Mitt Romney’s Chances: A View From China

Romney: The Right Choice Is Better
Than an Early Choice

19 January 2012

Translated By Michelle Deeter      Edited by Gillian Palmer

China - Sina - Original Article (Chinese)
When former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney dropped out of the U.S. presidential race in 2008, it was both lucky and wise. He dropped out in spring, before he could know that Lehman Brothers would go bankrupt that September. If he had won the Republican primary that year, during the elections, his connections with Wall Street would have made him lose badly.
Four years ago, at approximately the same time, I wrote another article about Romney. At the time Romney had just announced his plans to drop out of the Republican primaries for the 2008 election. As one of the frontrunners for the Republican candidacy, Romney’s decision to drop out surprised many. At that time, I predicted that Romney’s exit was to prepare for the 2012 election; the mood in 2008 was such that any candidate linked with the Republican Party was going to lose by a wide margin. That included a candidate like Romney, who was willing to take moderate or Democratic positions. After a major defeat, it would have been difficult to stage a comeback. Thus, pulling out of the race early and gathering strength was a wise decision.
Not surprisingly, Romney is on stage for the primaries again, four years later. This time he looks like he wants to go all the way.
If he can win the Republican primary and enter the election race against Obama, Romney has a distinct chance of winning. In 2008, so many Americans were disappointed with the Republicans that a few states that usually were Republican strongholds switched and supported the Democratic Party, including New Hampshire and North Dakota. Swing states overwhelmingly voted for the Democrats, including Florida and North Carolina. At the time, Americans had many complaints with the Republican Party: The war in Iraq was never ending; the war on terror was gloomy; and the Lehman Brothers' bankruptcy in September 2008 precipitated a financial crisis. This dealt a fatal blow to the Republicans’ election prospects. When we consider these factors, Romney’s decision to drop out was lucky and wise. He dropped out in spring, before anyone could predict that Lehman Brothers would go bankrupt that September. If he had won the Republican primary that year, during the elections, his connections with Wall Street would have made him lose badly.
But times have changed. Now, in 2012, people have other things on their minds. Americans, who were once dancing in the streets celebrating Obama’s election, have found that the honeymoon is over and they are no longer interested in his “Change” campaign. They have started to grumble. Change has happened. Bin Laden is dead and the U.S. has pulled out of Iraq. However, there is no peace in Iraq and Iran has become a new foreign policy issue. What’s worse, the economy has not picked up much in four years, the government is facing massive debt and the U.S.’ allies in Europe are constantly fighting. Economic recovery is a weak sapling that is unlikely to survive, while economic disaster hangs over the United States like the sword of Damocles. Looking back at the health care reforms the Democrats pushed so hard to pass, many people now feel that the decision was a poor one. Even though there are many long-term benefits, the benefits will only come after waiting patiently, while relevant taxes are going to increase very soon. The news of increased taxes seems like an overwhelming burden to the middle class, which is already heavily burdened. The middle class will be more likely to support the Republicans and their small government policies.
Therefore, I think Americans will find Romney very appealing. He got his degree at a prestigious school and worked at a famous consultancy. When compared to the traditional Republican candidate, some cowboy from a small town in the South, Romney’s background will resonate with moderate voters. Plus, voters who are typically wary of Republican positions on social issues will take comfort in his background. As a Republican, Romney is more conservative than Obama on issues such as increasing taxes. Romney might not continue the health care reforms Obama put in place. This will all give him extra support in the presidential election.
The biggest hurdle for Romney is the Republican primary. The New York Times recently reported that Romney’s latest actions make it seem like he is already thinking beyond the primaries, which means that he thinks his nomination is certain. I think Romney should not act like he has already won. The same thing that makes Romney successful could make him fail. Romney’s background will make it easier for him to earn the favor of moderate voters and some Democrats; at the same time, it will cause some Southern Republicans to mistrust him. Even though in terms of the presidential election, Romney’s victory is much more likely than any of the other candidates in the Republican primary race, that doesn’t mean that Republican voters are going to let Romney take the stage.
Recently, Jon Huntsman pulled out of the Republican primaries and supported Romney’s candidacy, which is good news for the latter candidate. The two candidates have similar backgrounds, which could split votes. However, there is still one major weakness that Romney has to overcome in both the primaries and the presidential election: the fact that he is a rich person. This might sound laughable. All of the Founding Fathers were rich slave owners, and even today, there are many examples of rich politicians: The Bush family owns a huge ranch in Texas, Clinton and Obama were professionals with high incomes, not to mention the wealth of the Kennedys. The problem for Romney is that he accumulated his wealth while working at Bain Capital. This is a major sore point for a public frustrated with Wall Street businessmen. Bain Capital is a private equity fund whose employees pay low income taxes; for this reason, it stands in eye of the storm of a crusade against capitalism. This problem may not become the Achilles’ heel of Romney’s candidacy, but he had better be prepared to take some criticism from the protesters of the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Technorati Tags: Mitt Romney,2012 Elections,Politics,Republican Party,Barack Obama,Democrats,Republican Primary,Current Events,An American Gothic,The Economy

The Republican Corporation Doesn’t Care For Gingrich

   Just take a read at what some of the beltway hacks on the GOP side have to say on the topic of Newt Gingrich being the Republican nominee, if he makes it over Mitt Romney.

                    

Henry Barbour:

“I like having a Republican speaker of the House,” Barbour cracked, suggesting Gingrich would be a disaster as the GOP nominee. “He puts all our down-ticket candidates at risk.”

Former John McCain advisor Steve Schmidt:

[N]ot only are we not moving towards a coalescing of support by the Republican establishment for Newt Gingrich, we're probably moving toward the declaration of war on Newt Gingrich by the Republican establishment. And if Newt Gingrich is able to win the Florida primary, you will see a panic and a meltdown of the Republican establishment that is beyond my ability to articulate in the English language.

People will go crazy and you will have this five week period until the Super Tuesday states which is going to be as unpredictable, tumultuous as any period in modern American politics. It will be a remarkable thing to watch should that happen in Florida.

Chris Christie

“Newt Gingrich has embarrassed the party over time. Whether he'll do it again in the future I don't know, but Gov. Romney never has,” Christie said on NBC's “Meet the Press.”

A "veteran" GOP leadership aide:

Veteran Republican leadership aide Ron Bonjean said on the record what most of his colleagues would only tell CNN privately.

"Most people on Capitol Hill and in Washington are very nervous about a Gingrich candidacy," he said. "It sends a shiver down a lot of Republican spines."

"You can actually feel the nervousness from Republicans around town that Gingrich could actually bring the craziness back of his speakership from the 1990s. It's everywhere."

"We are not at Defcon 5 yet, but we'll see what happens in Florida," said another one of the worried GOP strategists.

If Gingrich does win, veteran GOP strategists tell CNN to expect pressure on Senate Minority Leaders Mitch McConnell, House Speaker John Boehner and other Republican leaders to call key GOP donors and ask them not to contribute to Gingrich's campaign.

