Politics | 2014-15

Well, I want to do this anyway since this might be one of my major lobbying things in the future if the results end up looking nice from a distribution perspective.

Rand Paul in the building. "Don't tax the private sector, just individuals."

Sigh.

You don't get rid of inequality by granting more money and freedom to corporations.

By Gabyskra Go To PostRand Paul in the building. "Don't tax the private sector, just individuals."

Sigh.

You don't get rid of inequality by granting more money and freedom to corporations.

I don't think more heavily taxing the people running corporations is granting corporations more things at all?

By IWMTB19 Go To PostI don't think more heavily taxing the people running corporations is granting corporations more things at all?

Corporations and high income white collars are not victims of inequality; workers, employees and unemployed people are. One of the biggest problems today is that companies such as Xerox, Time Warner, CBS, Pepco, Mattel and many others quite simply do not pay taxes.

Taxes that could be useful for society as a whole. Taxes are not a "burden", they're what makes having roads, teachers, etc, possible. They also contribute to the economy much more so than stagnant income for the wealthiest (one of the reasons why land prices have gone up is that the rich getting richer means they have more to dedicate to land, creating an overinflated market and accentuating housing economic segregation).

In the end, the argument that you put forward is that employers and employees have interests in common. They don't.

... I'm still failing to see the logical distinction between a corporation and the top level employees and shareholders that make large profits off a corporation. I disagree with you on almost all economic issues, but this particular distinction makes no sense to me. Why does is it more important to tax the corporation than the CEO and directors making hundreds of thousands or millions via the corporation?

Tax both corporations and CEOs. Which is not done enough.

Your logic is to relieve both individuals and the private sector, à la Rand Paul, with the only exception being a tax on land (your token superwealthy fuck being able to bypass that by simply owning no land while still being a superwealthy fuck). Your prescription is exactly what's been happening ever since the end of the New Deal Order (lowering taxes on rich individuals and corporations).

... I don't think superwealthy fucks are going to want to avoid buying beach-side houses in America.

Anyway, Jeb! is still one dumbfuck:

"Look around this room," a man told Bush, who spoke to a mostly white crowd. "How many black faces do you see? How are you going to include them and get them to vote for you?" asked the man, who was white.

Bush pointed to his record on school choice and said that if Republicans could double their share of the black vote, they would win the swing states of Ohio and Virginia.

"Our message is one of hope and aspiration," he said at the East Cooper Republican Women’s Club annual Shrimp Dinner. "It isn't one of division and get in line and we'll take care of you with free stuff. Our message is one that is uplifting – that says you can achieve earned success."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/09/24/jeb-bush-win-black-voters-with-aspiration-not-free-stuff/

Talk about a plate full of platitudes.

Conservatism is weird. You've got the bigots and stuff who don't deserve any semblance of respect. And then there are libertarians. People who only deserve some semblance of respect because they're essentially socially liberal so they don't seem that crazy. They also want religion out of politics. That's sensible too.

But I've never heard a libertarian talk and left that interaction with a thought process other than "God, what a dumbass".

I was just channel flipping and landed on some Showtime Penn and Teller thing in defense of porn. Whatever side of the issue you fall on, it's clear that Those guys are fucking idiots.

Breaking : John Boehner resigning from Congress next month.

Interesting. The Republicans continually drifting more to the Right.

By lovingsteam Go To PostBreaking : John Boehner resigning from Congress next month.

Seems like the Pope's speech had very much to do with it.

It's coincidental, the article mentioning Cruz's faction is a more convincing part.

By Vahagn Go To PostSeems like the Pope's speech had very much to do with it.

He's resigning so he can put up a clean CR and save GOP from bad press. He now doesn't have to make a deal with Pelosi to keep his job dragging the right further through the mud.

The abrupt decision comes after he faced heavy pressure from conservatives to take a harder line on their causes, most recently over defunding Planned Parenthood.

lol conservatives. Truly fighting for what doesn't matter. This will be their undoing.

The big question is, who replaces him?

By Fenderputty Go To PostHe's resigning so he can put up a clean CR and save GOP from bad press. He now doesn't have to make a deal with Pelosi to keep his job dragging the right further through the mud.

That's one possible motivation, sure. But crying while listening to the Pope basically undress conservatism as callous and morally wrong on many issues seems a motivating factor. Especially since he and his staff said as much in the cnn article. If you were a reasonable moderate republican and didn't want the party to get dragged through the mud, why would you resign and allow the party to shift further to the right.

