The Obamney Tax Plan Doesn't Add Up

The "Tax Policy Center report assessing Mitt Romney's tax plans was a big, big deal. So big a deal, in fact, that [one writer interupted his summer] vacation to draw out a couple of its key points."

For example, point # 2:  "The reason Romney’s plan doesn’t work is very simple. The size of the tax cut he’s proposing for the rich is larger than all of the tax expenditures that go to the rich put together. As such, it is mathematically impossible for him to keep his promise to make sure the top one percent keeps paying the same or more."  

Read the Washington Post, Nine takeaways on Romney’s tax plan, which also notes that the "fact that they couldn’t make Romney’s numbers work even when they stacked all these scenarios on top of one another shows just how impossible Romney’s promises are."

Me, oh my, Republi-con lies, I am utterly shocked (NOT).  

Obamney's Economic Plan: Currency Devaluation and Inflation

How does Obamney plan to stimulate the economy? Currency devaluation and inflation.

Read the Washington Post, Does Romney want to be a debaser? and the Los Angeles Times, The idea that inflation might be our friend is gaining traction.

This after years of sacrificing workers to appease their imaginary inflation god.

BTW, I've suggested a little inflation for years.  

The Obamneys, The First Family of Amercia Dressage, ‘It’s Basically NASCAR In A Velvet Top Hat’

UPDATE:  "John Kerry was made to look effete in 2004 by Republican mockery of his windsurfing, his Turnbull & Asser shirts and his French fluency. Now Democrats have a chance to do something similar to Romney, with his Swiss bank account, his Grand Cayman and Bermuda tax havens, his multiple homes, his $10,000 bet, his friends who own NASCAR teams, and now the six-figure horses his wife imports from Europe. Nothing says 'man of the people' quite like horse ballet."

Read the Washington Post, The politics of horse ballet.

Speaking of horses and Obamney, there is the White horse Prophecy.

The Romneys' horse Rafalca makes the Olympic team.

You must agree that "there is no better way to dispel the myth that Romney is detached patrician elite than competitive horse prancing."

Watch the Colbert Report, Mitt Romney's Champion Horse & Dressage Tribute:

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

SUA, SUA!

More on the Birthers Racists Fantasies

Birthers are part of a "sick political culture where 'facts are so easily twisted for political purposes and where strange armies of ideological pseudo-historians roam the biographical fields in search of stray ammunition.' . . . they disregard facts and common sense and undermine the role of serious history as they concoct conspiracy theories that portray the president as dangerous, alien and less than American.

What drives them? . . . [F]ears of demographic changes in this country, and out of racism."

Read the Washington Post, What drives the Obama doubters and haters?

Republi-CON "Property Rights" Hypocrisy

Republi-cons have "made unsuccessful efforts to force a permit for the [Keystone XL] project, including adding language in the Houseversion of a highway spending bill" claiming that the pipeline "would create thousands of jobs and increase U.S. energy security."

But what they failed to mention is that building the pipeline would require "taking of private property for public use — all along its proposed route" and not all of the landowners want to sell.

Read the Washington Post, Keystone XL pipeline is issue of property rights for some ranchers. 

Obamney Praises Governmwent Takeover of Health Care System

In Israel, which "regulates its health care system aggressively, requiring all residents to carry insurance and capping revenue for various parts of the country’s health care system.

Israel created a national health care system in 1995, largely funded through payroll and general tax revenue. The government provides all citizens with health insurance: They get to pick from one of four competing, nonprofit plans. Those insurance plans have to accept all customers—including people with pre-existing conditions—and provide residents with a broad set of government-mandated benefits."

Read the Washington Post, Romney praises health care in Israel, where ‘strong government influence’ has driven down costs. 

Republi-CONs Wrong Again

Whatever happened to those Republi-con Bond Vigilantes'

A "funny thing happened on the way to the predicted fiscal crisis: instead of soaring, U.S. borrowing costs have fallen to their lowest level in the nation’s history. . .

The experience of the past few years — above all, the spectacular failure of austerity policies in Europe — has been a dramatic demonstration of Keynes’s basic point: slashing spending in a depressed economy depresses that economy further.

So it’s time to stop paying attention to the alleged wise men who hijacked our policy discussion and made the deficit the center of conversation. They’ve been wrong about everything — and these days even the financial markets are telling us that we should be focused on jobs and growth."