William Kristol:

I’ve got to think Monday night’s debate further swelled the groundswell of support for Mitch Daniels. The liveliest part of the debate was at the beginning, when Mitt went after Newt—and Republicans all over America watched with fascinated horror at the thought that these are the two GOP frontrunners. The only spectacle in American politics more off-putting than Newt Gingrich in self-righteous defense mode is Mitt Romney in self-righteous attack mode.

    Sourced from Daily Kos

Technorati Tags: Newt Gingrich,Mitt Romney,2012 Elections,Republican Party,Current Events,An American Gothic,Republican,Poltics

 

Politics’ Dirty Tricks

By Mariusz Zawadzki              10 January 2012
The schizoid situation where the candidates pose as innocents, while at the same time lead a brutal campaign through front men, is new for U.S. politics.     Translated By Anna Rygiewicz
Edited by Steven Stenzler      Origina in Polish

In his campaign adverts, Mitt Romney, the frontrunner in the race for the Republican presidential nomination, does not speak ill of other candidates. He does not even mention them. He is friendly and smiles all the time. He talks about how he will save America and find jobs for millions of unemployed. He talks about the model family he has created with his wife Ann, with whom he has been married for 42 years. He enumerates his achievements in business and politics. The ads also show the cheerful Ann who compliments the qualities of her husband’s character.
In Iowa, where the first Republican primary took place on Jan. 4 Romney spent nearly $1 million on such positive advertisements. But he did not win because of them. He beat his rivals thanks to the aggressive spots made by Restore Our Future, an independent political action committee. These ads attacked Newt Gingrich, former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, who has been leading in the polls since mid-December. The spots reproached him for committing tax fraud at the end of the 1990s, for which he was punished by the Senate Ethics Committee, and for supporting the environmentalists in the fight against the greenhouse effect, which is even more embarrassing for a true American conservative.
The Restore Our Future committee, founded by Romney’s former lawyer, spent about $3 million to destroy Gingrich. The founder does not hide that he supports Romney, but apart from that he does not have anything to do with him. In accordance with the law, he is independent. When Gingrich publicly urged his rival to order the committee to stop the attacks, Romney said that he cannot contact this committee or order it to do anything, because in accordance with the law, it is independent.
The wronged Gingrich is not innocent either. He is backed as well by an “independent” political action committee, even with a similar name: Winning Our Future. Next Wednesday, Gingrich’s committee is starting a TV campaign in North Carolina, where on Jan. 21 the third primaries will take place. Advertisements costing $3.5 million will remind Americans about the history of Bain Capital.
The company, established in 1984 by Romney and his business partners, bought enterprises on the verge of bankruptcy, carried out their restructuring (which usually meant mass dismissals) and sold them at a profit.
Such a business model generated a lot of money for Romney. His assets are estimated around $250 million. They are, however, a burden in the presidential campaign. People call Romney a heartless "vulture capitalist." The candidate defends himself by saying that Bain Capital saved thousands of jobs because thanks to the restructuring of the enterprises, many of them did not go bankrupt. Of course, the Winning Our Future committee’s ads show only the people who were fired by Romney’s company.
The schizoid situation where the candidates pose as innocents, while at the same time lead a brutal campaign through front men, is new for U.S. politics. The Supreme Court of the United States led to this situation when it ruled in January 2010 that private companies may without any restrictions finance the "independent” political action committees. Any such committee (super PAC) can, in turn, without any limitations finance its candidate's advertisements, provided that it does not contact him or her (which means it remains "independent.”)
The justices' decision was a real revolution because in the U.S. private companies cannot finance candidates, and private persons may donate no more than $2,500 to their favorite politician (or $30,800 to a political party.)
The U.S. Supreme Court created a legal loophole thanks to which many corporations can finance candidates without any limitations. And in secret, too! Although the “independent” committees have to disclose the donors, there can be among them a 501(c)4 organization (the name comes from section 501(c)4 of the Internal Revenue Code), and such an organization is not obliged to disclose the donors, provided that supporting a particular candidate is not its principal activity. This regulation is perfect for money laundering. Successfully making use of it is, among others, Karl Rove, the master Republican strategist and the most effective bursar of the Republican Party, who has founded American Crossroads, an independent committee, and a 501(c)4 organization called American GPS. The committee receives money from the organization, which gets it from God knows where.
Many politicians, including President Barack Obama and his Republican rival from 2008 Sen. John McCain, criticized the Supreme Court's ruling. It blurs the already fuzzy connections between business and politics in Washington. Now, when a congressman votes for, let’s say, tax reductions for the oil industry, you never know whether it is because he actually believes them to be good for the U.S., or simply because his campaign was secretly sponsored by the oil industry.
And the elections change sometimes into a cabaret because the "independence" of the PACs is a mockery. In the Saturday candidate's debate transmitted on NBC, Romney and Gingrich swore that they did not even watch their "independent" committees' adverts, but then, unintentionally, they engaged in a surprisingly detailed discussion about what is shown in the spots.

Technorati Tags: Newt Gingrich,Mitt Romney,Politics,2012 Elections,Republican Primary,Citizens United,Super-PACS,Current Events,An American Gothic

Why This Is The Best The GOP Can Do

    By  plf515        Mon Jan 23, 2012

The four remaining candidates for the Republican nomination are a pretty pathetic bunch:
Mitt, Newt, Rick and Ron (alphabetical order)

Mitt is a multimillionaire vampire capitalist who dodged the draft (by living in a mansion in Paris), abused his dog, said his sons serve America by helping him get elected and has parked a lot of his money in the Cayman Islands for some reason. A self-centered man with no center to his self. A perfectly lubricated weather vane.

Newt is a disgraced former Speaker of the House, the only one ever to be removed for ethics violations. He's a philanderer who excused his behavior because of the stress he was under serving in Congress, a racist who barely hides it, and a blowhard.

Rick is, at least, consistent. But he's consistently crazy and mean, with views that ought to have died 50 years ago but are sadly alive.

and Ron is against the federal department of, well, almost everything. He's a darling of Storm Front who thinks racists don't have enough rights and that things like clean water aren't important and who claims to be a libertarian but is really a states-rights person.

Is this the best they can do?

Yes it is.

Not because no one wants to run against Obama.
Not because of some vagaries of this election cycle.
Not because of the harshness of the political spotlight.

No.

The reason this is the best they can do is because this is who they are.

Neocons, lunatics, theocrats and pseudo-libertarians.

The Republican party doesn't deserve to just lose in 2012. They deserve to be destroyed.  This should be the last generation in which such a party is viable.

Technorati Tags: Republican Party,2012 Elections,Mitt Romney,Newt Gingrich,Ron Paul,Rick Santorum,Current Events,An American Gothic,GOP

Mitt Romney’s Tax Returns

By  Georgia Logothetis   for Daily Kos

Tue Jan 24, 2012

First, the facts from the Washington Post:

Mitt Romney offered a partial snapshot of his vast personal fortune late Monday, disclosing income of $21.7 million in 2010 and $20.9 million last year — virtually all of it profits, dividends or interest from investments.

None came from wages, the primary source of income for most Americans. Instead, Romney and his wife, Ann, collected millions in capital gains from a profusion of investments, as well as stock dividends and interest payments.

Yes, you read that correctly. Mitt Romney had zero wage income. Zero.

