“Cruelty to the 98%ers” should be the GOP motto for 2012 election, since so much of their economic gadgetry is aimed at only helping the richest of the rich, and taking as much away from working people and the poor as they possibly can. Paul Ryan’s Randian budget is a nightmare and Americans are rejecting it as fast as they can, but someone might have topped him: Several of the 2012 GOP presidential hopefuls have laid out economic platforms that would include huge cuts in the corporate tax rate. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) called for lowering the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent , while former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) went a step further, calling for a cut to 15 percent . In an interview published today by the Wall Street Journal, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) — who is toying with a presidential run herself — decided to one-up both Romney and Pawlenty, calling for a reduction in the corporate tax rate to 9 percent . Adding insult to injury, Bachmann wants to pair that huge tax cut with giant tax reductions for the rich, as well as a tax increase on the working poor : “In my perfect world,” she explains, “ we’d take the 35% corporate tax rate down to nine so that we’re the most competitive in the industrialized world. Zero out capital gains. Zero out the alternative minimum tax. Zero out the death tax. ” Her main goal is to get tax rates down with a broad-based income tax that everyone pays and that “gets rid of all the deductions.” A system in which 47% of Americans don’t pay any tax is ruinous for a democracy, she says, “because there is no tie to the government benefits that people demand. I think everyone should have to pay something.” Let’s take these one at a time. First, cutting the corporate tax rate to 9 percent — a reduction about two and a half times larger than that called for in the radical House Republican budget — would cost more than $2 trillion over ten years. (The Tax Policy Center estimated that a 10 point reduction in the corporate tax rate would cost about $915 billion .)… read on These ideas are insane and I’m not sure why they believe seniors and the elderly will nod their heads in approval, though of course they can always count on the most vicious right wing ideologues. Her ideas as well as many other conservatives these says draw up the battle lines of direct class warfare. I look at her proposals and I say, WTF will happen to me if they have their way in the near future? It’s getting scarier each and every day, people. Matt Yglesias writes: If you’re old, then Bachmann thinks there’s an “obligation” for you to keep your health care and pension benefits. But not only do those of us born later than 1956 have no right to decent health care and pension when we are old, but if we’re right now relying on student loans to make college affordable, that’s going to be cut. If you’re a parent relying on Medicaid to cover your autistic child’s treatment, you’re out of luck. If commute to work and are hoping America continues to have a viable transportation infrastructure, you’re out of luck. Absolutely everyone born after 1956 is going to be subject to immediate draconian cuts in the programs we benefit from, while we’re supposed to believe that nobody born earlier than that will suffer even the slightest bit. Earlier in the interview she’s going on about Ludwig Von Mises and Milton Friedman, but the actual economic agenda here is rather different from small government as such. It’s all about who’s the right kind of people and who’s not. Almost all of America is not the right kind of people. Do they really believe claiming that everyone over 55 will be A-OK is of any comfort? There seems to be a common idea among these fiscal extremists that if they can only convince the old folks that they won’t be hurt, then they’ll have no problem selling this dystopian future to the country. I don’t know why they think that. The over 55ers don’t trust them to keep their word (after all, they’re prepared to tell people 54 and under that all the money they’ve put in was for nothing) and they also tend to love their kids and grandkids enough not to want to consign them to a Death Race 2000 kind of existence. And I think they might need some other people to vote for them so blatantly screwing them probably isn’t going to be a huge selling point.
