The Republican Thread

[EvilMonkey]

Notice the wording on the ABC poll:

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/popup?id=69...000000000000000

Lawyers, dentists and entrepreneurs are among some high-earning professionals brainstorming ways to decrease their pay to dodge a proposed tax increase on incomes over $250,000.

 

 

Is it fair for people to reduce high salaries to sidestep President Obama's tax proposal?

No. The rich have had too many tax breaks. They should be ashamed for finagling the system.

No. I have to pay high taxes and so should that high-income bracket. They can afford it.

Yes. I also would find ways to decrease my salary to avoid taxes.

Yes. Why should ordinary folks, even those making $250K, pay when big corporations get bailed out.

(Emphasis added)

 

Last I checked, involuntary servitude was against the law. Unless that is part of the 'change' we are supposed to be getting.

[StrangeSox]

Our tax system is progressive. They'll still make more money making over $250,000 than making $249,999 because its marginal, right?

[southsider2k5]

So what gets the stock markets rallying? A Chinese stimulus plan

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=7003001

 

World Stocks Rebound on China Stimulus Hopes

World stock markets rebound on Chinese stimulus hopes, Shanghai leads recovery

By PAN PYLAS AP Business Writer

LONDON March 4, 2009 (AP)

The Associated Press

 

China's share benchmark surged 6.1 percent Wednesday as investors hoping for fresh government policies to stimulate the economy thronged back into the market. The benchmark Shanghai Composite Index rose 6.1 percent, or 126.68 points, to 2,198.11.

 

Stock markets in Europe and Asia rebounded Wednesday amid mounting hopes that China will soon announce a big stimulus package that could help limit the length and depth of the recession in the industrialized world.

 

A legislative meeting starts Thursday in China and top of the agenda is what the government can do to lift growth rates, which have fallen in the wake of the global economic downturn. As one of the few major economies still expanding, China is being closely watched amid hopes its demand and trade can help the world weather the most severe global slowdown in decades.

 

Chinese shares led Wednesday's advance, with Shanghai's index jumping more than 6 percent to close at 2,198.11.

 

"Obviously, this unusual rally suggests that investors are overly optimistic about what to expect from the legislature. They think the government will do more to boost spending to stimulate the economy," said Peng Yunliang, an analyst with Shanghai Securities in Shanghai.

 

Elsewhere in Asia, Japan's Nikkei 225 stock average was up 61.24 points, or 0.9 percent, to 7,290.96, while Hong Kong's Hang Seng added 297.27, or 2.5 percent, to 12,331.15. South Korea's Kospi climbed 3.3 percent to 1,059.26.

 

Markets in Singapore, Taiwan and New Zealand also gained. Australia's index shed 1.6 percent.

 

In Europe, the FTSE 100 index of leading British shares recovered from six-year lows to rise 66.42 points, or 1.9 percent, to 3,578.51, while Germany's DAX was up 99.38 points, or 2.7 percent, at 3,790.10. The CAC-40 in France was 54.05 points, or 2.1 percent, higher at 2,608.60.

 

U.S. futures pointed to a higher open for Wall Street on Wednesday. Dow futures rose 119, or 1.8 percent, to 6,788 and the broader Standard & Poor's 500 futures gained 14.3, or 2.1 percent, to 704. After a choppy session, the Dow closed Tuesday at 6,726.02, its lowest close since April 1997, while the S&P closed at 696.33, 52 percent below its peak of October 2007.

 

Despite Wednesday's rebound around the world, the markets remain in a jittery mood ahead of Thursday's interest rate decisions from the European Central Bank and the Bank of England and Friday's closely-watched U.S. jobs report for February.

[HuskyCaucasian]

GOP: Oh, s***, this Steel guy has no idea what he is doing

A month after Michael Steele became the first African-American chairman of the Republican National Committee, key party leaders are worried that the GOP has made a costly mistake — one that will make it even harder for them to take back power from the dominant Democratic Party.

 

Steadily becoming a dependable punch line, Steele has brushed back Rush Limbaugh, threatened moderate Republican senators, offered the “friggin’ awesome” Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal some “slum love,” called civil unions “crazy” and promised more outreach to “urban-suburban hip-hop settings” via an “off the hook” public relations campaign.

 

He even threw a shout-out to “one-armed midgets.”