More from the NYT:

Mr. Romney said last week that his effective rate was “about 15 percent,” a figure lower than that of many affluent Americans. But his returns suggested that he paid an effective tax rate of slightly below that of nearly 14 percent. [...]

Referring to the fact that nearly all of his income is taxed as capital gains at a 15 percent rate rather than as earned income at rates of up to 35 percent, Mr. Romney questioned a proposal by Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker, to reduce capital gains taxes to zero.

“Under that plan, I’d have paid no taxes in the last two years,” Mr. Romney said.

Yes, you read that correctly too. Mitt Romney is actually highlighting the fact that all of his wealth comes from capital gains instead of wage income.

Meanwhile, the New York Times on Gingrich's claim that he's an "outsider":

There is lot more than that to be learned from Mr. Gingrich’s documents, starting with the mockery they make of his claim to be an insurgent Washington outsider, the supposed anti-establishment candidate.

After he was drummed out of the House speaker’s office in 1998, Mr. Gingrich set about creating a lucrative living, by trading on his political connections. In 2010, he reported a total income of $3.16 million (including a tidy $76,200 Congressional pension).

Most of Mr. Gingrich’s income has come from helping corporate clients gain access and solicitous treatment from Washington’s power elite.

Frank Bruni:

In Monday night’s debate, Gingrich characterized the end of his Congressional career after the 1998 midterms as wholly volitional, making his exit sound like a self-sacrificing blaze of glory rather than the acrimonious firestorm it was.

With Gingrich, the distance between reality and rhetoric isn’t shrinking but growing, and the incongruities mount. He has lately fallen in love with his rants against “the elites,” and casts himself as their most determined foe, but I can’t for the life of me figure out a definition of elite that doesn’t include him.

Amie Parnes previews the president's State of the Union address:

President Obama won’t be mentioning Mitt Romney by name on Tuesday night. But the subtext of his State of the Union address will be all about him.

Just hours after Romney is expected to disclose his much-anticipated tax returns, Obama will attempt — in a read-between-the-lines way — to portray Romney as an über-wealthy businessman who is anything but a champion for the middle class. [...]

“Every time he says ‘wealthy few,’ it almost implies ‘investor class’ and Mitt Romney,” said Tobe Berkovitz, a professor of communications at Boston University who specializes in political communications and advertising, adding that it’s an “easy” association. One way Obama will implicitly highlight Romney in Tuesday’s speech will be in renewing his call for a tax code rewrite to codify what he calls the “Buffett Rule,” named after billionaire investor Warren Buffett, to ensure wealthier people pay a higher rate than do the middle class and poor.

And then, we have this news nugget from Aaron Blake:

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) said Sunday that he would consider being Mitt Romney’s vice presidential running mate if Romney asked him, but said he remained skeptical that he would ever be on the ticket.

Christie, who previously denied that he was ready to be president but then briefly considered entreaties to run, also appears to have softened his resistance to the idea of being vice president.

Technorati Tags: Mitt Romney,Income Taxes,Taxes,2012 Elections,Chris Christie,Current Events,An American Gothic,Newt Gingrich

Republicans Begin to Doubt Market Economics

By Markus Ziener   19 January                                             Sourced from Watching America

Germany - Handelsblatt - Original Article (German)

Translated By Ron Argentati   Edited by Mark DeLucas

Romney is presenting himself as a successful entrepreneur, but in light of the financial crisis and the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations, that doesn't necessarily resonate with many people — not even with those on the right, who are coming to terms with Romney and free markets.

America, the land of almost limitless opportunity, is facing its next existential crisis. After the bailout crisis and the tea party crisis, the nation is now facing a morality crisis. The bizarre thing about it is that it is conservative politicians who have plunged the country into a national debate about whether there should be limits on capitalism or if “anything goes.” In other words, they are asking whether a former private equity manager like Mitt Romney has the proper moral compass to become president.
And it's equally remarkable that the criticism comes not from the left but from the right. It is politicians like Newt Gingrich, who also seeks the Republican nomination to run for president, who are questioning Romney's integrity.
The ex-Speaker of the House calls Romney a plunderer who enriched himself on the backs of working people. Texas Governor Rick Perry, who suspended his campaign on Thursday, went so far as to call Romney's behavior as CEO of Bain Capital Management “vulture capitalism.”
It is correct that as manager of Bain Capital between 1984 and 1999, Romney amassed a fortune estimated today to be around a quarter of a billion dollars. Bain invested in companies, increased their profitability and then sold them off for considerable profit. It is also correct that at times, thousands of workers were fired in the process, many of the companies went bankrupt and Romney's company profited from low tax rates.
But many other companies were strengthened by the restructuring and later hired workers. Mitt Romney calls this process creative destruction and says it is an important element of capitalism, a system that ultimately results in better, more competitive companies.
That may well be, but it is also correct to say that the social costs of doing business this way are very high — so high that it has led to a discrediting of capitalism in the very bosom of its own motherland. Wherever Romney appears publicly, he finds himself confronted by members of the Occupy movement. They call out to him that they are part of the 99 percent. Romney, in contrast, belongs to the 1 percent of Americans who, according to Nobel Laureate for economics Joseph Stiglitz, control 40 percent of the nation's wealth.
Romney's attempts to butter up the common people just makes them more angry.
Romney tries to defend himself with arguments that are often ludicrous. For example, he claims that as the multimillionaire son of a multimillionaire auto executive, he has also had to worry about losing his job on occasion. He has also said that much like the people he's addressing, he's also unemployed.
Such schmoozing just serves to increase the anger directed at him by critics who know they have hit a raw nerve in society. According to a recent Pew Research Center survey, two-thirds of Americans think there is a serious conflict between rich and poor in the United States, an increase of 20 percent since 2009.
Mitt Romney's biggest financial supporters
It is not only leftists and liberals who share that opinion. The strict constitutional constructionists of the tea party movement have an equally large problem with those who profit from the system. Their definition of American success is the entrepreneurial spirit that contains an element of risk and creates additional value. What they don't approve of are those who only know how to get the most out of tinkering with their personal fortunes.
The fact that the Republican Party is preparing to nominate a candidate that is the very antithesis of the capitalist is causing great concern among the ranks of the party conservatives. Gingrich even believes that Romney, if chosen to run against Barack Obama, is unelectable — even if his warnings are nothing more than the crocodile tears of a power politician who milked as much as he could out of the system as an adviser to the quasi-governmental mortgage bank Freddie Mac and as a well-paid consultant for Credit Suisse.
That is what makes this fight so unbearably hypocritical. It isn't being waged truthfully, and it is so exploitative. If these were different times and there was no financial crisis, not one American would get excited about the fact that the made-in-the-U.S. brand of capitalism is often brutal, unfair and demands sacrifices. It was libertarian Ron Paul who leaped to Romney's defense a few days ago. That in itself is remarkable since Paul is closest to Romney in the opinion polls at the moment. Paul says of Romney's critics, “I think they’re wrong. I think they’re totally misunderstanding the way the market works.”
It was a reminder that in the United States, capitalism is market capitalism, not social capitalism, and within those parameters, Romney was absolutely right. If these were different times, Romney would be hailed as a hero.

