Death Lock GOP
Tweet
As Ezra points out, the Republican governors ask “how high” when the GOP base says “jump”. Folks on the left complain – often rightly – that Democratic pols feel more pressure from the media than from their base and it causes them to do stupid things in Washington like vote for the Iraq War or for Bush’s tax cuts that helped ruin the economy. But the GOP fealty to their base is the flip side of this phenomenon. The Republicans are all about appeasing what turns out to be a shrinking portion of the population, the same people who were the dead-enders who supported Bush and were convinced that immigration was the most important issue ever (a racist push that has likely permanently pushed Hispanics into the Democratic column).
I hated the cautious namby-pambyism of the 2000-2005 Democrats, but the way the Republicans are run now its as if after 2000 we just let Dennis Kucinich run the party. I like Rep. Kucinich but its safe to say that his views on the issues are considerably to the left of the average Democrat, let alone American. The GOP has no such moderating influence – there’s no reward in being a moderate Republican nowadays – just check out the hate mail people like Susan Collins and Arnold Schwarznegger get.
The Republican party remains the party of George W. Bush. And that’s good… for Democrats.
46 Responses to “Death Lock GOP”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
Ezra’s not paying attention to election results. Sanford (a conservative) got a higher % of the vote than did McCain (more moderate). Jindal got less, but that’s only because of LA’s wack-a-doo open primary rules.
When conservatives act conservative, they get more votes. When they stop acting conservative (and start porking it up), they lose.
When conservatives act conservative, they get more votes.
Like John McCain?
Sanford ran against a nobody Dem in the increasingly shrinking conservative south. If you think that should be the future of the GOP: Go for it.
SaveFarris, what about the more moderate Governors Schwarzenegger (Calif.), Lingle (Haw.), Douglas (Ver.) and Crist (Flo.)? They all outperformed the nationwide Republican Party in their states.
Of course, as is often the case, Ezra is writing things without actually thinking about it. Reason is a foreign concept for most of the left. He writes:
“The fact that rejecting the funds is obviously bad for the state is also why it’s such a good political move: It shows they are ideologues rather than pragmatists.”
Except that Jindal explained in very clear and concrete terms why he was rejecting that $100M for unemployment benefits. He actually had people you know….READ THE STIMULUS BILL…and saw that in order to get the $100M, permanent changes would have to be made in state unemployment law. As such, once the $100M dries up, the state has to take over and the only way to keep that money flowing is to raise taxes. For shame that Jindal would actually be concerned about the financial well being of his state 3-4 years from now! The horror!
Oh and I almost forgot this pearl of asininity:
“Bush’s tax cuts that helped ruin the economy”
Please explain how that happened. I’d like to see details.
The same side of the aisle that said Bush couldn’t claim credit for keeping the country safe after 9/11 because of “Post Hoc Ergo Proster Hoc” sure does like to blame W. for the economy without offering up much in the way of proof other than “Well, he was in office for the last 8 years”.
…in the increasingly shrinking conservative south.
Oliver has no idea which states are gaining population and which states are losing it. I guess he’s vying for that White House Census position!!!
Except that Jindal explained in very clear and concrete terms why he was rejecting that $100M for unemployment benefits
Yeah, he’s running for president.
Please explain how that happened.
There’s a direct line between the lack of tax revenue and Paris Hilton getting a tax cut.
Oliver has no idea which states are gaining population and which states are losing it.
Hey, if you think being a regional southern party is a good idea for the GOP, go for it.
Please explain how that happened. I’d like to see details.
The tax cuts, skewed to the richest among us, led to the entirety of real income growth over the past eight years being in the top percentiles. The vast swath of the country lost real income. That contributed to our dependence on credit, which, due to the lack of regulation, inflated into a bubble, which subsequently popped, affecting the financial sector, our industrial base, housing, our retirement funds, etc., etc.
And here we are, Jay. I really wonder, Oliver, if the market basically crashed on Clinton’s watch, these right-wing trolls would blame Clinton’s economic policies. I suspect yes.
The tax cuts, skewed to the richest among us, led to the entirety of real income growth over the past eight years being in the top percentiles. The vast swath of the country lost real income. That contributed to our dependence on credit, which, due to the lack of regulation, inflated into a bubble, which subsequently popped, affecting the financial sector, our industrial base, housing, our retirement funds, etc., etc.
Interesting little narrative there. Devoid of any substantiating facts, unfortunately.
