Willard Mitt Romney promised in his first major foreign policy speech to reverse “massive defense cuts” that haven’t happened, and he pledged to deploy missiles and ships that already are in place.

The AP reported Romney pledged, “As president, on day one, I will focus on rebuilding America’s economy and I will reverse President Obama’s massive defense cuts. Time and again, we have seen that attempts to balance the budget by weakening our military only lead to a far higher price, not only in treasure, but in blood.” Mittens also has vowed to increase the size of the military by 100,000 troops, a move he says is needed to reduce the hardship of long and frequent deployments.

Unfortunately for Romney there have been no “massive defense cuts” under President Obama, although he has slowed the “projected” rate of increase and in April asked the Pentagon to identify an additional $400 billion in reductions over the next 12 years, he hasn’t “cut” a single penny from defense spending.

When President Obama was sworn in, the defense budget was $513 billion, not counting $153 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. For the budget year that ended 30 Sep 11, the figure was $530 billion, with an additional $159 billion to pay for the wars. So, as anyone can plainly see, there has been an increase in defense spending under President Obama, not some imaginary “cuts”; and for the current fiscal year (FY 12), the President has requested $553 billion for the defense budget, exclusive of war costs. But in a deal worked out by Congress and the White House as part of a deficit-reduction plan in August, he was forced to come down to $513 billion – I hope everyone was paying attention to who wanted to spend $553 billion and who forced it to go down to $513 billion; in case you missed it, it would be the Republican Tea Party controlled Congress – meaning the House of Representatives – who as any fifth grader knows, controls the federal purse strings.

So, Mittens could – I suppose – if he’s elected, force the GOTP controlled House to stop cutting defense; but to claim its President Obama is either to do so deliberately, as in a lie, or out of ignorance for the facts. Since Romney is not ignorant, it must be a deliberate lie.

As for troop numbers, the AP reported President Obama’s previous defense secretary, Robert Gates, put the Army and Marine Corps on a path to reducing troop numbers to adjust to the winding down of combat in Iraq and plans to reduce troops in Afghanistan. The Army is to drop from its current 569,000 to 547,000 by September 2013, and then to 520,000 by 2015. The Marines are to drop from 202,000 to a figure yet to be specified but in the neighborhood of 186,000 by 2015, the Marine Corps – not he President – has been advocating cuts to its size; traditionally it numbers around 175,000, and was only bumped up to its current size of 202,000 to address its long “Army-like” missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. And, by-the-by, when you end wars, you scale back on the number of troops, planes, ships, tanks, etc … just thought I’d mention that.

To add 100,000 soldiers to current troop strengths would be not just expensive, but very expensive and it’s not even remotely clear from Romney’s remarks what they would do, or how he would pay for them especially since he’s part of the “let’s not raise taxes” choir. Oh wait, I know, we’ll just cut Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, and with 100,000 new troops we can, wait for it, invade Iran!

Mittens also pledged that within his first 100 days in office, he’d “reverse the hollowing of our Navy and announce an initiative to increase the shipbuilding rate from nine per year to 15. I will begin reversing Obama-era cuts to national missile defense and prioritize the full deployment of a multilayered national ballistic missile defense system. … I will enhance our deterrent against the Iranian regime by ordering the regular presence of aircraft carrier task forces, one in the Eastern Mediterranean and one in the Persian Gulf region.”

Once again, Romney’s view of reality doesn’t measure up; the total number of ships in the Navy has been declining steadily since the 1980s. With the demise of the Soviet Union, the need for large numbers of warships has not been a priority when the military has been fighting small-scale wars with minimal combat at sea. Dating back well into the Bush/Cheney era the Navy has said it needs a minimum of 313 ships to perform its missions. It now has 284 ships, up from a low of 278 in 2007. Hold on now, that’s an increase from the previous President?

Despite Romney’s inference, there’s a full-time carrier presence in the Persian Gulf and has been pretty much since Desert Storm, but while there’s no full-time presence in the Mediterranean, carriers are frequently there for deployments in the Middle East.

So, let’s see; there’s been an increase in ships since President Obama took office; and we’ve had a commanding carrier presence in the Persian Gulf – that would be the area Iran uses incidentally – another couple of lie perhaps, or is Mittens ignorant of foreign affairs, in spite of trying to portray himself otherwise?