Technorati Tags: Mitt Romney,Newt Gingrich,Capitalism,Politics,Wall Street,Bain Capital,2012 Elections,Current Events,An American Gothic

Romney Versus Gingrich

     Gotta love those two asshat as they now square off against each other over the votes of the ignorant in the state of Florida, which is a much more racist state than South Carolina is.  Romney truly has his work cut out for him if he wants to win in the state, which I do not see happening because most of the “ Christians “ will not vote for a Mormon, period.

   Romney’s tact is to now go after Newt and his lobbying ties.

Mitt Romney attacks Newt Gingrich's private sector lobbying experience

by Jed Lewison      Originally posted to The Jed Report on Mon Jan 23, 2012

According to Mitt Romney, if you attack his record in the private sector, you're attacking free enterprise and everything that makes America great ... even though he made millions of dollars by putting companies out of business and throwing workers out of jobs. But when it comes to attacking Newt Gingrich's record in the private sector, Mitt Romney says that's fair game:

Mitt Romney will use the backdrop of Florida’s depressed housing market to launch a fresh offensive against rival Newt Gingrich here Monday, highlighting his consulting work for Freddie Mac and calling on him to publicly release his records relating to the mortgage giant.

As the dramatically reshaped Republican presidential race centers on Florida this week, Romney will air a television advertisement in the state designed to expose Gingrich as a hypocrite. The ad will contrast the former House speaker’s claims not to be a lobbyist with the $1.6 million to $1.8 million in consulting fees he reportedly was paid for his work with Freddie Mac, according to a Romney campaign official.

At a news conference earlier this morning, Romney said, "Saying that Newt Gingrich is a lobbyist is just a fact." Romney called on Gingrich to release documentation of his work in the private sector because "we just have to understand what this activity has been over the last 15 years."

Fair points, both of them. But as Mitt Romney once said, "What's sauce for the goose is now sauce for the gander." His record in the private sector is every bit a relevant as Newt Gingrich's, if not more so. Remember, Romney's entire rationale for the presidency is that he allegedly created jobs as a businessman—but he won't explain whether or how he did that, and every time he's questioned he starts screaming about capitalism being under attack.

Well, Mitt ought to do what he's asking Newt Gingrich to do and start providing answers instead of attacking the questioner. The fact that he's been unable to do that is a tacit acknowledgment that he can't. And it's one of the many reasons he won't win this election.

Technorati Tags: Mitt Romney,Newt Gingrich,Free Enterprise,2012 Elections,Current Events,An American Gothic,Politics

Gingrich and the Revenge of the Little Guys

22 January 2012

France - Le Monde - Original Article (French)   Edited by Jes­sica Boesl   From Watching America

The Tea Party has disappeared, scattered between the chapels and candidates. In South Carolina however, Newt Gingrich has resuscitated the tea party. At the same time, Gingrich smashed Mitt Romney’s main platform, i.e.: "The electability," that is being the most competitive Republican candidate to run against Barack Obama.
"Newt Can Win" was the victory cry at the Gingrich headquarters party in Columbia, South Carolina.
In his speech, Newt Gingrich talked about his performance in the debates. He knows that many activists would love for him to run against Obama. So, Gingrich also challenged the incumbent president to participate in seven debates at three-hours each.
"And I give him permission to exercise his right in to use his teleprompter," he said amidst laughter. Who would not want use a teleprompter to defend Obamacare, better known as Medicare Reform.
The debates have been repeatedly harmful to Mitt Romney, especially considering how the presence of a voracious audience reinforces demagogue trends. (It is important to note that prior to this year, audience reactions were not considered significant.)
The race continues. In fact, it is just beginning, so to speak. But as noted in a key Republican crossover in a hotel in Charleston just before the primary, the establishment is concerned that Mitt is "deteriorating" from week to week. (In fact, Jeb Bush has refrained from supporting Romney in Florida.)
The results of the South Carolina poll have given Newt Gingrich a resounding victory with a 12 percent lead over Romney (40 percent versus 28 percent). The populist outweighed the businessman’s platform of “job creation” among almost every category of voters if one believes the exit polls: evangelicals (two-thirds of voters), Catholics, tea party ... and even women believed that Gingrich was always pursued by the vengeance of his second wife, Marianne.
Newt Gingrich has managed to channel the revolt of the "little guy" against the elite, including staging characteristic hostility against the media, accusing them of "forcing" the American people to be confused.
According to Erik Erickson of RedState.com, one of the spokespersons of the tea party, "the base is revolting because they swept the GOP back into relevance in Washington just under two years ago and they have been thanked with contempt ever since."
The contempt has to do with the particular choice of candidate. For the base, Mitt Romney is considered to be as stimulating as an "old battery," commented Erickson.

Technorati Tags: Newt Gingrich,Reublican Primaries,Politics,Current Events,An American Gothic,Watching America

Chris Christie: Gingrich Is A Disaster Waiting To Happen

By Christian Dem in NC  on Sun Jan 22, 2012      Original Post

Chris Christie was on "Meet the Press" this morning, and pretty much summed up the feelings of the Repub establishment in the wake of Newt Gingrich's massive win last night in South Carolina.  In his usual blunt style, Christie, who is backing Mitt Romney, all but called Gingrich a ticking time bomb.

MR. GREGORY: You've been more pointed when you talk about in favor of Governor Romney. You say he will never embarrass you. Do you think Newt Gingrich will embarrass the party?

GOV. CHRISTIE: I think Newt Gingrich has embarrassed the party over time. Whether he'll do it again in the future, I don't know. But Governor Romney never has.

MR. GREGORY: You say he's embarrassed the party. How and where do you worry he might do it again that makes him unelectable?

GOV. CHRISTIE: Well, listen, David, we all know the record. I mean, he was run out of the speakership by his own party. He was fined $300,000 for ethics violations. This is a guy who's had a very difficult political career at times and has been an embarrassment for the party. You remember these times, you were here. So the fact of the matter is, I don't need to regale the country with that entire list again except to say this. I'm not saying he will do it again in the future, but sometimes past is prologue.

No doubt Christie saw this week's "holy f'ing crap" moment, when Public Policy Polling showed Obama possbly beating Gingrich in Texas.  It cannot be repeated enough--if Gingrich makes Texas even potentially competitive, then he has likely been Goldwatered.

Also republished by Kos Georgia.

Technorati Tags: 2012 Elections,Republican Party,Chris Christie,Newt Gingrich,Current Events,An American Gothic

Saturday Satire: Those Darn Republicans

  Rick Perry is out of the running as is Jon Huntsman. All who remain are the Republican professional clowns, Mitten and Newtie.

Jay Leno: "Mitt Romney is coming under fire because even though he is a multimillionaire, he only paid 15 percent in taxes. That's not a tax, that's barely a tip."

"Mitt Romney, whose father was born in Mexico, is now talking up his Mexican heritage. Not to be outdone today, Newt Gingrich said he once cheated on one of his wives with a woman named Juanita."

"Sen. John McCain told Sean Hannity that choosing Sarah Palin was still the best decision he ever made. Well, today the Arizona DMV took away his driver's license."