And you left off any reasons for the bubble in the first place (lack of oversight, legislation pushing banks to lend to people who couldn’t afford the houses they were buying, etc.). Understandable, since many of those root causes lead straight back to the Democrats.
Oh, and regarding those tax cuts affecting the “richest among us”? These are couples making the astronomical sum of $250,000 per year and above. Real robber baron types, those people.
Oliver, your 1:39pm comment was quite the “LA LA LA LA” fingers-in-ears statement.
Maybe next time you can dazzle us by actually addressing the points.
just check out the hate mail people like Susan Collins and Arnold Schwarznegger get.
Yes, Arnold used to be a moderate Republican. Up until he tried to make substantial changes in the entrenched California political culture via referendums back in 2005 and got his ass handed to him. After that, he gave up any pretense of having conservative principles and switched over to an easier “I want everyone to like me” policy.
So no, you can’t use him as an example of a “moderate Republican”.
So no, you can’t use him as an example of a “moderate Republican”.
Watch me.
Dumbass California Republican actor – Hatred of gay people = Moderate Republican
The tax cuts, skewed to the richest among us, led to the entirety of real income growth over the past eight years being in the top percentiles. The vast swath of the country lost real income. That contributed to our dependence on credit, which, due to the lack of regulation, inflated into a bubble, which subsequently popped, affecting the financial sector, our industrial base, housing, our retirement funds, etc., etc.
Good to see you got the talking points down. Of course, the tax cuts weren’t “skewed” as all tax rates were reduced. If you make more money and paid more taxes, you saw a bigger break. That’s because of this thing we call here on planet earth, MATH. The last time I checked, the overwhelming majority of homeowners in this country bought their homes with credit. Most people don’t have hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash to purchase homes outright. Even if people do, they still get mortgages to take advantage of the tax savings. The housing bubble that followed had nothing at all to do with a lack of regulation. Quite the opposite in fact. It was government policies, particularly those that stressed to lending institutions to weaken credit standards so that people who would otherwise not qualify for a mortgage were able to do so. Such mortgages were guaranteed by GSE’s Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and converted to securities. This allowed home ownership to skyrocket and weaker lending practices allowed for many people to purchase homes that they really could not afford and often at an inflated price. This created a very hot market, and that bubble you referred to. When people’s rates started resetting with home values going receding, it was all downhill from there.
Oliver, your Paris Hilton references with regard to taxes allow for some nice snark, but they don’t address what I asked. You said Bush tax cuts “helped ruin the economy.” I’d like to see what the direct correlation was between lowering marginal rates and the housing/financial crisis.
It had NOTHING to do with the decrease in marginal income tax rates.
Watch me.
No thanks. While I can’t stop you from flinging your own feces and hooting in delight, it doesn’t mean I have to watch it.
Dumbass California Republican actor – Hatred of gay people = Moderate Republican
Case in point.
When conservatives act conservative, they get more votes.
This is probably true in some districts. But nationally, it hasn’t been true in some time. Sen. McCain bent over backwards to pander to the right, and where did it get him again?
There’s a direct line between the lack of tax revenue and Paris Hilton getting a tax cut.
Not according to the facts (Table 1-1).
From 2000 to 2006 (the last year on record), revenues rose 19%. Expenditures rose 48%. Tell me again why decreasing taxes caused the deficit.
You don’t think the states and FedGov could do with the revenue from Ms. Hilton and her ilk right about now? Or should we fire cops and the likes to keep Paris and Bill Gates in slightly more cash?
Sen. McCain bent over backwards to pander to the right, and where did it get him again?
The problem is that conservatives knew McCain was pandering to them, that he didn’t really support the things he was saying. Hence, his lukewarm support from the right.
Pandering is much more effective on the left, where it’s a feature, not a bug.
Bent over backwards how exactly? His support of amnesty? McCain/Feingold? Bailing on the campaign to pass TARP?
The only things he did to “pander” to the right were pick Palin and support drilling. Not coincidentally, that late-August/Early-September period was when he was polling at his highest.
You don’t think the states and FedGov could do with the revenue from Ms. Hilton and her ilk right about now?
Oh sure, let’s just take an extra 10% from them. They won’t miss it, right? Hell, f*** em. Take every single penny they have. Of course, you can only do that once, you know.