On the topic of national missile defense; Earth to Mittens, it’s already deployed and is being expanded, not cut. There are 30 ground-based interceptors based in Alaska and California, along with a network of radars and command and control stations to operate it. Additionally, there are 24 Navy Aegis ships with a missile defense capability already in service.

Mittens is clearly mistaken in all his assertions; the question now is, was he lying, or his he that woefully ignorant on national defense issues; unfortunately, I think it’s the former; it appears he’s deliberately trying to mislead voters; it’s bad enough to lie, worse yet is to lie about the Commander-in-Chief at a Military School in front of Cadets who will one day serve.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on October 8, 2011 in 2012 Election

 

Tags: , , , , ,

According to a Perry backer Romney’s in a ‘cult’ and isn’t a Christian

The Associated Press (AP) is reporting that a pastor who introduced Republican Tea Party (GOTP) presidential favorite Reverend Ricky Perry at a conservative gathering has said rival presidential candidate Mittens Romney is not a Christian and is in a cult because he’s a Mormon.

This is another reason why I’m not a Republican – I don’t like be associated with ignorance and intolerance.

Robert Jeffress, the so-called senior pastor at First Baptist Church in Dallas, is no stranger to showing his religious bigotry; as he made an identically imperceptive remark during the 2008 then GOP campaign.

Reportedly, the event organizers at the Values Voters Summit selected Jeffress to introduce Perry, but the Perry campaign was consulted about the choice and approved Jeffress to introduce the Texas governor.

So, Perry’s people obviously share the same lack of unprofessionalism and inability to vet people as Senator John McCain’s staff demonstrated – or do they? Perry’s steady slip in the polls coupled with Michele “Krazy” Bachmann’s push to make nice with evangelicals may have rattled the Texan’s cage enough that he’s ready to start playing the “Mormon” card.

Jeffress – whose comments about Romney clearly show him to be utterly unreliable in judging who is and who is not a Christian – endorsed Perry at the event and introduced him as “a proven leader, a true conservative, and a committed follower of Christ.”

After his remarks, Jeffress told reporters Perry’s religion is different from Romney’s.

“Rick Perry’s a Christian. He’s an evangelical Christian, a follower of Jesus Christ,” Jeffress said. “Mitt Romney’s a good moral person, but he’s not a Christian. Mormonism is not Christianity. It has always been considered a cult by the mainstream of Christianity.”

“It has always been considered a cult by the mainstream of Christianity.”? Did you really just say that chuckles? Because if you did, clearly mainstream doesn’t mean the same thing to you that it does to, well, to mainstream.

I’m fairly confident Reverend Dullard was meaning the adjective definition of mainstream when he spoke, which is defined as, “belonging to or characteristic of a principal, dominant, or widely accepted group, movement, style, etc…”

I’m equally confident that mainstream Christianity – meaning those Christians whose beliefs are not steeped in the ignorance of 19th century southern religious sophistries – know that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are not only Christian, but devotedly so.

To his credit, Perry – and his campaign – attempted to say he disagrees with Jeffress.

Asked by reporters in Tiffin, Iowa, whether Mormonism is a cult, Perry replied, “No.”

Perry spokesman Mark Miner also said that “the governor does not believe Mormonism is a cult.”

While those comments are reassuring, the campaign refused to say whether it was accepting Pastor Dolt’s endorsement. “The governor is running a campaign of inclusion and looks forward to receiving the endorsement of many people,” Miner said. “People can endorse whoever they like.”

So, by that kind of logic, the Perry campaign will probably not be saying if they’d refuse the endorsements of other individuals or organizations? I’ll leave that up to the imagination of the reader what kind of individuals or groups might want to endorse someone of Perry’s character and background.

Jeffress – who has also said “… the deep, dark, dirty secret of Islam: It is a religion that promotes pedophilia – sex with children. This so-called prophet Muhammad raped a 9-year-old girl – had sex with her”; and who put businesses on a “Naughty or Nice List” based upon the depth to which they celebrated Christmas – said in a 2007 sermon that “Mitt Romney is a Mormon, and don’t let anybody tell you otherwise. Even though he talks about Jesus as his lord and savior, he is not a Christian.