 

That’s in just 30 days on the job — and that’s just the PR part.

 

On the organizational side, Steele does not have a chief of staff, a political director, a finance director or a communications director. Last week, one of the two men sharing the job of interim finance director was forced to resign.

 

For now, “the fourth floor,” as the RNC’s executive suite is known, is being run by a pair of consultants.

 

“There’s frustration that there’s no discipline, no planning,” said a well-known Republican consultant. “He’s risking being overexposed by accepting every interview, which makes gaffes more likely.”

[NorthSideSox72]

Our tax system is progressive. They'll still make more money making over $250,000 than making $249,999 because its marginal, right?

On income taxes, yes. But Obama is proposing changes to itemized deductions, cap gains rates, etc., that become effective if your income goes above that level. So it is theoretically possible that if you go just a little above 250k, and have a lot of itemized deductions and/or investment income, you could potentially make less at, say, $255k, than at $249k. That effect would decline quickly above the 250k line though, as the amount of deductions hits up against AMT anyway. If you have a metric s***-ton of investments with realized gains, then your tax bill will increase quite a bit, but those folks are already less concerned about actual income anyway.

 

[southsider2k5]

Interesting slip up here by the President. I wonder how much he knows about the actual analytical metrics for stocks. He mistakenly refers to "profit and earnings ratios" when in fact it is PRICE to earnings ratios. Thinking back, this would be a total Bushism, and an example of his ignorance if W had said it. As it is, it was a day before anyone actually noticed this one.

 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office...-after-Meeting/

 

On the other hand, what you're now seeing is profit and earning ratios are starting to get to the point where buying stocks is a potentially good deal if you've got a long-term perspective on it. I think that consumer confidence -- as they see the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act taking root, businesses are starting to see opportunities for investment and potential hiring, we are going to start creating jobs again.

[MexSoxFan#1]

I was watching Rush Limbaugh giving a speech to CPAC and I thought,as a political party you know you're in deep sh*t when you're reduced to having this clown as one of your movement's leaders.Outside of his dittohead fanboy base and other extreme right wingnuts,nobody takes this drug addict jerk seriously.As a democrat,I never hoped that W would fail even though I disagreed with almost everything he stood for because that would mean the nation would fail and I would be a traitor and a scoundrel that puts politics before country.I'm having a ball watching the GOP becoming an clueless irrelevant regional (read southern) party being led further into obscurity by reactionary blowhards...if and when the GOP gets serious and their adults take over and want to have a real debate on the future of our country that includes solutions other than government=bad and tax cuts,President Obama and the Democrats will be waiting...we won't be holding our breaths though.

Edited March 4, 2009 by MexSoxFan#1

[lostfan]

I was watching Rush Limbaugh giving a speech to CPAC and I thought,as a political party you know you're in deep sh*t when you're reduced to having this clown as one of your movement's leaders.Outside of his dittohead fanboy base and other extreme right wingnuts,nobody takes this drug addict jerk seriously.As a democrat,I never hoped that W would fail even though I disagreed with almost everything he stood for because that would mean the nation would fail and I would be a traitor and a scoundrel that puts politics before country.I'm having a ball watching the GOP becoming an clueless irrelevant regional (read southern) party being led further into obscurity by reactionary blowhards...if and when the GOP gets serious and their adults take over and want to have a real debate on the future of our country that includes solutions other than government=bad and tax cuts,President Obama and the Democrats will be waiting...we won't be holding our breaths though.

FYI, this kind of editorial-toned comment really more or less belongs in the Democrat thread.

[mr_genius]

I was watching Rush Limbaugh giving a speech to CPAC and I thought,as a political party you know you're in deep sh*t when you're reduced to having this clown as one of your movement's leaders.Outside of his dittohead fanboy base and other extreme right wingnuts,nobody takes this drug addict jerk seriously.As a democrat,I never hoped that W would fail even though I disagreed with almost everything he stood for because that would mean the nation would fail and I would be a traitor and a scoundrel that puts politics before country.I'm having a ball watching the GOP becoming an clueless irrelevant regional (read southern) party being led further into obscurity by reactionary blowhards...if and when the GOP gets serious and their adults take over and want to have a real debate on the future of our country that includes solutions other than government=bad and tax cuts,President Obama and the Democrats will be waiting...we won't be holding our breaths though.