"According to the exit polls, Mitt Romney won in every category of voter in New Hampshire, from rich to poor, from young to old, from white to really white. He won across the board."

"Researchers found a frog in new guinea that is so tiny, they believe it's the smallest vertebrate on the planet. It has the tiniest backbone of any living creature, except members of Congress."

"A new poll says 84% of Americans disapprove of Congress' job. The other 16% weren't aware Congress was doing one."

David Letterman: "Mitt Romney is quite a guy. At one point he and his wife bought a zoo and fired all the animals."

"Newt Gingrich says that on Thursday he will be releasing his tax returns. You can feel the excitement, right?"

David Letterman's "Top Ten Signs Mitt Romney Is Getting Cocky"
10. Answers all questions with, "So's your mother"
9. Offered Santorum a 10,000-vote head start in South Carolina primary
8. He's forwarding his mail to the White House — Wow, that's cocky
7. Skipping next three primaries to go on tour with Young Jeezy
6. Started selling his own commemorative presidential plates on QVC
5. Donated $50,000 to Rick Perry's campaign
4. Now spelling "Mittt" with three T's
3. Ended debate by taking out wad of bills and "making it rain"
2. Wants to rename states Mittchigan, Mittsouri, Mittsissippi, and New Mittsico
1. Offered to help Newt with his concession speech

David Letterman's "Top Ten Things People Said When They Heard Jon Huntsman Was Dropping Out Of The Presidential Race"

10. "Who's Jon Huntsman?"
9. "Is he the rich boring white guy, or the other rich boring white guy?"
8. "Seriously, who's Jon Huntsman?"
7. "You mean my tax attorney? Oh wait, that's Stan Huntsman"
6. "Does this mean we can bring Herman Cain back? That guy was hilarious"
5. "So that leaves only four viable candidates, plus Rick Perry"
4. "It's like Jon Huntsman said . . . Well, actually, I have no idea what he said"
3. "Hey honey, some guy I’ve never heard of is dropping out of the race"
2. "He should have Tebowed more"
1. "Now who's gonna lose to Obama in the general election?"

Technorati Tags: Politics,Political Humor,Late Night Talk,Jay Leno,David Letterman,Newt Gingrich,Mitt Romney,Jon Huntsman,Rick Perry,Current Events,An American Gothic

More Privatization Legislation In Florida, Republican Style

    So once again the corrupt, Republican controlled Legislature is up to it’s eyeballs in trying to hide a bill from the Florida public.

    The Republican corporate servants want to pass a bill (  SPB 7170 ) that would allow for some state agencies to be privatized in secret. 

    There is also another bill ( SPB 7172 ) which would allow the privatization of correctional facilities throughout a pretty large swath of south Florida ( 18 counties ).

Florida Today notes:

The Senate rules committee will take up the bill (PCB 7170) at today’s afternoon meeting. The bill essentially means that an agency would not have to report its privatization of a program or service until after the contract is signed.

Open government advocates say the bill would keep the public in the dark about the costs of outsourcing government services. But proponents counter that the measure requires any privatization deal to first offer “a substantial savings” to the state.

   Also, from the Orlando Sentinel:

The Senate Rules Committee, chaired by Sen. John Thrasher, R-St. Augustine, gave the go ahead for the Senate to take up legislation that would privatize correctional facilities in an 18-county South Florida region and also a bill that revises requirements for the privatization process. The second piece of legislation would drop a requirement that departments looking at privatization create a business case for privatization prior to the Legislature making the decision.

   Oh yes, another attempt by the corporate legislature to put one past the residents of Florida, who really should get off of their asses and takes these crooks like Thrasher to task for fixing something which is not broken.

    In case you have not notice in the past, most of the privatization in the state of Florida or elsewhere usually ends up costing the taxpayer more money, not less. This scam will be no different.

    What happened to the open records law that Florida government is always boasting about? Telling the public after the fact is not very transparent, and this sort of shit only happens when the parties involved have something to hide.

Technorati Tags: John Thrasher,Florida,Republicans,Florida Legislature,SPB 7172,SPB 7170,Senate Rules Committee,Current Events,An American Gothic

SOPA, The MPAA and Chris Dodd

By Hunter  for Daily Kos on Wed Jan 18, 2012

For as long as I can remember, the MPAA (that's Motion Picture Association of America) has labored hard in their effort to be the most universally reviled industry group in the country. They are in stiff competition with the music business, but still manage to hold their own. What makes both these groups special is their ability to treat absolutely everyone like dirt: directors, actors, artists, distributers, consumers, everyone. To hear the MPAA tell it, the entire world revolves around a handful of companies whose content comes to them via magical pixie delivery service, the only talent that exists in the world is Studio Head, and everyone else from actors to consumers to the person playing bass guitar is a filthy, valueless leech only tolerated because slavery is still technically prohibited (for now). My own expectation is that there's something in the water, but in any event, in order to work there you have to be a raging, insufferable asshole with a titanic ego and no apparent skills other than raw parasitism.

Enter former Sen. Chris Dodd.

As Markos already mentioned, the only substantial response from the MPAA to the SOPA/PIPA internet blackout has come in the form of a profoundly pompous statement penned by Chris Dodd, or at least penned by an army of soulless half-humans in an MPAA lab, then signed by Chris Dodd afterwards.

MPAA Chairman Chris Dodd came out swinging Tuesday in the fight over pending Internet anti-piracy legislation calling online web sites and tech companies supporting the “Blackout Day” protest scheduled for Wednesday “irresponsible” and calling their protest action “a disservice to people who rely on them for information” or use their services.

“It is also an abuse of power given the freedoms these companies enjoy in the marketplace today,” said Dodd in a statement. “It’s a dangerous and troubling development when the platforms that serve as gateways to information intentionally skew the facts to incite their users in order to further their corporate interests.”

Yes, Markos already hit it. But I get to hit it again, under the This is So Stupid It Deserves Constant Mention rule. For starters: the sheer arrogance of the statement. That's not accidental, that is how the entertainment industry trade groups present themselves in nearly every situation. If a Girl Scout goes up to the head of the MPAA, she won't get away again until she hears how her very existence is only allowed because the big corporate studios make it possible, and that the color green is a copyright infringement, and that selling cookies is prohibited because cookies are a form of entertainment and fuck you, little girl, for thinking you could do that without handing over a large cut of the profits.

The sole argument Dodd has here is this, and I'm not kidding: You, internet websites, are engaged in an "abuse of power" by taking down your own websites. Only the MPAA gets to decide when to take down your websites. So shut up.