Boehner, who will speak at a 1 p.m. news conference, also told the lawmakers that Pope Francis' visit to Congress the day before was a crystallizing moment, according to the lawmaker. Boehner then read the prayer of St. Francis to the conference after announcing his decision

.

Reasonable moderate republicans in congress don't really exist or they sold their souls to the Koch bros.

Boehner isn't a moderate. He's just not for shutting government down or defunding. He's using the pope as a line to feed to the media. He's not gonna tell them, "I'm doing this to save the GOP from bad press during an election"

By Fenderputty Go To PostBoehner isn't a moderate. He's just not for shutting government down or defunding. He's using the pope as a line to feed to the media. He's not gonna tell them, "I'm doing this to save the GOP from bad press during an election"

Cruz and his crew(z) pressured him out, made the party unmanageable. That's also what the NYT says.
But I agree that he's not a moderate (see Bibi's visit this year), or only because they're getting so far down the Right that it seems that way today...

By Gabyskra Go To PostCruz and his crew(z) pressured him out, made the party unmanageable. That's also what the NYT says.
But I agree that he's not a moderate (see Bibi's visit this year), or only because they're getting so far down the Right that it seems that way today…

Right. Speculation was that Boehner was going to have to drop a clean CR not de-funding PP to keep government open. Maybe shut down for a week and then drop a clean CR. Then he would have to strike a deal with Pelosi to retain his speaker-ship once the tea party (Cruz crews) went after him. This way he can just drop the clean CR for the establishment and bow out easily not causing to much of a stir and more bad press for the GOP.

How long will the CR be though. Without Boehner there to whip the two factions on the right in line, will the government shut down when he's gone?

The pope stuff is pure political grandstanding. Dude will be making cash as a lobbyist for the right wing after.

By Fenderputty Go To PostRight. Speculation was that Boehner was going to have to drop a clean CR not de-funding PP to keep government open. Maybe shut down for a week and then drop a clean CR. Then he would have to strike a deal with Pelosi to retain his speaker-ship once the tea party (Cruz crews) went after him. This way he can just drop the clean CR for the establishment and bow out easily not causing to much of a stir and more bad press for the GOP.

How long will the CR be though. Without Boehner there to whip the two factions on the right in line, will the government shut down when he's gone?

The pope stuff is pure political grandstanding. Dude will be making cash as a lobbyist for the right wing after.

I'm not suggesting he's going to be a monk. But if you read the story, ignore half of it because it doesn't fit your agenda, and then latch on to the other half - what are you doing exactly. Maybe it's pure political grandstanding, maybe it's not. That's yet to be determined.

Moderate is a relative term. He's very often passing legislation through with the support of the House Democrats and without the support of the 100 or so Tea Party members in the House. This Clean CR, if successful, will be the same blueprint. There is more than a year until the next election. Plenty of chances to shut the government down from now until then. If he really was motivated by making the Republicans look sane until the election, he'd stay on until after 2016.

He could just be tired of it all, decide to do something else with his life. Sure he might be a lobbyist. Or he might join some right wing family values think tank or anti-abortion crusade. These were all parts of the Pope's message too.

He's not a moderate policy wise. He holds a ton of the same views as Cruz. He's just not willing to de-fund or shutdown like the crazies are. He'll compromise because he's at least pragmatic. He doesn't want to destroy our credit rating. But his economic views and his social views are anything but moderate.

http://www.ontheissues.org/OH/John_Boehner.htm

If he actually had some change of heart after the Pope's speech, he could stick around and be more effective than taking off. He could make deals with Pelosi and get dem support. He could drop an immigration vote that way etc etc. He's not. He's leaving and the person who follows will have the same issues of trying to wrangle the extreme of the party with the establishment.


EDIT: I do agree that he's probably tired and sick of dealing with the two factions

https://vine.co/v/exOwFei7j2W

By Fenderputty Go To PostHe's not a moderate policy wise. He holds a ton of the same views as Cruz. He's just not willing to de-fund or shutdown like the crazies are. He'll compromise because he's at least pragmatic. He doesn't want to destroy our credit rating. But his economic views and his social views are anything but moderate.

http://www.ontheissues.org/OH/John_Boehner.htm

If he actually had some change of heart after the Pope's speech, he could stick around and be more effective than taking off. He could make deals with Pelosi and get dem support. He could drop an immigration vote that way etc etc. He's not. He's leaving and the person who follows will have the same issues of trying to wrangle the extreme of the party with the establishment.