 

you love him

[mr_genius]

FYI, this kind of editorial-toned comment really more or less belongs in the Democrat thread.

 

uh did you read ahb2000's post? clean this thread up, please. or just go back to the free for all format. up to you .

[Balta1701]

you love him

Of course the Democrats love him. He's winning us the 2010 elections.

[mr_genius]

Of course the Democrats love him. He's winning us the 2010 elections.

 

i don't know about that considering the pace of failure Obama is at. i have faith the GOP will still be lousy. that will be the saving grace for the Dems if anything. 2 years is a bit away, if the economy keeps completely tanking...

Edited March 4, 2009 by mr_genius

[southsider2k5]

Of course the Democrats love him. He's winning us the 2010 elections.

 

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/...g-rush-limbaugh

 

Susan Estrich Warns Democrats About Dangers of Attacking Rush Limbaugh

By P.J. Gladnick (Bio | Archive)

 

 

Susan Estrich is worried. Very worried. She believes that the current coordinated Democrat strategy of attacking Rush Limbaugh is completely counterproductive. And she's right:

 

He talks for hours every day. He gets paid to talk. Just talk. Doing it well is no small thing; witness the number of people who have tried to be him, or be the NOT-him, and failed. But he doesn't have to build a coalition. He doesn't need the votes of the other side to earn his check. He doesn't have to write the legislation, convince Olympia Snowe, raise money to keep the lights on, put his name on the ballot. All the things he doesn't have to do give him the freedom to be as effective as he is at what he does.

 

Trying to beat him at his own game when your own game is played by a different set of rules is a losing proposition. He knows that.

 

The Republican Party's chairman and even some of my Democratic friends need to remember that.

 

When I first started doing talk radio, I listened to Rush Limbaugh in the morning to figure out how to do it. I don't mean, obviously, that I studied Rush to figure out my positions on issues; I've been doing issues my whole life. I studied him to figure out how to do radio — how to talk about issues in a way that engages people, creates a community of the audience, makes them want to hear more, connect, join the club. Rush is wrong on almost everything, by my lights, but the lessons I took from him weren't about substance, but about craft. By my lights, no one is better at it.

 

To dismiss Rush as mere "entertainment," as Michael Steele, the Republican Party's chairman, did this weekend, understates his abilities and influence. To a very large extent, all of us who do television news or politics are in the business of entertainment. President Barack Obama's speech craft is a form of entertainment. Fox News (for whom I work) has mastered a sort of lively and engaging approach to delivering news that, regardless of the content or what you think of the perspective, is quite simply more fun to watch than many of its competitors. The best and most successful news-oriented Web sites are also, frankly, creative and engaging and, yes, entertaining.

 

Susan Estrich must be thinking of NewsBusters here. :-)

 

But he is not the leader of the Republican Party. He may be the guru; he is certainly a powerful voice. But his job is not to write the opposing bill, to decide when to compromise and when not to, to participate in the process of making the sausage. He doesn't need to reach out to the middle, the way politicians do. Calling him "the voice and the intellectual force and energy behind the Republican Party," as Rahm Emanuel did, only gets him more attention and more power, and it makes it more difficult, not less, for the Republicans, whose votes the president ultimately needs, to defy his naysaying.

 

...But the fact that Steele felt the need to apologize to Rush attests to the fact that it was a mistake to attack him in the first place. The attention Rush is getting right now from the White House chief of staff and the chairman of the Republican Party will increase Rush's ratings, but it is far from clear to me that it will make it any easier for Republicans to cross the line and vote with the president. Harder, I would think. Rush wins this game, which is why those who play on a different field should stay away from his.

 

Echoing Estrich's views is Peter Daou, a Democrat political strategist who worked on the campaigns of John Kerry and Hillary Clinton. Daou posted his worries about the attack Rush strategy on his Huffington Post blog nervously titled, "Why on Earth Are Democrats Legitimizing and Empowering Rush Limbaugh?"

 

I don't buy into this 'brilliant' strategy of elevating Rush Limbaugh in the hopes that it will tarnish Republicans.