That's what the whole law is about: giving the largest entertainment companies themselves the right to preemptively shut down any effing website they want, under  unproven claims of "infringement", and leaving it to the poor pisser on the other side to try to prove their innocence in court battles after the fact. And why shouldn't they try for that? We are for the most part there already, after all; Congress has steadily been ceding government authority and mandating court deference to private industries over and over again, so getting it over with and just letting a top handful of companies preemptively decide who they think might be breaking the law, then giving them heightened government-assisted abilities to destroy the "offender" in question before actually having to prove their case—well, that seems like a logical next step, doesn't it? The true genius of it, however, is the added bonus of being able to threaten any internet site that even has a link to the supposed offender, or that allows users to post content that is not properly pre-censored to remove "potential" copyright claims according to whatever guessed criteria these companies later come up with. If the MPAA decides you haven't been taking explicit steps to "confirm" that no users or commenters are posting things it deems naughty, that's it: you're shut down as well. That's the real kicker, the call for preemptive, universal monitoring of all posted internet content. Forget the technical incompetence of the bill; the intent and logic alone is a megacorporate fantasy come to life. Preemptive shutdowns! Seizing assets! A required level of user policing that is objectively impossible for most sites to reasonably meet (including, hilariously, the sites of the MPAA-belonging, SOPA-supporting studios themselves, you unrelenting dipshits), thereby ensuring a rich and unending stream of new criminals!

You can practically hear the condescension dripping from Dodd's statement, the outrage that these silly internet companies are still able to express themselves in any way at all, if that expression comes in a form that might slightly inconvenience Sony, or Disney, or whatever other entertainment mega-corporation wants the power to literally police the entire structure of the internet in the name of their supposed corporate rights.

Oh, I think we're all for reducing piracy. As shown by their unwillingness to just change their flawed and asinine bill already, however, the MPAA, like the music industry, is not quite so narrowly targeted on that. Their more pressing concern has of late been how to continue to squeeze top profits out of a distribution model that increasingly does not need them, and doesn't want them, and which revolves around bleeding content producers and consumers both, and that, in turn, requires tight control over every other possible means of alternate distribution (see: Net Neutrality, the fight over whether or not many of these same companies should be able to charge you a steeper fee if you get your content from "discouraged" sources, i.e. competitors, critics, or anyone else who makes it onto their corporate blacklist).

If it were easier to buy content, people would do more of it (iTunes, etc., has begun to help in this regard for music, but the film and television industries will apparently have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the electronic age). If industry groups did not consistently and absurdly overstep in what they called "infringement," and so had a small bit more credibility in this debate, that would help too. While we're at it we can ponder on the Neverending Copyright Story, the constant battle to ensure that we treat corporate copyrights as infinite entities, more sacrosanct than the original artist-centric version ever was, because once again corporate giants of course deserve stronger protection than individual people. That's just natural.

Net Un-Neutrality, SOPA, PIPA and ever-expanding copyright laws; a ridiculous patent system; ALEC, the MPAA, the Keystone fight; the legal fights over fracking; the mere political existence of Mitt Romney: Every aspect of our current government is predicated on expanding corporate power, and if that power conflicts with deeper American principles than those other principles can piss off. Even while we celebrate the internet bringing concrete benefits to other nations, we seek to limit it at home because some group of lobbyists says that corporate profits demand it. Then we have to listen to those same corporate voices condemn us for having the rotten audacity to even object.

Technorati Tags: SOPA,PIPA,MPAA,Chris Dodd,Internet Censorship,Hollywood,Big Business

Sorry GOP: America Still Blames Bush For The Economic Mess

   They also say that our Congress is confused, inept, and basically worthless as far as the Republican side of the room is concerned.

   From latest news according to the Washington professionals:

A majority of Americans believe that former President George W. Bush is more responsible than President Obama for the current economic problems in the country, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Fifty-four percent of respondents said that Bush was more to blame while 29 percent put the blame on Obama; 9 percent said both men deserved blame while 6 percent said neither did. Among registered voters, the numbers are almost identical; 54 percent blame Bush, while 30 percent blame Obama.

Independents, widely considered the most critical voting bloc this fall, continue to blame Bush far more than Obama for the economic troubles. Fifty-seven percent of unaffiliated voters put the blame on the former Republican president, while 25 percent believe the blame rests more with Obama.

Heck, even one in five Republicans say Bush is more responsible than Obama for the state of the economy!

CBS/New York Times:

The public is not assigning blame equally between President Obama and Republicans in Congress for the partisan gridlock over key legislation.

In the latest New York Times/CBS News poll, 60 percent say Mr. Obama is attempting to work with Congressional Republicans to try to accomplish something; 27 percent say Republicans in Congress are making the same effort to work things out with the president.

There is strong public support for politicians to start cooperating. At least 80 percent – regardless of party identification – say Republicans and Democrats should compromise some of their positions in order to get things done.

    Another Republican talking-point bites the dust.

Technorati Tags: ABC-Washington Post,ABC/WaPo Poll,CBS/NY Times Poll,Barack Obama,Congress,Current Events,An American Gothic,Politics

Blackout Got you Down? Coming attractions for the NEW internet!

Originally posted to detroitmechworks on Tue Jan 17, 2012

Ok, so all your favorite websites are down today.  It's no big deal!

Yes folks, the corporations of America have stepped up to the plate, and are ready to provide you with alternate sites that do ALMOST exactly what your old sites did. 

Of course, there is a nominal registration fee for accessing each and every one of the following sites, but that is simply the cost of getting what you want!

Follow me across the flip, and your journey into the FUTURE of the internet will begin!

Missing Wikipedia?  No problem!  We present the new and improved Weekpedia!  
No longer will you be forced to sit through erroneous and constantly updated information by random people on the internet!  The new Weekpedia is written and controlled by the top experts in the field.  Each entry is scrupulously scanned for copyright violations, and then, given that wonderful professional polish!
-Who needs comprehensive information on Gibraltar, when you can see a LIVE performance of the newest pop sensation! Each article will have a learning machine that determines what YOU most likely will want to see!  Don't like her?  Don't worry!  We've got a hundred more lined up for you!  And if you DO need that information, we will happily link you to the 1901 copyright free Encyclopedia Britannica article.  After all, Nothing's really changed as far as the Rock goes.  And SPEAKING of the Rock, you'll want to see his NEW MOVIE!

Want up to date political Commentary like on DailyKos?  Well, buckle up because the new and improved MSNBC site has you covered!  No longer will you need to surf the internet for progressive stories when you can simply go to our site and see the important news right there!  No more hassles of trolls and voting.  Our editors have determined what you NEED to see and where you NEED to go to get it.  Want to comment?  Just send us your comments and we'll determine if they fit the story!  You'll see comments from people JUST LIKE YOU!   And if you are worried about not seeing the controversy, don't worry!  We have linked our site to the former members of Redstate, so you will be sure to see ALL sides of complex isssues.  It's only through fair and balanced coverage that you will get the whole story!

Want Videos like you used to see on Youtube?  No problem!  Welcome to USTube!  The net's new site for user created videos.  By uploading your video, you ensure that you are helping this vibrant community stay strong.  Our editors will review all content, after doing a quick check against the MPAA and RIAA catalogs to ensure compliance.  If you are using a licensed song, the royalty fee can be deducted automatically, provided that the use of the music is approved by the copyright holder.  No more worrying about fair use or possibly violating a film copyright either!  We simply will replace all violations with random public domain films from the early fifties, ensuring entertainment and compliance.

Want to go shopping?  Well, the NEW internet has you covered!  Almost every corporation will have a website, and the new instant charges to your bank account will ensure that you buy the products you want in a fraction of the time.  No more worrying about con artists trying to rip you off.  If it isn't verified, it WON'T be sold. 