Continue reading …“Cruelty to the 98%ers” should be the GOP motto for 2012 election, since so much of their economic gadgetry is aimed at only helping the richest of the rich, and taking as much away from working people and the poor as they possibly can. Paul Ryan’s Randian budget is a nightmare and Americans are rejecting it as fast as they can, but someone might have topped him: Several of the 2012 GOP presidential hopefuls have laid out economic platforms that would include huge cuts in the corporate tax rate. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) called for lowering the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent , while former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) went a step further, calling for a cut to 15 percent . In an interview published today by the Wall Street Journal, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) — who is toying with a presidential run herself — decided to one-up both Romney and Pawlenty, calling for a reduction in the corporate tax rate to 9 percent . Adding insult to injury, Bachmann wants to pair that huge tax cut with giant tax reductions for the rich, as well as a tax increase on the working poor : “In my perfect world,” she explains, “ we’d take the 35% corporate tax rate down to nine so that we’re the most competitive in the industrialized world. Zero out capital gains. Zero out the alternative minimum tax. Zero out the death tax. ” Her main goal is to get tax rates down with a broad-based income tax that everyone pays and that “gets rid of all the deductions.” A system in which 47% of Americans don’t pay any tax is ruinous for a democracy, she says, “because there is no tie to the government benefits that people demand. I think everyone should have to pay something.” Let’s take these one at a time. First, cutting the corporate tax rate to 9 percent — a reduction about two and a half times larger than that called for in the radical House Republican budget — would cost more than $2 trillion over ten years. (The Tax Policy Center estimated that a 10 point reduction in the corporate tax rate would cost about $915 billion .)… read on These ideas are insane and I’m not sure why they believe seniors and the elderly will nod their heads in approval, though of course they can always count on the most vicious right wing ideologues. Her ideas as well as many other conservatives these says draw up the battle lines of direct class warfare. I look at her proposals and I say, WTF will happen to me if they have their way in the near future? It’s getting scarier each and every day, people. Matt Yglesias writes: If you’re old, then Bachmann thinks there’s an “obligation” for you to keep your health care and pension benefits. But not only do those of us born later than 1956 have no right to decent health care and pension when we are old, but if we’re right now relying on student loans to make college affordable, that’s going to be cut. If you’re a parent relying on Medicaid to cover your autistic child’s treatment, you’re out of luck. If commute to work and are hoping America continues to have a viable transportation infrastructure, you’re out of luck. Absolutely everyone born after 1956 is going to be subject to immediate draconian cuts in the programs we benefit from, while we’re supposed to believe that nobody born earlier than that will suffer even the slightest bit. Earlier in the interview she’s going on about Ludwig Von Mises and Milton Friedman, but the actual economic agenda here is rather different from small government as such. It’s all about who’s the right kind of people and who’s not. Almost all of America is not the right kind of people. Do they really believe claiming that everyone over 55 will be A-OK is of any comfort? There seems to be a common idea among these fiscal extremists that if they can only convince the old folks that they won’t be hurt, then they’ll have no problem selling this dystopian future to the country. I don’t know why they think that. The over 55ers don’t trust them to keep their word (after all, they’re prepared to tell people 54 and under that all the money they’ve put in was for nothing) and they also tend to love their kids and grandkids enough not to want to consign them to a Death Race 2000 kind of existence. And I think they might need some other people to vote for them so blatantly screwing them probably isn’t going to be a huge selling point.
Continue reading …“Cruelty to the 98%ers” should be the GOP motto for 2012 election, since so much of their economic gadgetry is aimed at only helping the richest of the rich, and taking as much away from working people and the poor as they possibly can. Paul Ryan’s Randian budget is a nightmare and Americans are rejecting it as fast as they can, but someone might have topped him: Several of the 2012 GOP presidential hopefuls have laid out economic platforms that would include huge cuts in the corporate tax rate. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) called for lowering the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent , while former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) went a step further, calling for a cut to 15 percent . In an interview published today by the Wall Street Journal, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) — who is toying with a presidential run herself — decided to one-up both Romney and Pawlenty, calling for a reduction in the corporate tax rate to 9 percent . Adding insult to injury, Bachmann wants to pair that huge tax cut with giant tax reductions for the rich, as well as a tax increase on the working poor : “In my perfect world,” she explains, “ we’d take the 35% corporate tax rate down to nine so that we’re the most competitive in the industrialized world. Zero out capital gains. Zero out the alternative minimum tax. Zero out the death tax. ” Her main goal is to get tax rates down with a broad-based income tax that everyone pays and that “gets rid of all the deductions.” A system in which 47% of Americans don’t pay any tax is ruinous for a democracy, she says, “because there is no tie to the government benefits that people demand. I think everyone should have to pay something.” Let’s take these one at a time. First, cutting the corporate tax rate to 9 percent — a reduction about two and a half times larger than that called for in the radical House Republican budget — would cost more than $2 trillion over ten years. (The Tax Policy Center estimated that a 10 point reduction in the corporate tax rate would cost about $915 billion .)… read on These ideas are insane and I’m not sure why they believe seniors and the elderly will nod their heads in approval, though of course they can always count on the most vicious right wing ideologues. Her ideas as well as many other conservatives these says draw up the battle lines of direct class warfare. I look at her proposals and I say, WTF will happen to me if they have their way in the near future? It’s getting scarier each and every day, people. Matt Yglesias writes: If you’re old, then Bachmann thinks there’s an “obligation” for you to keep your health care and pension benefits. But not only do those of us born later than 1956 have no right to decent health care and pension when we are old, but if we’re right now relying on student loans to make college affordable, that’s going to be cut. If you’re a parent relying on Medicaid to cover your autistic child’s treatment, you’re out of luck. If commute to work and are hoping America continues to have a viable transportation infrastructure, you’re out of luck. Absolutely everyone born after 1956 is going to be subject to immediate draconian cuts in the programs we benefit from, while we’re supposed to believe that nobody born earlier than that will suffer even the slightest bit. Earlier in the interview she’s going on about Ludwig Von Mises and Milton Friedman, but the actual economic agenda here is rather different from small government as such. It’s all about who’s the right kind of people and who’s not. Almost all of America is not the right kind of people. Do they really believe claiming that everyone over 55 will be A-OK is of any comfort? There seems to be a common idea among these fiscal extremists that if they can only convince the old folks that they won’t be hurt, then they’ll have no problem selling this dystopian future to the country. I don’t know why they think that. The over 55ers don’t trust them to keep their word (after all, they’re prepared to tell people 54 and under that all the money they’ve put in was for nothing) and they also tend to love their kids and grandkids enough not to want to consign them to a Death Race 2000 kind of existence. And I think they might need some other people to vote for them so blatantly screwing them probably isn’t going to be a huge selling point.
Continue reading …Mr. Hard News: NY Times’s Michael Shear, Bitter About Talking Weiner, Spends Next 2 Days on Palin Emails
June 13, 2011 No CommentMichael Shear, chief writer for the New York Times’s “Caucus” blog, sounded sarcastic and bitter, almost angry, at the opening of the paper’s last “ Caucus ” podcast on Thursday about having to talk about the Anthony Weiner sex scandal. Host Sam Roberts: “But you pointed out that this is a particularly inopportune time for this latest sex scandal to break in Washington. Why is that?” Michael Shear: “Lots of policy and we’re going to start with the sex scandal! That’s fine. Yeah, it’s not a good time for Democrats.” So what vital hard-core political news did Shear spend the entire following day covering to compensate for having to discuss Weinergate? The three-year-old trove of Sarah Palin emails from her time as Alaska governor. Among the urgent news Shear dug up? One subhead: ” Palin Wanted a Tanning Bed in the Governor's House. ” Sarah Palin's tanned good looks may have gotten a bit of help. An e-mail from the manager of the governor's house to Ms. Palin in early 2008 makes clear that Ms. Palin had inquired about the possibility of installing a tanning bed in the house. But even the tanning bed “scoop” is old news. Kate Phillips covered it on the “ Caucus ” back on September 17, 2008, and the anecdote showed up intermittently in the Times when the paper’s liberal columnists needed a Palin joke. Shear ran an update Saturday morning under a headline, ” News Outlets Pounce on Palin E-Mails ,” that was an implicit confession the news value of the Palin emails were the political equivalent of the Al Capone vault (reference courtesy Allahpundit). After admitting “there were no major revelations” in the emails, Shear, showing chutzpah, worked in a crack at Fox News for refusing to join the liberal media hit parade on Palin: A review in the morning of Web sites for news organizations and major blogs found that most gave the story prominent play, with large headlines and, in some cases, multiple articles. One exception: Fox News, where Ms. Palin is a paid commentator. The network’s home page offered one link to its article with the headline “Palin E-Mails Reveal Harsh Scrutiny After VP Pick.” It came above an article about a fight on an airliner and below one about Turkish preparations for elections. As if the overdose of Palin coverage was justified because all the other members of the liberal media were doing the same thing. On Saturday, media reporter Jeremy Peters, to his credit, covered critics of the media's anti-Palin overkill, “ Critics