Read The New York Times, Money for Nothing.

The Republi-CON 'Tax Hike Prevention Act' Tax Hike

The Act states that "There is no extension of the payroll tax cut in the amendment.  In addition, the increased spending through the tax code from the partisan 2009 stimulus law (ARRA) is not included in the amendment."

As you might have guessed, these tax cuts were passed during the Obama administration to benefit the poor and working class.  As the Republi-cons tried to explain, if "Obama passed it into a law, it’s not a tax cut."

Read the Washington Post, Republicans want to raise taxes on the poor. Why?

Expect a campaign ad on this topic soon.

Republi-CON "I Don't Need No Government Help" Hypocrisy

"The star of a recent Romney ad, who criticized President Obama for saying that businesses aren’t built alone, got some government help for his business in the 1980s. Jack Gilchrist’s Gilchrist Metal got $800,000 in tax-exempt revenue bonds from New Hampshire Business Finance Authority, the New Hampshire Union Leader reports. The company has also got some government contracts more recently.  'As far as I’m concerned, I’m getting some of my tax money back,' Gilchrist told ABC News."  Read the Washington Post, The Fix, What You Might Have Missed.

Run or Walk, What is the Best Strategy If You Are Caught in the Rain Without An Umbrella?

As with most of life's problems, it depends. 

In this case, how big are you, and which way is the wind blowing?  Read the Washington Post, Physicists tackle a crucial issue: How to stay dry in the rain.

Another Republi-CON Flip-Flop

"[M]any [Republi-con] notables, such as Mitch Daniels, Rick Perry, Tim Pawlenty, Haley Barbour, Mike Huckabee, Jeb Bush and, of course," Obamney, were for state welfare waivers before they were against them.  Read the Washington Post, The Obama administration fires back on welfare, which notes that "this is hardly the first time a previously widely held Republican policy position has become anathema almost overnight, but it’s a stark change nonetheless."

What to Expect If It Is Obama v. Romney

UPDATE II:  It's déjà vu all over again.

Read the Washington Post, Is the 2012 election the 2004 election all over again?

UPDATE: "He was for it before he was against it, and against it before he claimed credit for it." Read The New York Times, Romney and the Bailout.

Ronmey, the flip-flopper's flip-flopper.

Funny isn't it, what goes around comes around.

"He’ll have hundreds of millions of dollars, the bully pulpit, Air Force One and high-profile supporters from Warren Buffet to Lady Gaga behind him. But President Obama’s chances of re-election could come down to a single strategic question: To what degree can the history of 2004 be repeated in 2012? . . .

The Obama team, he said, 'wants to make Mitt Romney into the Republican version of John Kerry.'"

Read The New York Times, Can Obama 2012 Replicate Bush 2004?

That's why the base hopes it is anyone but Romney.

The Bane of Obamney's Existence

UPDATE:  Limpy thinks "there might be a sinister connection between Bane, the villain in the new Batman movie, and Bain, the villain in the new Obama campaign narrative."  Read the Washington Post, Bane/Bain of Romney and Rush Limbaugh’s existence.

"Holy atomic pile," the only problem, as the article notes, is that "Bane was created in 1993.

'So? If Mitt Romney can retroactively retire, what’s to prevent Barack Obama from going back in time to alter history too?'"

"You've tripped on one of your tricks this time," Limpy!

He was there, before he wasn't there.

But, "he wasn’t even there when they did those bad things that he was in no way associated with but it was fine if he was. . .

Who knows what’s true? It’s a simple case of 'He said, He filed SEC documents that contradict what he said' . . .

[Obamney didn't commit a felony.] Lying to the SEC is not a felony, it’s an entire industry. . .

[As his campaign explained, in 2002 Obamney 'retired retroactively to February of 1999.']  So he was not responsible for firing all those people whose jobs were outsourced. He was responsible for retroactively not hiring them. . .

If Obama wins the race in November, Mitt can just say he retroactively retired from the race in 2009."

Watch The Colbert Report, Mitt Romney's Retroactive Retirement from Bain Capital:

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

I guess that Etch-a-Sketch reset ain't working as hoped.

P.S.

I told ya to expect this if Obamney won the nomination.  

Obama's just starting to use "McCain's entire, 200-page opposition research file — or 'book' — on Mitt Romney from 2008, the year they were bitter rivals."