Want to chat with your friends on Facebook and Twitter?  Well, we've got a surprise for you!  The new Faceplace ensures that everyone is EXACTLY who they say they are.  Once you've uploaded all of your information, you can be sure that there will be nothing posted to your wall that could be hurtful in any way, because it will all be checked.  No violations of copyright also means we can ensure that everyone plays by the rules.  Uploading a picture?  We'll check it to make certain you aren't breaking any laws.  That way we protect both you AND your community.

And for added security, the new internet will helpfully monitor your hard drive for all media.  By doing this, we can ensure that you aren't doing anything that could get you into trouble.  Real time monitoring will ensure no pirated films or software have been placed onto your computer, through NO fault of your own of course.  We'll make certain that stuff is GONE.  Of course, refusal to accede to this monitoring IS a violation of the terms of service of the new internet.

So don't worry.  You'll still be able to shop, talk and do all of your productivity!  Just with a little bonus.   A friend who is going to be watching over you.  A Big Brother, if you will.

He's got your best interests at heart, after all.

Technorati Tags: SOPA,Redstate,The Internet,Website Blackouts,Snark,Youtube,Curent Events,An American Gothic

Christians, Rick Santorum, and Voter Fraud

    Sometimes those so-called “ Christian Conservatives  “ can be downright amusing.

Accusations of voter fraud fly among Christian conservatives after Rick Santorum endorsement

Originally posted to Laura Clawson on Mon Jan 16, 2012

The gathering of Christian conservative leaders intended to choose a not-Romney to unify behind (a little late in the game to have much effect) has dissolved into recriminations:

But in back-and-forth emails, Protestant fundamentalist leaders who attended – most of them backing former House Speaker Newt Gingrich to be the anti-Romney candidate — are accusing Catholic participants of conniving to rig the vote.

They said they were conned into leaving after the second ballot on Saturday. They said pro-Santorum participants held a third ballot which Mr. Santorum won with more than 70 percent of the vote — far higher than the nine-vote margin he won on the first ballot. [...]

Now, a prominent evangelical political organizer is saying to others confidentially he has evidence that in a least one instance a participant was seen writing Mr. Santorum’s name on four separate ballots and putting them in the ballot box.

This is a nice little twist on the Republican obsession with voter fraud. But is it evidence that they're obsessed with fraud because they're so likely to commit it? Or just that their obsession leads them to be suspicious of anyone who disagrees with them, even an elite group of their peers?

No word on whether the voter ID requirement involved knowing a set number of Bible verses.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Technorati Tags: Christian Conservatives,Rick Santorum,Republicans,Voter Fraud,2012 Elections,Newt Gingrich,Current Events,An American Gothic

Mitten Romney: Stimulus Lies

   Another Christian candidate who has to resort to lies in an effort to look better than he actually is.

Romney's Big Lie on the Economy Gets Bigger

Originally posted to Avenging Angel on Mon Jan 16, 2012

If nothing else, Mitt Romney seems dedicated to proving that repetition of a lie will make it true.  On no point is Romney's tilting against the windmill of truth more comically pathetic than his long-ago debunked claim that President Obama "did not cause this recession, but he made it worse."  After a tidal wave of fact-checkers demolished his mythology last summer, Romney on June 30 pretended, "I didn't say that things are worse" before reinstating the falsehood in his stump speech just days later.  Now, Mitt has a new twist on his "Obama made it worse" fraud, declaring in light of the improving economic outlook that "It's getting better not because of him, it's in spite of him and what he's done."

Sadly for the myth-maker from Massachusetts, the numbers and the overwhelming consensus of economists - including John McCain's 2008 brain trust - demand Mitt Romney give credit where credit is due.

That, of course, is something the serial deceiver Romney is refusing to do, even as he acknowledges the economy is improving.  As Mitt put it in New Hampshire ten days ago:

"I'm sure the president will want to take credit for it, for any improvement. Guess what? He doesn't deserve it."

Two days later during a GOP debate, Romney repackaged his con job this way:

"The president is going to try and take responsibility for things getting better. You know, it's like the rooster taking responsibility for the sunrise. He didn't do it," Romney said. "In fact, what he did was make things harder for America to get going again."

But back on planet Earth where the force of gravity still applies and the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, Romney's slander should receive the ridicule it rightly deserves.

This summer, Time blasted Romney's accusation that "the recession is deeper because of our President," concluding "that Romney's claim has no credible basis" because "there's no credible economic data showing that Obama has inflamed our economic problems."  As Greg Sargent noted on June 27, both the AP and the Washington Post's own fact-checker demolished Romney's talking point on the recession which the NBER declared over in June 2009.  Confronted three days later by NBC producer Sue Kroll about the growing economy, modest job gains and surging stock market, Romney simply denied he ever made the charge:

"I didn't say that things are worse...What I said was that economy hasn't turned around."

Nevertheless, just four days later Romney marked Independence Day by returning to his lie.  As the New York Times reported:

Speaking at the annual July Fourth parade here on Monday, Mr. Romney told a crowd of supporters and passersby, "the recession is deeper because of our president," adding, "it's seen an anemic recovery because of our president."

Mr. Romney made a similar assertion earlier when reporters had pressed him on the point near the parade staging grounds, after initially seeming to limit his commentary to the president's handling of the recovery, which he said, "has been slower and more painful,'' But then he went ahead and said it, that the president "made the recession worse."

As it turns out, it's not just the tidal wave of reporters and fact-checkers that washed away the mud Mitt Romney hurled at President Obama on the economy.  A bevy of economists, including ones who worked for Romney endorser John McCain, long ago concluded that Barack Obama saved the U.S. economy from calamity.

Take, for example, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.  Despite Republican mythmaking that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) "created zero jobs," in November the CBO reported that the stimulus added up to 2.4 million jobs and boosted GDP by as much as 1.9 points in the previous quarter.  As The Hill explained, the CBO has found that "President Obama's 2009 stimulus package continues to benefit the struggling economy":

The agency said the measure raised gross domestic product by between 0.3 and 1.9 percent in the third quarter of 2011, which ended Sept. 30. The Commerce Department said Tuesday that GDP in that quarter was only 2 percent total...

By CBO's numbers, the $800 billion stimulus added up to 0.9 million jobs in 2009, 3.3 million jobs in 2010 and 2.6 million jobs in 2011.

Mark Zandi, an adviser to John McCain in 2008, was adamant on positive role of the stimulus. Federal intervention, he and Princeton economist Alan Blinder argued in August 2010, literally saved the United States from a second Great Depression. In "How the Great Recession Was Brought to an End," Blinder and Zandi's models confirmed the impact of the Obama recovery program and concluded that "laissez faire was not an option":

The effects of the fiscal stimulus alone appear very substantial, raising 2010 real GDP by about 3.4%, holding the unemployment rate about 1½ percentage points lower, and adding almost 2.7 million jobs to U.S. payrolls. These estimates of the fiscal impact are broadly consistent with those made by the CBO and the Obama administration.

But their modeling also suggests that the totality of federal efforts to rescue the banking system dating back to the fall of 2008 prevented a catastrophic collapse:

We find that its effects on real GDP, jobs, and inflation are huge, and probably averted what could have been called Great Depression 2.0. For example, we estimate that, without the government's response, GDP in 2010 would be about 11.5% lower, payroll employment would be less by some 8½ million jobs, and the nation would now be experiencing deflation.