Bill Gates took nothing (except Mac’s reverse-engineered OS [allegedly]) and turned it into one of the top companys in the world employing millions and making shareholders billions. I trust his track record a hell of a lot more than Harry, Nancy, Obama & all the rest. Why not let Bill keep a little more of his cash and see what he can invest in next?
You don’t think the states and FedGov could do with the revenue from Ms. Hilton and her ilk right about now? Or should we fire cops and the likes to keep Paris and Bill Gates in slightly more cash?
What makes you think the government or any leader has the right to decide how much of what a person makes they should be allowed to keep?
You like to trot out the Paris Hilton example as if she and her ilk are the norm. Obama considers couples making above $250,000 to be wealthy. There are millions more “wealthy” people like that in this country than retarded trust-fund celebrities like Hilton. So all those people, who already pay more of their income at a higher tax rate than anyone else, should give up even more?
How about you, Oliver? Why don’t you work harder and make more money so you can pay more taxes? Aren’t you ever ashamed that you’re not doing your fair share? Not pulling your weight?
And as far as “firing cops” goes, don’t the poor and middle class rely on the same police too? And firemen? Don’t you think that the 50% of Americans who don’t pay ANY income taxes (and many of them in fact get free money via a “tax credit”) should be paying some part of this protection?
Media Glutton says, February 23, 2009:
The tax cuts, skewed to the richest among us, led to the entirety of real income growth over the past eight years being in the top percentiles. The vast swath of the country lost real income. That contributed to our dependence on credit, which, due to the lack of regulation, inflated into a bubble, which subsequently popped, affecting the financial sector, our industrial base, housing, our retirement funds, etc., etc.
So Dave in SoCal says, February 23, 2009 at 2:18 pm:
Interesting little narrative there. Devoid of any substantiating facts, unfortunately.
And then proceeds to post his commentary, which is also devoid of any substantiating facts. Unfortunately. Not nearly as interesting, relevant, or reality-based as the comment Media Glutton made (IMHO). But much more infotaining – a bundle of hypocrisy, lies, and empty rhetoric that seems to be the signature calling card for Republican’ts these days.
Y’know, Dave, if you’re calling someone else out for being devoid of any substantiating facts,, it probably would be a good idea if you provided a narrative that had some substantiating facts. Or maybe, if you’re spinning fanciful Republican’t fantasies, you should inform us all that you’re making baseless allegations unrelated to the reality based world.
Don’t worry, Dave – we’re not laughing with Republican’t idiots like you, we’re laughing at Republican’t idiots like you.
Oh sure, let’s just take an extra 10% from them. They won’t miss it, right? Hell, f*** em. Take every single penny they have. Of course, you can only do that once, you know.
Who wants to tell SaveFarris that the Clinton Era ended with a Budget Surplus and a National Debt projected to be erased by 2009?
I love it when Southern politicians harp on the evil of government spending. Doesn’t Louisiana get about $1.30 in Federal government spending for every dollar they pay in taxes. It’s like they don’t even try to make sense any more.
What makes you think the government or any leader has the right to decide how much of what a person makes they should be allowed to keep?
Well gawrsh, Dave in SoCal, why don’t you move to an island somewhere and declare your own independent nation, completely devoid of any government (democratically elected or otherwise) making decisions about taxes? Because unless you want to live in Reality World, and Reality World: Civilization Edition, that’s what you’re gonna have to do. Maybe everybody can just decide for themselves how much they ought to pay in taxes? What the hell are you talking about. Wait, don’t bother answering. At least not for my benefit. I don’t give a frog’s fat ass what you think.
Dave, you’re not just any liar but a very willing liar albeit a bad one.
Your skewed “facts” are way to easy to deflate and frankly speaking, to argue with you is an execise in futility because it plays to your mindless desire to needle your betters with even more lies.
An endless cycle.
One day scientist will be able to isolate and correct the asswipe molecule in rethuglican DNA and breed it out of you knuckledraggers.
Republican’ts = $$$$
Want to make sure you get proper credit, Tom.
At least not for my benefit. I don’t give a frog’s fat ass what you think.
And I know you’re too stupid to understand even if I did try.
Zardoz,
That took a lot of words for you to say “Duh… I got nothing”.
Dave, you’re not just any liar but a very willing liar albeit a bad one
Zardoz, you’re not just any idiot but a very willing idiot, albeit a bad one.
Point out the lies.