Republi-CONs "Vote to Repeal Medicare Cuts They Voted For and Are Campaigning Against"

"That headline is not an exaggeration or a parody."  Read the Washington Post, Republicans vote to repeal Medicare cuts they voted for and are campaigning against, which notes that "it really takes an astonishing amount of chutzpah to run against a spending cut in dozens of races across the country, to come to Congress and vote for that cut anyway, and then to continue to rail against it as though you still think it’s the worst thing Congress has ever inflicted on the American people. Even if they hadn’t voted for these exact cuts, it’s really impossible to square general GOP rhetoric about cutting spending, specifically on entitlements, with their insistence that every dollar that Obamacare cuts either through the Medicare Advantage cuts or from the Independent Payment Advisory Board is the end of the world for seniors."

The Republi-CON "Socialism Destroys Growth" Myth

What is the relationship between social programs and growth?  None.

Read The Atlantic, The Myth That Entitlements Destroy a Nation's Growth, Busted in 1 Chart.

How American Are You?

"To become a US citizen, immigrants must past a test that includes questions on government, history, and geography.

But what really makes someone "American?" Many would argue it is our common culture. Do you eat hot dogs on Independence Day? What do you really know about the Simpsons? . .

Just how American are you? Take [The Christian Science Monitor] alternative citizenship quiz and find out!"

Will It Be a Neo-Republi-CON Party-Line Vote?

UPDATE XI:  After the case that "could never be cited as precedent," did Chief Justice Roberts decide for the sake of the Court's public legitimacy and historic legacy, not to play politics with the decision?  Read the Washington Post, John Roberts, umpire and The New York Times, John Roberts’s Political Decision. 

UPDATE X:  Did the Supreme Court split the difference, by rejecting the Commerce Clause reasoning, but find the mandate is a tax?  This possibility was suggested before the ruling was announced.  Read the Washington Post, Four ways the Supreme Court could split the difference on health care.

UPDATE IX:  If the Supreme Court does overturn the health care law in the face of decades of precedent,would it be yet another case showing the "today's Supreme Court is moving toward the confederationist framework of protecting corporate interests. From its decision authorizing corporations to spend unlimited political money in the Citizens United case to its assaults on equal pay for women and job security for older workers, the Court's five conservatives have left no doubt about their willingness to obviate the commerce and general-welfare clauses of the Constitution to protect powerful corporate interests"  Read The Atlantic, The Real Affordable Care Act Battle: Constitutionalists vs. Confederates, which notes:

"[T]hat, throughout the last century, when the corporatist strand has conflicted with the state's-rights position -- from Lochner (in which the Court infamously overturned New York's public health regulations in 1905) to the current Court's reversal just this week of Montana's anti-corruption campaign-finance law -- the corporatist side has won.

Respected conservative constitutionalists have all but begged the Supreme Court to stay loyal to the document. Judge Laurence Silberman, a Reagan appointee who received the Presidential Medal of Freedom from President George W. Bush, warned that the case against the Affordable Care Act has no basis "in either the text of the Constitution or Supreme Court precedent." Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III, a runner-up for the Supreme Court nomination that eventually went to Chief Justice John Roberts, warned that striking down health reform "is a prescription for economic chaos that the framers, in a simpler time, had the good sense to head off."

During his confirmation hearing, Chief Justice Roberts claimed the mantle of these conservative constitutionalists, as an umpire calling balls and strikes. But if he and the other four conservative justices overturn the Affordable Care Act, they will effectively be taking the umpire off the field. In historical context, this amounts not to a reinterpretation of the Constitution but rather its rejection. If the law is upheld, the real victory is not for President Obama but for that most durable of governing documents, the U.S. Constitution."

UPDATE VIII: If the Supreme Court does overturn the health care law in the face of decades of precedent, will it be because:

"The post-New Deal consensus about the scope of federal power has broken down amid national, and global, concern over the welfare state’s cost and intrusiveness — a sea change of which the tea party is but one manifestation" or 

The 2000 presidential election was 'decided by five people, who don’t even try to explain their choice in normal legal terms. Then the beneficiary of that decision appoint[ed] the next two members of the court, who present[ed] themselves for consideration as restrained, humble figures who care only about law rather than ideology. Once on the bench, for life, those two actively second-guess[ed] and re-d[id] existing law, to advance the interests of the party that appointed them. Meanwhile their party’s representatives in the Senate abuse[d] procedural rules to an extent never previously seen to block legislation — and appointments, especially to the courts. And, when a major piece of legislation g[ot] through, the party’s majority on the Supreme Court prepare[d] to negate it — even though the details of the plan were originally Republican proposals and even though the party’s presidential nominee endorsed these concepts only a few years ago.' 

