Pepper sprayed for public safety.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Those are at least two different thing.

Yes and no. It's as arguable increasing taxes will hamper jobs recovery as it is lowering taxes does not spur growth.

Because he best case scenario is that he does what he promises and blow the hell out of the budget leading to even higher future taxes.

He's a liar. He'll govern as a moderate.

The better case scenarios require believing he's a liar and you have special insight I to what he really thinks (you don't).

I do. You're as astute on those subtleties as a tree slug.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

How about: a vote for Romney is a vote for further economic disparity and a bigger deficit?

How about: A vote for Obama is a vote for less economic disparity, at cost to anyone in the upper middle class, and a bigger deficit?

There's pain coming. If you can articulate an argument for why I shouldn't seek to minimize its impact on me in the near term, you should be running for something, nationally.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

He's a liar. He'll govern as a moderate.

He showed passion on just one thing when Governor - gay marraige. He hates it and he hates them. Their very existence offends him. Oh, and he got really pissy when the legislature didn't do what he told them to, which kind of amused them. I don't know if pissy qualifies as passion, but it was the closest he got except when he was hating on the gays.

Don't be so sure he'll govern as a moderate. He clearly has views that would be comfortable in the 19th century on social issues.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

How about: A vote for Obama is a vote for less economic disparity, at cost to anyone in the upper middle class, and a bigger deficit?

There's pain coming. If you can articulate an argument for why I shouldn't seek to minimize its impact on me in the near term, you should be running for something, nationally.

You seem ready to form the Barney Frank 2016 Committee. Have at it, he is available and quotable.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

How many rape originated pregnancies happen each year? After a rape there has to be treatment that minimizes the possibility, right? I think the R's should sign on for a rape exception to their otherwise complete ban. It would help them get to their main goal, and baby Jesus won't have to cry too often.

Apparently you missed the implication of "some girls rape easy." If a rape exception is the rule, all the sluts will say they were raped.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Yes and no. It's as arguable increasing taxes will hamper jobs recovery as it is lowering taxes does not spur growth.



He's a liar. He'll govern as a moderate.



I do. You're as astute on those subtleties as a tree slug.

Translation: don't blame me I voted for Kodos.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

the main reason to hope Obama wins is that if Romney wins, for the next 8 years Ty will post a scandal that should result in Romney being impeached and/or imprisoned every day. I cannot handle it, I mean there is a part of me that hopes he will mature and realize that Obama went beyond 80% of what he complained about re W, but let's be real, Ty ain't growing. I cannot spending the next years reading all that.

OTOH, if Obama wins you will post this same bullshit for the next eight years, which was never true and if it was ever funny that is but a shadow of a distant memory now.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

"Why do even the most popular efforts of the Left come to be mired in a gluey swamp of academic talk and pointless antihierarchical posturing?"

Thomas Frank

When I was in college, the guys who could spin that shit the best were the ones that the hottish lefty chicks were most interested in fucking.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Adder

Apparently you missed the implication of "some girls rape easy." If a rape exception is the rule, all the sluts will say they were raped.

I'm pretty sure Hank was thinking only of legitimate rape.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Because it hasn't the balls to actually do anything. It can't unionize enough to effect pain on industry. It can't demand more in terms of government assistance, or redistribution, because we could tax the 1% at 100% of income and not pay for six months of what's been promised to the 99%.

It doesn't have any bullets in the gun. Globalization, and its own delusional decision to accept the promises of politicians it knew or should have known could never be kept, fucked it.

The Left is as bad as the right. The only difference is the number of greedy of fucks trying to maximize their take. On the Right, it's a few for X times 100 to 1000. On the Left, it's an innumerable mass of demanders, asking for X times 10 to 50.

The truth is, the Left is miles more expensive than the Right could ever hope to be. It isn't the welfare. It isn't the food stamps. It isn't the programs. It's the endless litany of regulations/rules/rights/entitlements that make every American worker a few cents more expensive for govt and industry every day. And consequently, less competitive with foreign labor.

...Except, of course, Europe's.

One of Frank's points about Occupy is that they never thought about asking the government to do anything.

And I'm sorry, but I this stuff about regulations/rules/entitlements is nonsense. We both understand that. Politicians say it to pander to business, but it's tripe.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

How about: A vote for Obama is a vote for less economic disparity, at cost to anyone in the upper middle class, and a bigger deficit?

There's pain coming. If you can articulate an argument for why I shouldn't seek to minimize its impact on me in the near term, you should be running for something, nationally.

1. If nominated I will not run. If elected I will not serve.

2. Of course there is pain coming. The thing is, there's been pain for decades; it just hasn't been spread around. There isn't much middle class left, though. Truth be told, all that separates us is a question of whether the deficit will be cut more over the long term through taxes or spending cuts. I favor taxes and you favor cuts. Selah.

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

When I was in college, the guys who could spin that shit the best were the ones that the hottish lefty chicks were most interested in fucking.

I remember the hottish Lefty chicks from college. Forget the tiddy fancy parts, those girls didn't shave anything. They also seemed to economize on hair products by getting that "I haven't washed my hair since the last time I went swimming" sheen.

The guys who spun that shit deserved them.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

OTOH, if Obama wins you will post this same bullshit for the next eight years, which was never true and if it was ever funny that is but a shadow of a distant memory now.

what have I ever said about Obama that wasn't true? The targetting of
US citizens for rocket killing? the only thing I've said is about you guys who complained about Bush doing stuff then you spin it as fine once Obama took over.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

He's a liar. He'll govern as a moderate.

I do. You're as astute on those subtleties as a tree slug.

The Economist just addressed these arguments. A partial quote:

Mr Romney is still in the cloud-cuckoo-land of thinking you can do it entirely through spending cuts: the Republican even rejected a ratio of ten parts spending cuts to one part tax rises. Backing business is important, but getting the macroeconomics right matters far more.

Mr Romney’s more sensible supporters explain his fiscal policies away as necessary rubbish, concocted to persuade the fanatics who vote in the Republican primaries: the great flipflopper, they maintain, does not mean a word of it. Of course, he knows in current circumstances no sane person would really push defence spending, projected to fall below 3% of GDP, to 4%; of course President Romney would strike a deal that raises overall tax revenues, even if he cuts tax rates.

You’d better believe him

However, even if you accept that Romneynomics may be more numerate in practice than it is in theory, it is far harder to imagine that he will reverse course entirely. When politicians get elected they tend to do quite a lot of the things they promised during their campaigns. François Hollande, France’s famously pliable new president, was supposed to be too pragmatic to introduce a 75% top tax rate, yet he is steaming ahead with his plan. We weren’t fooled by the French left; we see no reason why the American right will be more flexible. Mr Romney, like Mr Hollande, will have his party at his back—and a long record of pandering to them.