Fume Over Intensity of News Coverage for Palin’s Messages .” News organizations mobilized teams of reporters and even recruited online volunteers to scan more than 24,000 pages of e-mails from Sarah Palin that were released on Friday, prompting some critics to accuse the news media of overkill at best and vigilantism at worst. …. The New York Times and The Guardian sent reporters armed with scanners and then solicited readers’ assistance. Politico enlisted a dozen editors, reporters and interns who worked as a team from their Northern Virginia newsroom “plowing through” the documents, as one editor described it. The Washington Post initially asked for 100 volunteers to sift through the documents. They were quickly overwhelmed with too many applicants. Unable to screen all of them, the paper abandoned the plan late Thursday, opting instead to invite reader comments. Were news organizations Dumpster diving, as one outraged reader of The Washington Post put it? News outlets insisted that they were trying to be as thorough and efficient as possible while reporting on information that the public was entitled to know. “This is not a witch hunt,” said Jim Roberts, an assistant managing editor at The Times. “There are 25,000 documents here, and we can use all the eyeballs we can get.” …. Greta Van Susteren, the Fox News host, asked if all the fuss amounted to a “media colonoscopy,” and pointed to comments from her readers who asked whether news organizations had devoted such energy to the 2,800-page health care overhaul bill that passed last year.
Continue reading …Mr. Hard News: NY Times’s Michael Shear, Bitter About Talking Weiner, Spends Next 2 Days on Palin Emails
June 13, 2011 No CommentMichael Shear, chief writer for the New York Times’s “Caucus” blog, sounded sarcastic and bitter, almost angry, at the opening of the paper’s last “ Caucus ” podcast on Thursday about having to talk about the Anthony Weiner sex scandal. Host Sam Roberts: “But you pointed out that this is a particularly inopportune time for this latest sex scandal to break in Washington. Why is that?” Michael Shear: “Lots of policy and we’re going to start with the sex scandal! That’s fine. Yeah, it’s not a good time for Democrats.” So what vital hard-core political news did Shear spend the entire following day covering to compensate for having to discuss Weinergate? The three-year-old trove of Sarah Palin emails from her time as Alaska governor. Among the urgent news Shear dug up? One subhead: ” Palin Wanted a Tanning Bed in the Governor's House. ” Sarah Palin's tanned good looks may have gotten a bit of help. An e-mail from the manager of the governor's house to Ms. Palin in early 2008 makes clear that Ms. Palin had inquired about the possibility of installing a tanning bed in the house. But even the tanning bed “scoop” is old news. Kate Phillips covered it on the “ Caucus ” back on September 17, 2008, and the anecdote showed up intermittently in the Times when the paper’s liberal columnists needed a Palin joke. Shear ran an update Saturday morning under a headline, ” News Outlets Pounce on Palin E-Mails ,” that was an implicit confession the news value of the Palin emails were the political equivalent of the Al Capone vault (reference courtesy Allahpundit). After admitting “there were no major revelations” in the emails, Shear, showing chutzpah, worked in a crack at Fox News for refusing to join the liberal media hit parade on Palin: A review in the morning of Web sites for news organizations and major blogs found that most gave the story prominent play, with large headlines and, in some cases, multiple articles. One exception: Fox News, where Ms. Palin is a paid commentator. The network’s home page offered one link to its article with the headline “Palin E-Mails Reveal Harsh Scrutiny After VP Pick.” It came above an article about a fight on an airliner and below one about Turkish preparations for elections. As if the overdose of Palin coverage was justified because all the other members of the liberal media were doing the same thing. On Saturday, media reporter Jeremy Peters, to his credit, covered critics of the media's anti-Palin overkill, “ Critics Fume Over Intensity of News Coverage for Palin’s Messages .” News organizations mobilized teams of reporters and even recruited online volunteers to scan more than 24,000 pages of e-mails from Sarah Palin that were released on Friday, prompting some critics to accuse the news media of overkill at best and vigilantism at worst. …. The New York Times and The Guardian sent reporters armed with scanners and then solicited readers’ assistance. Politico enlisted a dozen editors, reporters and interns who worked as a team from their Northern Virginia newsroom “plowing through” the documents, as one editor described it. The Washington Post initially asked for 100 volunteers to sift through the documents. They were quickly overwhelmed with too many applicants. Unable to screen all of them, the paper abandoned the plan late Thursday, opting instead to invite reader comments. Were news organizations Dumpster diving, as one outraged reader of The Washington Post put it? News outlets insisted that they were trying to be as thorough and efficient as possible while reporting on information that the public was entitled to know. “This is not a witch hunt,” said Jim Roberts, an assistant managing editor at The Times. “There are 25,000 documents here, and we can use all the eyeballs we can get.” …. Greta Van Susteren, the Fox News host, asked if all the fuss amounted to a “media colonoscopy,” and pointed to comments from her readers who asked whether news organizations had devoted such energy to the 2,800-page health care overhaul bill that passed last year.