EDIT: I do agree that he's probably tired and sick of dealing with the two factions

https://vine.co/v/exOwFei7j2W

They're all crazy. On economic policy, Trump is probably the most moderate. But as a matter of pragmatic congressional action, he's a moderate in that he's willing to pass legislation with widespread Democratic support instead of sticking to a policy.

I'm not suggesting that the Pope turned him into a liberal. Just made him question the party platform enough to think - "What the fuck am I doing here exactly. I need to get away and figure shit out"

I think you're giving him too much credit., but I guess we'll find out eventually. Iv'e been reading that Boehner might try and pass a full budget with debt ceiling increase before he leaves because passing a clean CR is essentially just kicking the crazy can down the road and doesn't really protect the establishment from the crazies during the election season.

It was a day that ended in y so Fiorina either lied or is horribly misinformed again.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2015/09/25/3705774/carly-fiorina-medical-marijuana/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+matthewyglesias+%28Matthew+Yglesias%29

Van Winkle, a Gulf War veteran, is also the “first and only certified cannabis nurse” in Iowa. At a voter forum at St. Ambrose University on Friday morning, she asked Fiorina what she would do to make it easier for patients — like veterans with PTSD, and children with cancer — to access medicinal marijuana.

“You’re not going to like my answer,” Fiorina responded before hearkening back to her breast cancer diagnosis in 2009. At the time, she recounted, her doctor asked “if I was interested in medicinal marijuana.”

“I said ‘No,’ and his response was ‘Good,’ because its a chemically complex compound that we do not understand — we do not understand how it reacts with chemotherapy and all of the other statements,” she said. “It is true today …. [that before you get chemotherapy] you cannot have any marijuana in your system for at least 30 days …”

Van Winkle interrupted. “That’s no longer true, ” she said.

Fiorina paused. “So I will also tell you something else. We lost a daughter to addiction,” Fiorina said, before recounting the death of her daughter due to drug and alcohol abuse.

According to the Annenburg Public Policy Center, it is no longer true that doctors don’t know how marijuana reacts with other drugs. “Prescribing information for approved versions of medical marijuana does contain drug interaction information, and studies have turned up few problems in terms of interactions with cancer therapies, as well as other types of medication,” the organization’s FactCheck.org website reads.

Van Winkle, who is a Registered Nurse with the American Cannabis Nurses Association, said she was disappointed in Fiorina’s answer — one, because she was not talking about recreational drug use, and two, because she felt that Fiorina had outdated views on the science and culture of medicinal marijuana.

“Her answer fell back to 20 years ago, when you could go to Venice Beach to smoke a joint,” she said. “If she wants to be a viable candidate, she has to get with current research.”

At least she's moving up to trying to lie to vets while attempting to start multiple wars? Neocons are fucking weird.

I'm gonna have a pot cookie today. Relevant? Probably not. But fuck that BS coming from the right.

edit: nevermind.

Hero of the American Christian "we must protect religious liberty!" Far-Right, Sisi is setting up surveillance cameras in the mosques across Egypt because he's an asshole dictator.

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/09/egypt-ministry-endowments-annex-mosques-extremism.html#

Fox News argued that Sisi deserved a noble peace prize and the National Review and other far-right outlets have argued that Sisi has a better approach to Islam than Obama.

Jason Chaffetz (Utah House rep, district 3), is a total fucking embarrassment:

Chart he posted:


Which has no axis and therefore is not an actual graph and shows that 327 > 935.

Accurate charts:

Right up there with:


and

Holy shit lol.

How does anyone take a person who releases a graph like that seriously

North Carolina Republicans on Islam:

“Do you think a Muslim should ever be allowed to be President of the United States, or not?

A Muslim should be allowed to be President of the United States: 16 percent

A Muslim should not be allowed to be President of the United States: 72 percent

Not sure: 12 percent”



“Do you think the religion of Islam should be legal or illegal in the United States?

Islam should be legal in the United States: 40 percent

Islam should be illegal in the United States: 40 percent

Not sure: 20 percent”

Jeb! hates pool safety laws:


Okay.

No it's a great analogy, something that is actually trivial to me (because the fence likely has a gate I can simply walk through) and could prevent the deaths of children is clearly infringing on my freedom to do cannonballs into it, thus it's evil incarnate.

That's always the conservative fear. We overreact to an incident or set of incidents and pass laws that restrict freedom and our economy.