Even Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former head of the CBO and chief economic adviser to John McCain during the 2008 election, acknowledged the impact of the stimulus. Certainly no fan of either Barack Obama or the design of the ARRA, Holtz-Eakin told Ezra Klein that:

"The argument that the stimulus had zero impact and we shouldn't have done it is intellectually dishonest or wrong. If you throw a trillion dollars at the economy it has an impact, and we needed to do something."

Of course, Mitt Romney is nothing if not intellectual dishonest.  But his lie that President Obama "made the economy worse" has become, as Greg Sargent noted, "has now become absolutely central to his campaign message, yet it's finding its way into story after story and segment after segment with no rebuttal whatsoever."  And until that deception is finally buried by the scorn and disdain it deserves, Mitt Romney's "Post-Truth Campaign" will continue until November.

* Crossposted at Perrspectves *

Also republished by Community Spotlight.

Technorati Tags: Mitt Romney,Barack Obama,Stimulus,The Economy,ARRA,CBO,GDP,The Recession,2012 Elections,An American Gothic,Current Events

Where We Are Headed if Republicans Get Their Way with the Tax Code

Originally posted to Tim DeLaney on Mon Jan 16, 2012

The current Republican candidates have all called for the elimination of both capital gains taxes and estate taxes. Presumably, taxes on dividends would also be eliminated, but even if not, there are ways of diverting profits from dividend payments to capital gains--stock buy-backs, for instance.

Below the fold, we will examine the likely consequences of adopting this Republican vision of taxation. Briefly put, it ain't pretty.

Let's imagine you are a CEO or other high-placed executive for a major corporation. Your annual salary--including bonuses--is about $5 million. You are getting more wealthy each year because you don't spend the whole $4 million in after tax dollars. (You have a very good accountant!)

The Republicans gain control of the White House, and of both houses. (Hurray! Let the good times roll!) True to their word, they cut the capital gains tax to zero and eliminate the estate tax. You and your accountants, with an eye toward the 0% tax on capital gains, decide that your salary ought to be structured such that it is classified as capital gains rather than ordinary income.

Somehow, under the magic of creative accounting, and perhaps with an assist from the lawmakers you helped elect with your Super Pac, most of your income is transformed into capital gains. With an effective tax rate near 0%, your net worth skyrockets.

So, what do you do with the money? Even today, the top 1% in wealth own more than half the financial assets in the country. Under the new tax regime, this inexorably increases until--perhaps a few decades from now--they own nearly all the stocks, bonds, and other financial assets. What now?

A natural outlet for all that capital is property. So you start buying up houses on the open market to use as rental properties. The 99% can no longer afford home ownership because you have squeezed the last available dollar out of them. Eventually, most workers are reduced to living from paycheck to paycheck. What do you do when you con no longer get blood from a stone?

You resort to cannibalism, of course. If you are one of the top 0.01%, you start squeezing out the other 0.99%. eventually, and it might take a few generations, all the country's wealth will be concentrated in a few thousand families. (Remember, we abolished estate taxes.) Under the Republican paradigm, the trend is inevitable: the rich will inevitably get richer, and the rest will get poorer.

It may already be too late to reverse the trend. Excess wealth can readily be converted to votes, especially in view of the Citizens United decision. Votes are converted into control of the government, and this in turn is converted to control of the country's wealth. In this circular paradigm, wealth begets wealth. When wealth and politics combine, the non-wealthy are the losers.

For the United States--and all its citizens--to prosper, we need to attain political equilibrium. The politics of the Democratic Party naturally tend towards equilibrium; the politics of the Republicans naturally tend towards runaway wealth concentration.

I don't by any stretch mean to suggest that everything proposed by Democrats is naturally and necessarily optimum policy. We can, and have, made mistakes. But when Democrats make mistakes, those mistakes tend to be self-correcting. When Republicans make mistakes, the results are generally catastrophic.

What does this have to do with the current campaign? First priority, in my opinion, is to overturn the Citizens United decision by means of a constitutional amendment. Demand from every congressional candidate--Democrat or Republican--a firm commitment to the proposed amendment. The alternative is to allow corporations to buy the government. In reality, this amounts to allowing the Boards of directors and the CEO's to buy the government. It is merely a convenient fiction to believe that the shareholders are in control.

There are other reforms needed. In future diaries, perhaps I will try to advocate for some of them.

Also republished by J Town, Dream Menders, and Community Spotlight.

Technorati Tags: Republicans,Taxes,Tax Code,Citizens United,Class Warfare,Current Events,An American Gothic,Politics,The 1%

Saint Ron Paul’s Biblical Adventure

    While blazing through the vast Internet universe, I came across one of the books of the Bible renamed  the “ Book of Saint Ron Paul.

More from the Book of Paul

by ontheleftcoast           Sat Jan 14, 2012

I had a bit of fun morphing the words of the Book of Mark into the rather bizarre, self-serving words of the Republican party's mad elf Ron Paul. My sig line was the result. So I took a shot at transcribing more of chapter 8 into the words of Adam Smith as misunderstood and taught by Saint Ron Paul.

[1] In those days the millionaires being very great, and having caviar to eat, Adam Smith called his disciples unto him, and said
[2] "I have compassion for the millionaires, because they have now been with me for many days, and have nothing but caviar to eat."
[3] "And if I send them away to their own mansions, they will faint on the way, for they lack carbohydrates and they came from afar."
[4] And his disciples answered him, "From whence can a man satisfy these men with bread here in the wilderness?"
[5] And he asked them, "How many loaves have ye?" And they said, "Seven."
[6] And he commanded the rich to sit down at the tables with fine linen: and he took the seven loaves, and the money collected to feed the poor, and paid for more loaves, and said, "The rich did pay more so should get more."

Editor's note, the following several verses are a rather boring account of various courses being served to all the guests. Those that couldn't pay were given vouchers for a meal at a later time at the soup kitchen. Back to the story.

[31] And he began to teach them, that he must suffer many things, that he would be rejected by the scholarly, and be replaced by better understanding of markets, but after 3 generations would rise again.
[32] And he spake that saying openly. And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him.
[33] But when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he took from Peter and gave it to Paul, saying, "Get thee behind me, Peter: for thou savorest not the things that be of gold, but the things that be of paper money."
[34] And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples, he said unto them, "Whosoever will follow me, let him pay for himself, pick up his own check, and he can join me."
[35] "For whosoever will put his life savings in stocks shall lose it; but whosoever shall put his life savings in gold, the same shall save it."
[36] "For what profit a man, if he gain the world, but has to pay taxes on it?"
[37] "For what shall a man demand in exchange for those taxes?"
[38] "Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and my words in this deficit spending and wasteful generation; of him shall I be ashamed when I return."

When money is your religion then you surely must follow the profits.

Originally posted to ontheleftcoast on Sat Jan 14, 2012

Also republished by Street Prophets and Community Spotlight.

Technorati Tags: Political Humor,Religion,Ron Paul,Economic Theory,Satire,Current Events,An American Gothic