Continue reading …
Referendums see huge votes against PM’s plans – a second setback in under two weeks The anti-nuclear movement won a crushing victory in Italy on Monday when well over 90% of voters rejected Silvio Berlusconi’s plans for a return to nuclear power generation. The result represented an overwhelming setback for the prime minister, who had tried to thwart the outcome by discouraging Italians from taking part. The referendum needed a turnout of at least 50% to be binding. Interior ministry figures projections indicated that more than 57% of the electorate had taken part. Greenpeace called it a historic result. Quorums were also reached in three other referendums held simultaneously – the first time in 16 years that a quorum had been achieved in any referendum in Italy. Official projections showed more than 95% of voters rejecting water privatisation and a law allowing Berlusconi and other ministers to cite government business as a reason for delaying trials in which they were defendants. The expected majority against nuclear power was 94%. For the prime minister it represented a second, bitter setback in under two weeks. His government, which yokes his Freedom People movement to the regionalist and Islamophobic Northern League, first ran into serious trouble on 30 May when his candidate for mayor of Milan lost in a local election runoff. Milan is Berlusconi’s home city and traditionally a weather-vane accurately pointing to Italy’s future political direction. Acknowledging defeat even before the polls closed, Berlusconi said: “We shall probably have to say goodbye to nuclear [energy].” He told a press conference in Rome that his government would now throw all its energy into developing renewable sources. The outcome was a huge success for the anti-nuclear movement in the world’s first nationwide vote on the issue since Japan’s Fukushima disaster. The ballot was also the latest, and most persuasive, evidence that a majority of Italians have turned against their flamboyant prime minister. The government, which appealed to the courts for the vote to be scrapped, did all it could to keep turnout low. Berlusconi boycotted the vote and Italian television, largely under his sway, almost ignored the approaching ballots until the final days of a poorly funded, low-profile campaign. Following the defeat in Milan, many rank-and-file Northern League supporters have been urging their leader, Umberto Bossi, to cut himself free of Berlusconi. The party leadership has so far remained wedded to the coalition while pressing for a radical change in economic policy that would deliver tax cuts to its lower middle-class electoral base. But as the results of the two-day ballot became known on Monday, it was clear that even some of the League’s top officials were losing patience. Roberto Calderoli, a cabinet minister, said: “In the local elections two weeks ago we took the first hit. Now, with the referendum, has come the second. I would not like taking hits to become a habit.” Italy abandoned its nuclear programme following a similar referendum in 1987. The government of the day opted to phase out all the country’s existing plants. The last one shut down in 1990. Berlusconi had planned to generate a quarter of Italy’s electricity with French-built nuclear plants. Construction of the first was due to start between 2013 and 2015. Vittorio Cogliati Dezza, president of the environmental organisation Legambiente, said: “The era of nuclear [energy] is coming to an end today. Definitively. A new season of development for the country is beginning.” Recalling Italy’s first and most famous legislative referendum in 1974, when voters were asked whether divorce should be outlawed, the leader of the biggest opposition group, Pier Luigi Bersani of the Democratic party, said the latest ballot had also been a referendum on divorce. But this time, said Bersani, it was about “the divorce between the government and the country”. Silvio Berlusconi Nuclear power Energy John Hooper guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Referendums see huge votes against PM’s plans – a second setback in under two weeks The anti-nuclear movement won a crushing victory in Italy on Monday when well over 90% of voters rejected Silvio Berlusconi’s plans for a return to nuclear power generation. The result represented an overwhelming setback for the prime minister, who had tried to thwart the outcome by discouraging Italians from taking part. The referendum needed a turnout of at least 50% to be binding. Interior ministry figures projections indicated that more than 57% of the electorate had taken part. Greenpeace called it a historic