Your skewed “facts” are way to easy to deflate
You say they’re way too easy to deflate, but they must be light years beyond your own limited skillset because you don’t even bother with such an easy task.
to argue with you is an execise in futility because it plays to your mindless desire to needle your betters with even more lies.
If I really had a desire to “needle my betters”, I certainly wouldn’t be on THIS blog or any other “progressive” one. No betters here. Or in the White House.
One day scientist will be able to isolate and correct the asswipe molecule in rethuglican DNA and breed it out of you knuckledraggers.
Scientists won’t have to bother isolating the “dimwitted, think-with-their-emotions sheeple” genes in Democrat DNA. Natural selection will take care of that just fine.
Or should we fire cops and the likes to keep Paris and Bill Gates in slightly more cash?
Oh well. I knew it wouldn’t be too long before we delved into this sort of sophistry. This may surprise you, but police officers are paid with local taxes, not federal ones.
Y’know, Dave, if you’re calling someone else out for being devoid of any substantiating facts,, it probably would be a good idea if you provided a narrative that had some substantiating facts. Or maybe, if you’re spinning fanciful Republican’t fantasies, you should inform us all that you’re making baseless allegations unrelated to the reality based world.
Oh please. Media Glutton’s attempt to link tax cuts with the housing crisis was the worst kind of piffle that had no basis in reality or facts. Dave has no obligation to respond to such a bullshit argument with anything other than the scorn such rubbish deserved.
I realize I shouldn’t expect more. After all, we’re dealing with people who actually believe the housing market burst because of a lack of government regulations. Hilarious. Absolutely hilarious.
In the spring of 2007 there was a blind tasting of candidate policy positions, polling issues without the names of the candidates attached. Once the individuals, both Repubs and Dems as well as indies, made their answers about what policies they preferred, the candidate most in tune with their views was shown. Among Dem., Indies and even GOPers, the hands down winner was Kucinich. Kucinich has a problem getting elected because of the media and a propaganda line that gets swallowed by one an all.
Yes, because federal dollars never find their way into education or law enforcement. Sheesh.
So all those people, who already pay more of their income at a higher tax rate than anyone else, should give up even more?
Yes.
I’ll gladly pay more taxes in exchange for making a six figure salary. You guys on the right defend people making that kind of money like everyone makes it, and it just isn’t so. (I should point out that ultra-wealthy people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have argued in favor of a more reasonable tax system as well as for the existence of the estate tax)
Aw, Dave, did I hit a nerve.
As I said I won’t argue with someone who’s willing to be an idiot (that’s you Dave)because your capacity for learning is bound by your inability to seperate a rational thought from your warped ideology. That said, your typical Rushlovian response says all one needs to know about you.
Your parents unwittingly raised a fool.
It’s funny, I’ve seen this $250,000/yr figure from Dave twice in this thread. He seems to want to use this figure to claim that couples with combined income over this threshold are not wealthy.
Does he actually know what the median income per household is?
The US Census Bureau’s latest figures from 2007 place the median US family income at just over $50,000. http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/p60-235.pdf
Does he even realize that the low figure he cites is FIVE TIMES the average US income?
As I said I
won’tcan’t argue with someone who’swilling to be an idiotmade a cogent point.FTFY
The only things he did to “pander” to the right were pick Palin and support drilling.
I have to agree with that. McCain would say anything and never met an issue he couldn’t back flip on.
I’ll gladly pay more taxes in exchange for making a six figure salary.
Sorry, Oliver, for the vast majority of people in that income bracket, it takes years of hard work to finally get to that point. Not a lot of Paris Hiltons among them. Easier for you to just kick back, breakout the PS3 and collect those “Tax credit” gov’t checks courtesy of all those hard working suckers.
But if you feel so strongly about paying more taxes, you’re free to pay as much as you want over and above what the gov’t asks for. I won’t hold my breath, though. It’s far easier to throw money at problems and make yourself feel better with OTHER people’s money.
You guys on the right defend people making that kind of money like everyone makes it, and it just isn’t so.
Oliver, you try to paint all those “wealthy” people as Paris Hiltons and Bill Gates with just too much money than they know what to do with. And that just isn’t so either. The majority of these “rich” families that Obama wants to raise taxes on are two income earners who spent years working hard to get where they are. If they’re living in states like California or New York, they’re also paying a big chunk of their income for state income taxes. They’re paying their mortgages, on time, every month. They’re more likely to be driving Toyotas than BMWs. And they’re already contributing far more than they’re getting back.