 

...There's precious little benefit in making Limbaugh more of a central player, in engaging him directly from the White House podium, in raising his stature, in stamping, sealing and approving the years he's spent bashing his political opponents. There was a moment, a brief moment, after Barack Obama was elected president, a moment long gone, where the likes of Limbaugh and Hannity could have become marginalized, bit players rather than media movers and shakers, the detritus of a sorry era. But instead, they have been granted more power -- out of some contrived political calculus. This, at a time when we don't need political calculus, we need single-minded determination to get us out of this economic calamity and to restore sanity to our government.

 

...Empowering Limbaugh in the hopes of a bank-shot against Republicans will yield the opposite result: Limbaugh will become more powerful, Republicans will relish his increased influence and allow him to do their dirty work.

 

...The idea that making him more powerful in the hopes that it somehow illustrates the weakness of GOP ideas is too Rube Golbergy for me.

 

Note to George Stephanopoulos: Please ignore all the above advice and continue to recite the attack Rush talking points on your Sunday show dictated to you at your morning conference calls with Rahm, James, and Paul.

 

—P.J. Gladnick is a freelance writer and creator of the DUmmie FUnnies blog.

[mr_genius]

the blame Rush Limbaugh for everything angle will fall apart. it's really a terrible strat. from an economy on the brink to Obama's major failures dealing with Russia it really appears that he is in over his head.

[NorthSideSox72]

the blame Rush Limbaugh for everything angle will fall apart. it's really a terrible strat. from an economy on the brink to Obama's major failures dealing with Russia it really appears that he is in over his head.

I agree that it would be stupid to go after Rush. Let that jackass hang himself, just give him all the rope he wants.

 

[mr_genius]

I agree that it would be stupid to go after Rush. Let that jackass hang himself, just give him all the rope he wants.

 

it might work as a temporary diversion, which the Democrats need. if it's a long term approach, most people aren't going to care about Limbaugh being mean to Obama. they will demand an improved economy.

Edited March 4, 2009 by mr_genius

[NorthSideSox72]

it might work as a temporary diversion, which the Democrats need. if it's a long term approach, most people aren't going to care about Limbaugh being mean to Obama. they will demand an improved economy.

Actually, I don't think they need a distraction right now. Their support levels are pretty good. That economy and what it looks like in mid-2010, though, will have a huge impact on the 2010 elections.

 

[mr_genius]

Actually, I don't think they need a distraction right now. Their support levels are pretty good. That economy and what it looks like in mid-2010, though, will have a huge impact on the 2010 elections.

 

A distraction right now couldn't hurt. Approval ratings can drop pretty fast.

Edited March 4, 2009 by mr_genius

[bmags]

I'm not sure how well its being followed outside the political junkies. Much like in the GE, it's hard to tell how much of this day-to-day news has an impact.

[HuskyCaucasian]

it might work as a temporary diversion, which the Democrats need. if it's a long term approach, most people aren't going to care about Limbaugh being mean to Obama. they will demand an improved economy.

It's basically hitting them while their on the ground... stepping on their throat... the GOP is in such disarray that they are very vulnerable to attacks right now and the Democrats see that. They see that they can use Rush as a wedge at time when they are desperately trying to re-unify... and it seems to be working.

 

They can use this time to get some real nice quotes from GOP leaders defending and praising rush. Then in 2010 and 2012... pull them back out:

GOP Leader: "I think Rush is an asset to our party...."

Rush: "I hope he fails"

 

GOP Leader: "I hope he fails too"

Rush: "I hope he fails"

Announcer: "so and so follows the lead of Rush Limbaugh... are his polices best for America?"

Rush: "I hope he fails"

Edited March 4, 2009 by Athomeboy_2000

[whitesoxfan101]

I agree that it would be stupid to go after Rush. Let that jackass hang himself, just give him all the rope he wants.

 

This couldn't be more true. My current anger at the GOP is due to the fact they REFUSE to call out Rush and are basically admitting he is the most powerful voice in the party right now. I simply can't support a party whose most important and powerful voice is a man who I completely disagree with on most things. The democrats going after him has nothing to do with my anger at Rush or the GOP, and I think the democrats going after him is just a waste of time honestly. I can't see how it will do anything of relevance.

[southsider2k5]

Tuscumbia, population 218 according to the 2000 census. Yeah, a bridge to no where!!!