result. Quorums were also reached in three other referendums held simultaneously – the first time in 16 years that a quorum had been achieved in any referendum in Italy. Official projections showed more than 95% of voters rejecting water privatisation and a law allowing Berlusconi and other ministers to cite government business as a reason for delaying trials in which they were defendants. The expected majority against nuclear power was 94%. For the prime minister it represented a second, bitter setback in under two weeks. His government, which yokes his Freedom People movement to the regionalist and Islamophobic Northern League, first ran into serious trouble on 30 May when his candidate for mayor of Milan lost in a local election runoff. Milan is Berlusconi’s home city and traditionally a weather-vane accurately pointing to Italy’s future political direction. Acknowledging defeat even before the polls closed, Berlusconi said: “We shall probably have to say goodbye to nuclear [energy].” He told a press conference in Rome that his government would now throw all its energy into developing renewable sources. The outcome was a huge success for the anti-nuclear movement in the world’s first nationwide vote on the issue since Japan’s Fukushima disaster. The ballot was also the latest, and most persuasive, evidence that a majority of Italians have turned against their flamboyant prime minister. The government, which appealed to the courts for the vote to be scrapped, did all it could to keep turnout low. Berlusconi boycotted the vote and Italian television, largely under his sway, almost ignored the approaching ballots until the final days of a poorly funded, low-profile campaign. Following the defeat in Milan, many rank-and-file Northern League supporters have been urging their leader, Umberto Bossi, to cut himself free of Berlusconi. The party leadership has so far remained wedded to the coalition while pressing for a radical change in economic policy that would deliver tax cuts to its lower middle-class electoral base. But as the results of the two-day ballot became known on Monday, it was clear that even some of the League’s top officials were losing patience. Roberto Calderoli, a cabinet minister, said: “In the local elections two weeks ago we took the first hit. Now, with the referendum, has come the second. I would not like taking hits to become a habit.” Italy abandoned its nuclear programme following a similar referendum in 1987. The government of the day opted to phase out all the country’s existing plants. The last one shut down in 1990. Berlusconi had planned to generate a quarter of Italy’s electricity with French-built nuclear plants. Construction of the first was due to start between 2013 and 2015. Vittorio Cogliati Dezza, president of the environmental organisation Legambiente, said: “The era of nuclear [energy] is coming to an end today. Definitively. A new season of development for the country is beginning.” Recalling Italy’s first and most famous legislative referendum in 1974, when voters were asked whether divorce should be outlawed, the leader of the biggest opposition group, Pier Luigi Bersani of the Democratic party, said the latest ballot had also been a referendum on divorce. But this time, said Bersani, it was about “the divorce between the government and the country”. Silvio Berlusconi Nuclear power Energy John Hooper guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
President Barack Obama is visiting Puerto Rico on Tuesday in a stop rich in both history and election-year politics. (June 13)
Continue reading …
President Barack Obama is visiting Puerto Rico on Tuesday in a stop rich in both history and election-year politics. (June 13)
Continue reading …Notable Quotables: Targeting Palin’s Outlaw Bus; Tea Party ‘Not the Brightest’
June 13, 2011 No Comment
The June 13 edition of MRC’s Notable Quotables has now been posted over at www.MRC.org , showcasing the most outrageous, sometimes humorous, quotes from the liberal media over the past two weeks. This edition features: CNN’s Piers Morgan snootily slamming the Tea Party as “not the brightest” and perhaps similar to the mobs Hitler and Mussolini employed in the 1930s; MSNBC’s Martin Bashir seriously arguing that Sarah Palin is a criminal because of the American flag painted on the side of her tour bus; and news reporters fretting over Weinergate, worried that President Obama might lose a “very important” left-wing critic now that a “rising star” of the Left has become tainted by scandal. The entire package (including four videos) is posted at www.MRC.org (click here for the nicely-formatted three-page PDF);
Continue reading …