“Mormonism is not Christianity. Mormonism is a cult. And just because somebody talks about Jesus does not make them a believer.”

Reportedly, in that sermon, Jeffress said he was frustrated that some religious leaders had backed Romney anyway. “What really distresses me is some of my ministerial friends, and even leaders in our convention, say, `Well, he talks about Jesus, we talk about Jesus, what’s the big deal?’ It is a big deal.”

The AP said Perry’s campaign initially said the decision to have Jeffress introduce Perry had been made strictly by organizers, but a Perry spokesman later backtracked and said the campaign had agreed to it.

“It was their suggestion; it was their choice of who introduced us. They asked our campaign what we thought, and we said OK,” Miner said.

The AP also reported that Jeffress is a prominent religious leader in Texas, and that Perry specifically recognized Jeffress by name during his speech at a dinner for the Light of Life dinner and gala in Dallas.

Perry and Reverend Pudden-head are clearly known associates; the campaign knew what he thought about Romney – their disavowals aside – and they used the opportunity to score much needed points with the uber-conservative evangelical wing of the Tea Party. Romney may eventually win the nomination, by the slightest of margins, but it is very doubtful that the evangelical block will ever vote for him. And while they won’t vote for the President either; they’ll probably just stay home.

 
4 Comments

Posted by on October 7, 2011 in 2012 Election

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

On taxes, Reagan and Obama would be tight …

Isn’t it interesting that the same Arthur (aka Art) Laffer, the former Reagan economic underling, who is now making a splash on FOX PAC interviews crying “TAX CUTS FOR ALL, TAX CUTS FOR ALL!” wrote in June 2004 – for the Heritage Foundation no less – that as a result of the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 (ERTA) and other tax acts (meaning increases) in the 1980s, the top 10% were paying 57.2% of total income taxes by 1988 – up from 48% in 1981 … Why, that looks like a tax increase on the top tax bracket under Ronald Reagan, creating more tax revenue and stimulating the economy … and wow, President Obama has proposed increasing taxes on the top echelon of earners just like Reagan did to create more tax revenue and to help stimulate the economy, and yes Virginia, that would mean not only that there is a Santa Clause, but that the rich would be paying a higher percentage of total income taxes.

Additionally, a report from the Joint Economic Committee in 1996 found that the bottom 50% of earners share dropped from 7.5% to 5.7% from 1981 to 1988, and that the total share of taxes on middle income earners in the 50th to 95th percentile decreased from 57.5% to 48.7% between 1981 and 1988 … now that’s just amazing, the President’s jobs bill would reduce payroll taxes on both workers and employers, extend long-term unemployment benefits and invest in public works and teachers, police officers and other public servants – in effect reducing the tax burden of the lower and middle class, gee, just like Reagan did.

So, just to recap, from 1981 to 1988 we see an increase on taxes during Reagan’s presidency on the upper percent of earners (the top 5% to be exact) aka the fabulously wealthy so-called job creators, while at the same time tax rates were cut for the middle class and lower income classes and the economy grew right along with tax revenues helping the country out of a devastating economy … curse those darned facts!

 
1 Comment

Posted by on October 6, 2011 in 2012 Election

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Reagan would have supported President’s jobs bill?


CBS News is reporting that President Obama has said that former President Ronald Reagan would have supported his plan to raise taxes on Americans who make more than $1 million per year, known as the “Buffett rule,” and to back up his statement he quoted the Gipper from a 1985 statement saying, “Some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying 10 percent of his salary, and that’s crazy. It’s time we stopped it.”

And, oh surprise, just as the President Obama noted, Republicans never accused Reagan of being a “socialist” for wanting a bus driver to pay lower tax rates than a millionaire.

The President also mocked Republican Tea Party (GOTP) claims that his effort to pass the Buffett Rule — which would establish a minimum tax rate for those making more than $1 million per year in order to ensure they pay as much in taxes as lower-income individuals — amounted to “class warfare.”

“I know a lot of folks have short memories, but I don’t remember Republicans accusing Ronald Reagan of being a socialist or engaging in class warfare because he thought everybody should do their fair share. Things have just gotten out of whack,” he said.