And I know you’re too stupid to understand even if I did try.
No, you are, poopyhead. No tagbacks, infinity.
But if you feel so strongly about paying more taxes, you’re free to pay as much as you want over and above what the gov’t asks for. I won’t hold my breath, though. It’s far easier to throw money at problems and make yourself feel better with OTHER people’s money.
Ooh. Good one!
And Dave in SoCal thinks it’s awesome to send other people off to die in shit-all stupid, baseless, vanity wars which he supports. No fuckin way Dave in SoCal’s enlistin.
Easier for you to just kick back, breakout the PS3 and collect those “Tax credit” gov’t checks courtesy of all those hard working suckers.
You really don’t know anything about this plan, do you?
And none, I say none of these wealthy people that dave talks about ever got a college loan, a SBA loan, a tax break for home ownership, public infrastructure like schools, roads, bridges, subsidized mass transit, etc.
Not to mention the one thing that propels the Gdp more than anything, enforcement of contracts and property rights through our court system and public safety through our military and our police departments. Those rich people get NONE of those benefits that us lucky duckies do!
Fact is, most public expenditures benefit the middle class and wealthy in far greater proportion. You get what you pay for, and poor people don’t pay for lobbyists and campaigns. That “pork” project to build a reptile museum? A private company gets the contract. That few dollars in wage tax rebates? Instantly laundered through the business owner.
There is nothing fundamentally wrong in this, public money should be used to support the infrastructure that sometimes makes some people rich. However it is foolish that people complain about getting nothing for their tax money when in fact they are benefiting greatly.
Or maybe they would like to relocate their business to a third world backwater with low taxes- and see their goods take 3 days to go to market because the roads are so rutted that 5mph is speeding, or to not have power 16 hours a day. Or not have their contracts enforced, or have their business taken away at gunpoint.
Another fact is that the Earned Income Tax Credit is an indirect subsidy for business owners as it suppresses wages. The government is partially subsidizing the wages of these workers on the backs of businesses that pay a living wage. Without the EITC large groups of businesses would fail because employees couldn’t afford to work for them.
Duros is right, but not for the reason he thinks. Oliver would kick back and play XBox, not PS3. And Oliver’s answer on taxes is very telling. He says he’ll gladly pay more in taxes if someone gives him 6 figures. But the truth is, a huge majority of the people making 6 figures have to work hard for it. Put your blood, sweat, and tears into earning your pay and you’ll feel a whole lot differently about how much you think the government is entitled to.
Now, let’s all kick back and enjoy Mardi Gras!
Yes, who will speak up for the rich? I don’t begrudge the rich, I work to be in their income bracket! I’ve even got a friend or two already there. But don’t pretend like they have been paying a reasonable amount in taxes for the last 8 years. If you guys would quit trying to make people making $100-250k (and especially those making much more) out to be your average Jane & Joe rather than in the upper level where we all know they are we could discuss this issue more maturely.
“He says he’ll gladly pay more in taxes if someone gives him 6 figures. But the truth is, a huge majority of the people making 6 figures have to work hard for it. Put your blood, sweat, and tears into earning your pay and you’ll feel a whole lot differently about how much you think the government is entitled to.”
Because Oliver and all of us lucky duckies not making $100k don’t work hard at all. Nope, all we do is laugh at the man and go home at 5pm and play video games. Heh.
The only things he did to “pander” to the right were pick Palin and support drilling.
Guantanamo, pro-life, tax-cuts. Yes, continue arguing the candidate with an 83% lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union wasn’t conservative enough to win in the U.S.
Dave in SoCal
‘Oh, and regarding those tax cuts affecting the “richest among us”? These are couples making the astronomical sum of $250,000 per year and above. Real robber baron types, those people.’
Wow, you just don’t get it (willfully, I suspect). If and when my household income ever hits 250K, I will drop to my knees and thank God. Yes, Dave, 250K is rich. Even factoring in living in crazy Cali with a high cost of living, it is rich. No, it’s not Bill Gates rich but come on, do you expect me to feel pity for someone who hits 251K and moves into a higher tax bracket? So you worked hard and got ahead, good on you (really). You benefitted from our society. Do you think you could have done that in some Third World craphole with no income tax?
We live in the best society in human history, Dave. What do you think is a fair price for that?
Oliver, republicans aren’t the ones saying the $100-250K bracket are ordinary Joes. Democrats are, at least when it comes to things like SCHIP