That's the general rule of conservatism, it's on us as liberals to prove our point as to why, on a case by case basis, passing new restrictions or regulations are the right course of action.

Pool safety laws seem kind of like a slam dunk though, idk.

So somone posted on poligaf a tweet that we're expected to run out of our ability to deficit spend sooner than expected. Anyone know if that means Boehner might get to deal with the debt ceiling before he leaves like this CR he dropped?

By IWMTB19 Go To PostPool safety laws seem kind of like a slam dunk though, idk.

I'm with you. But I'm happy to have that debate. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't want video games outlawed if it was found out that some serial killer played call of duty and people like Joe Scarborough implied that should happen, as he has.

So we all have those worries of government overreaction to a degree. NSA wire taps and such. Those are the kind of debates we should be having as a society. But unfortunately It's whether or not black lives matter, or whether or not xenophobia or islamaphobia is healthy - that's the kind of shit we're stuck debating more often than not.

The more pressing question is why fences around pools restricts our economy. Doesn't it provide and economic boost to fence makers and construction workers? You can't just say any and all govt safety regulations negatively affect the economy. Present your case, but it better be solid.

http://theslot.jezebel.com/oh-so-carly-fiorina-is-just-a-bad-person-1734664672

Carly Fiorina reimbursed herself over $1 million from her failed US Senate campaign, while failing to pay staffers to the tune of $500k.

Including the widow of a pollster who died of a heart attack while working on the campaign, who was owed $30,000.

TPP is done. Now it just needs to get through the clowns in Congress in the middle of a Presidential election circus.

By Forever Go To PostTPP is done. Now it just needs to get through the clowns in Congress in the middle of a Presidential election circus.

Isn't this one of the few things with bipartisan support?

By Fenderputty Go To PostIsn't this one of the few things with bipartisan support?

It also has bipartisan opposition too.

By Forever Go To PostIt also has bipartisan opposition too.

In meaningful numbers? I thought this was as slam dunk.

By KingGondo Go To PostRight up there with:

the fuck is this

By Fenderputty Go To PostIn meaningful numbers? I thought this was as slam dunk.

Boehner's departure might shake things up on the GOP side, it was very much a top down effort to keep the Republicans under control when passing fast track. Meanwhile the unions are on the warpath and it is Democratic primary season; Bernie Sanders stans are starting to give me a headache whenever they talk about the TPP.

I expect it to pass in the end but we'll see. The good thing is that fast track prevents a filibuster in the Senate.

By DY_nasty Go To Postthe fuck is this

Fox News fuckery.

Ben Carson said some more stupid shit regarding the shooting. Fiorina is fucking her staff out of their paychecks and this semi-worrisome poll

Iowa: Trump vs. Clinton NBC/WSJ/Marist Trump 48, Clinton 41 Trump +7
Iowa: Bush vs. Clinton NBC/WSJ/Marist Bush 50, Clinton 40 Bush +10
Iowa: Fiorina vs. Clinton NBC/WSJ/Marist Fiorina 52, Clinton 38 Fiorina +14

Iowa: Trump vs. Sanders NBC/WSJ/Marist Sanders 48, Trump 43 Sanders +5
Iowa: Bush vs. Sanders NBC/WSJ/Marist Bush 46, Sanders 44 Bush +2
Iowa: Fiorina vs. Sanders NBC/WSJ/Marist Fiorina 45, Sanders 42 Fiorina +3

New Hampshire: Trump vs. Clinton NBC/WSJ/Marist Clinton 48, Trump 45 Clinton +3
New Hampshire: Bush vs. Clinton NBC/WSJ/Marist Bush 49, Clinton 42 Bush +7
New Hampshire: Fiorina vs. Clinton NBC/WSJ/Marist Fiorina 50, Clinton 42 Fiorina +8

New Hampshire: Trump vs. Sanders NBC/WSJ/Marist Sanders 52, Trump 42 Sanders +10
New Hampshire: Bush vs. Sanders NBC/WSJ/Marist Sanders 46, Bush 46 Tie
New Hampshire: Fiorina vs. Sanders NBC/WSJ/Marist Sanders 47, Fiorina 45 Sanders +2

Those polls make zero sense. If you're that pollster and saw those results, you would facepalm and throw those out and never admit the results.

By reilo Go To PostThose polls make zero sense. If you're that pollster and saw those results, you would facepalm and throw those out and never admit the results.

Yeah it's an outlier for sure. Though NH kinda makes sense because they're so high on Bernie right now.