Isn’t it amazing how it’s not class warfare when we lower the tax brackets for the wealthiest 2% while advocating cuts to the poor and needy?

The President quoted Reagan once again during remarks at Eastfield College later in the day in which he called on Republicans to pass his $447 billion jobs bill, which he sent to Congress last month. He noted in that speech that Republican House majority leader Eric Cantor has vowed not to let the jobs bill come up for a vote.

“Well I’d like Mr. Cantor to come down here to Dallas and explain what exactly in this jobs bill does he not believe in,” he said. “…Does he not believe in rebuilding America’s roads and bridges? Does he not believe in tax breaks for small businesses, or efforts to help our veterans?”

He went on to urge Cantor to “put this jobs bill up for a vote so that the entire country knows exactly where every Member of Congress stands.”

“Do your job, Congress!” he added.

Cantor spokesman Brad Dayspring responded to the comments by saying that “President Obama needs to understand that his ‘my way or the highway’ approach simply isn’t going to work in the House or the Democratic Senate, especially in light of his abysmal record on jobs.”

Ah yes, of course, the “my way or highway” tactic is the expressed copyrighted property of the GOTP House and the President isn’t allowed to use it. Well Brad, he just did, and the GOTP is going to have to put up or shut up. Vote it down and stand by it if you think it’s that bad of a bill; oh, and if I were a spokesman for a GOTP member of Congress right now, mentioning abysmal job performance is probably not the way to go, especially when you schmucks ran on the promise of creating jobs in 2010.

GOTP Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has reportedly called for an immediate vote on the bill in an effort to show it doesn’t have the unified support of Democrats, but Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid objected to bringing up the proposal, offering Republicans the chance to formally move to a debate on the bill; they declined the offer.

Well sure they declined the offer; they don’t want to go on record for actually opposing the creation of jobs.

The President’s bill would reduce payroll taxes on both workers and employers, extend long-term unemployment benefits and invest in public works and teachers, police officers and other public servants. It would be paid for through the tax increase on high earners and the closing of some corporate tax loopholes.

And what’s to argue here? Ah yes, I forgot, Darth McConnell has sworn an oath to the Dark Lord to make sure President Obama only has one term, and Cantor is a frightened little rabbit who likes to make a loud noise from his hutch but lacks the courage of his convictions to go on the record voting against it. Guess what boys? You’re already on the record opposing jobs, and it will come back to bite you in the butt come November 2012.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on October 6, 2011 in 2012 Election

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Tina Fey says she will not run for president?

Well, it’s finally official – sort of; according to the Associated Press (AP) ex-sportscaster/beauty queen contestant/mayor/VP candidate/governor Sarah Palin is saying she will not run for president, leaving little doubt that the eventual Republican Tea Party (GOTP) nominee will come from the current field of contenders – or some reasonable facsimile thereof.

After months of leaving her loyal subjects guessing, the Ice Queen has issued a proclamation saying that she and her royal consort Todd “devote ourselves to God, family and country,” and that her decision by golly maintains that order don’t ya know.

Her Majesty told uber-conservative per-adolescent radio bloviator Mark Levin that she would not consider a third party candidacy because it would assure President Barack Obama’s reelection.

Yeah, because those hundred or so votes would make all the difference.

Later, in a video authenticated by the CIA and posted on Youtube, Palin said, “you don’t need an office or a title to make a difference.”

Interestingly enough, it was during the unsuccessful 2008 presidential campaign of John McCain, that Palin – the VP nominee – seemed overwhelmed by the national spotlight, faltering at times in televised interviews even when asked straightforward questions, and it was just this week that a former McCain staffer revealed there was serious talk inside the campaign questioning if Palin was fit to be sworn in if they had won the election.

Crazy or not, Palin’s decision is hardly surprising; to put it quite simply, there’s no money in running for president, and clearly her support has eroded to such a point where her chances of winning the nomination – much less the presidency – were somewhere between slim-to-none and a snow ball’s chance. Fact is Palin isn’t now, and never has been, presidential and the GOTP is better off with her not running and simply sniping from the sidelines.

So, now Michele Bachmann is the only crazy woman running, and as anyone who’s attended a family reunion can attest, one crazy woman at a picnic is enough.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on October 5, 2011 in 2012 Election

 

Tags: , , , , ,