 

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/...under-stimulus/

 

Missouri bridge project touted as first under stimulus package

Tuesday, February 17, 2009 | 4:16 p.m. CST

BY CHRIS BLANK/The Associated Press

 

TUSCUMBIA — Missouri barely waited for President Barack Obama to sign the $787 billion stimulus package before it started using the money Tuesday for construction on what was believed to be the nation's first stimulus-fueled project.

 

Meeting at the site of a crumbling 76-year-old bridge, the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission voted just seconds after Obama signed the bill to approve the bridge replacement along with three other projects.

 

Within a minute, transportation commissioners handed a check for more than $200,000 to a contractor who had workers standing by. Gov. Jay Nixon sounded a horn, and a backhoe operator began digging a hole for a pylon of the new bridge while others began working on the old bridge.

 

Missouri Transportation Department Director Pete Rahn said the rush was intended to show that spending money on infrastructure projects can quickly help spur the economy.

 

"This is a great project," Rahn said. "It's something desperately needed, and there is no question it would not be addressed without stimulus money."

 

A spokesman for the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, a trade group for the nation's state transportation departments, said the organization wasn't aware of any other states that were ready to start projects using the stimulus money.

 

The nation's first stimulus-triggered project is the replacement of a 1933 bridge that had to be closed to large trucks in 2007 because of structural concerns. A badly deteriorating steel beam was identified during inspections conducted after the deadly Minnesota bridge collapse.

 

The 1,000-foot long bridge is part of a state highway route that crosses the Osage River — a tributary of the Missouri River — about 30 miles southwest of the state capital in Jefferson City. The project is expected to cost $8.5 million.

 

But it's not exactly on a well-worn path. Only a couple hundred people live in Tuscumbia, the county seat of sparsely populated Miller County. It's so remote that Missouri transportation officials brought a special satellite truck to allow highway commissioners to meet and award the bridge construction contract.

[southsider2k5]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...&refer=news

 

Secretary Timothy Geithner said the U.S. bank rescue program may cost more than the $700 billion Congress approved, and he pledged to crack down on companies and individuals who try to avoid paying taxes.

 

Testifying before the House Ways and Means Committee on the Obama administration’s 2010 budget, Geithner pledged to work with Congress to “determine the appropriate size and shape” of further bailouts.

 

And who is the chair of the Ways and Means committee? Why none other than Charlie Rangel

[HuskyCaucasian]

Tuscumbia, population 218 according to the 2000 census. Yeah, a bridge to no where!!!

 

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/...under-stimulus/

"The 1,000-foot long bridge is part of a state highway route that crosses the Osage River a tributary of the Missouri River about 30 miles southwest of the state capital in Jefferson City. The project is expected to cost $8.5 million."

 

It has nothing to do with building a bridge TO somewhere. It's THROUGH somewhere. And the bridge was over 70 years old!

Here is a map of the area.

 

I'm not saying it's the worlds most important project, but if they find it important to their local economy... then isnt that the point behind the stimulus? If you look at the map, it's the only way to cross the river without going way south and either through or around Lake of the Ozarks, or going far east, then north, then backtracking. I dont know the inter-city commerce traffic down there, but I can see how it would be important to have trucks rolling through.

Edited March 4, 2009 by Athomeboy_2000

[mr_genius]

It's basically hitting them while their on the ground... stepping on their throat... the GOP is in such disarray that they are very vulnerable to attacks right now and the Democrats see that. They see that they can use Rush as a wedge at time when they are desperately trying to re-unify... and it seems to be working.

 

They can use this time to get some real nice quotes from GOP leaders defending and praising rush. Then in 2010 and 2012... pull them back out:

GOP Leader: "I think Rush is an asset to our party...."

Rush: "I hope he fails"

 

GOP Leader: "I hope he fails too"

Rush: "I hope he fails"

Announcer: "so and so follows the lead of Rush Limbaugh... are his polices best for America?"

Rush: "I hope he fails"

 

Reminds me of the talk of the permanent majority the GOP knew they had. They thought all they had to do was blame nancy pelosi and and crazy liberals and they would always win. The Democrats are going down the same path, no ideas just need to blame GW Bush and Rush Limbaugh for everything. It might work short term, but if the economy is crap and things are going bad in 2010 and 2012 using Limbaugh as a strawman won't work. Blaming Bush won't either. After a couple years people aren't going to go along with that, they will want some solutions. It's going to be about what the Democrats accomplish.

Edited March 4, 2009 by mr_genius