Read the Washington Post, Redefining American government through Obamacare and The Atlantic, SCOTUS Update: La Loi, C'est Moi.

UPDATE VII:  Republi-con only hate Obamacare because he passed it.  Read the Washington Post, Poll: Republicans hate ‘Obamacare,’ but like most of what it does.

UPDATE VI:  If it does overturn the health care law in the face of decades of Supreme Court precedent, then how to explain the change.  By creating a 'permission structure.'   Read the Washington Post, How Republicans made it possible for the Supreme Court to rule against the mandate.

 

UPDATE V:  "Bloomberg surveyed 21 top constitutional scholars and found that, while 19 think the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act ought to be upheld on the basis of legal precedent, just eight think the Supreme Court will actually do so ."  Read the Washington Post, Poll: Legal scholars think the mandate is valid, will fall anyway.

UPDATE IV:  Citing The New Yorker article below, a writer asks what is going on in Washington.  He concludes, " — based both on [his] experience as a reporter in Washington and on an increasingly voluminous psychological literature about how partisans form opinions — is that human beings are very good at convincing themselves of whatever their self-interest would have them believe, and that Washington has become an increasingly sophisticated machine for encouraging and accelerating this sort of 'motivated reasoning.' That is to say, strategic incentives do drive shifts in opinion, but the new opinions are sincerely held.

This distinction is, I think, crucial to make, because there’s a real difference between bargaining with a political party that has fixed policies it would like to achieve but shifting strategic incentives and a party that has shifting policy and strategic incentives. In the former case, the fixed policy preferences give you something to hold onto, something you can use to fight against the shifting strategic incentives. In the latter case, there’s nothing to hold onto, and in a political system where elections are zero-sum and so compromise is rarely in the minority party’s strategic interest, it’s very difficult to see how many major compromises can be reached. This model, I think, does a much better job explaining the previous few years."

Read the Washington Post, The individual mandate: What happened?

And what is the Republi-con's interest, as noted in February 2009, Republi-cons hope Obama will fail.

UPDATE III:  Another Republi-con flip-flop, "the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act -- better known as the DREAM Act ."  Read the Washington Post, DREAMing of bipartisanship. 

UPDATE II:  Of course, the flip-flop is a tried-and-true Republi-con tactic,  Read the Washington Post,  A GOP bait-and-switch on disclosure. 

UPDATE:  So why did the Republi-cons propose a mandate?  Because "[i]t became pretty clear that, if you want a market to work, you need a mandate."  Read the Washington Post, Health reform without a mandate: Lessons from Washington state.

I say neo, the ancient Greek prefix meaning new or young, because Republi-cons were for the individual mandate for two decades, before they were against it.  To understand why they changed their minds, read The New Yorker, Unpopular Mandate.

Republi-CON Fear, Anger and Hatred At Work Before the Election

"It was a blood-boiler of a story, a menacing tale of government gone too far: The Environmental Protection Agency was spying on Midwestern farmers with the same aerial 'drones' used to kill terrorists overseas.

This month, the idea has been repeated in TV segments, on multiple blogs and by at least four congressmen. The only trouble is, it isn’t true."

Read the Washington Post, Reining in the rumor about EPA 'drones'.

Is God a Bacteria?

I ask because Genesis 1:27 (KJV) states that "God created man in his own image."  Read The New York Times, In Good Health? Thank Your 100 Trillion Bacteria. 

Who Cares About the Economy, the 'Single Most Important thing is for President Obama to be a One-Term President'

For years now the Republi-cons have been sacrificing workers to appease their imaginary inflation god.  They want to crucify the middle class 'upon a cross of gold'. It's all part of the Republi-cons war on the middle class. 

So, of course, the Republi-cons have been trying to tank the economy, because good news for the economy is bad news for their election hopes.

Now others have started to notice that the Republi-cons have "blocked pro-growth policy and backed job-killing austerity – all while blaming Obama."  Read The Guardian, Did Republicans deliberately crash the US economy?