Nutjobs Ranting About Politics.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
On the other hand JFK's knee jerk, no we shouldn't pull the troops shows the silliness that is the guy's total platform.

1) Our solution to Iraq is to bring in troops from Germany and France
2) We can't pull our troops from Germany and France, how could they survive?
Me
3)Huh?

Oddly enough, your description of Kerry's position bears very little resemblence to what he said to the VFW yesterday:

• "Nobody wants to bring troops home more than those of us who have fought in foreign wars," Mr. Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee, told some 6,000 veterans gathered for the V.F.W.'s annual convention, where Mr. Bush announced the plan on Monday. "But it needs to be done at the right time and in a sensible way. This is not that time or that way."
  
  The deployment debate, played out over two days in this imporant swing, was the latest in a string of disagreements over military policy than have dominated the presidential campaign in recent weeks.
  
  Mr. Kerry said he was worried that the withdrawal, now under way, of 12,000 troops from the Korean peninsula would destabilize that area "at the very time we are negotiating with North Korea, a country that really has nuclear weapons."

NYT

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
I have to agree, Ty, this is so minor that I hate to call it a lie.

However, I am a bit unclear on how Kerry's possibly adding flavor to a war story by placing on Christmas Eve rather than on February is much more significant that Bush's incorrect statement.

S_A_M

P.S. I know, I know. Spare me another round of "BUT THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT of his Senate testimony (maybe that was Slave). I doubt it. Even if it was -- look at it this way:

If we can forgive Bush's drugging, drinking, and wastrel ways as a young man, let's forgive Kerry for exaggerations or misstatements made as a young man on one side of an intense battle over the most important domestic and foreign policy issues of the day. You don't have to like him, just don't blow it out of proportion.

I know I'm the crazy drunk one, but I keep thinking you guys are missing one big point:

KERRY IS BACKING AWAY FROM EVER HAVING BEEN IN CAMBODIA, EVER.

Last I heard he thought he maybe went in accidently, but maybe not, no sign at the border who can tell.

[Hank Chinaski]

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk...ft_of_the.html


One dollar and eighty-seven cents. That was all. And a piece of souvenir grenade shrapnel. Three times John counted it. One dollar and eighty- seven cents. And the next day would be Christmas.

“Kerry” read the simple tag on his khaki shirt, with insignia showing he was a Lieutentant, JG. Tomorrow would be Christmas Day, and he had only $1.87 with which to buy ‘Agent X’ a present.

You should read this- it is funny!

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Odd that liberals would make a fuss about flying flags in conformity with federal law, but I guess that if that's what we've got to do to be divisive, that's what we liberals'll do.

And following the rule, even though the federal law is advisory only.

4 U.S.C. Sec 1-10 Only the first four sections are actionable law. Section 7 is not actionable.

I noticed nobody raised a fuss when, after 9/11, all the MLB teams started wearing American flags on their uniforms, despite 4 U.S.C. Sec. 8, probably because everyone recognized it for what it was, an expression of respect and pride.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I know I'm the crazy drunk one, but I keep thinking you guys are missing one big point:

KERRY IS BACKING AWAY FROM EVER HAVING BEEN IN CAMBODIA, EVER.

Last I heard he thought he maybe went in accidently, but maybe not, no sign at the border who can tell.

Really? Cite, please.

[Aloha Mr. Learned Hand]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Conservatives heading to their local bookstore to buy "Unfit For Command" should remember to look for it in the Fiction section.

That is all.

Megadittos, Ty? Surely you can't be getting your material from Limbaugh?

Listened to a talkshow late afternoon yesterday about this subject. They played a clip of Limbaugh telling his listeners that they'd have to look hard to find a copy of the book because liberal booksellers would hide it or display it backwards in places like the cooking section and the fiction section. He also said it might be hard to find for legitimate reasons, however, because it's #1 on Amazon and #3 on the NYT Best Seller List.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Hey, anyone willing to work hard enough to earn enough is entitled to those tax breaks as well.

Did I say they weren't? Once again, MY COMPLAINT IS THAT THE ONLY ONES WHO GOT THE TAX BREAK WERE THE WEALTHY, I AM NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE WEALTHY GOT THE TAX BREAK!!!

[bilmore]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Did I say they weren't? Once again, MY COMPLAINT IS THAT THE ONLY ONES WHO GOT THE TAX BREAK WERE THE WEALTHY,

Dude, you keep ignoring the fact that YOU YOURSELF SAID that the middle got a break too, just not as large.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Conservatives heading to their local bookstore to buy "Unfit For Command" should remember to look for it in the Fiction section.

That is all.

About twice a day, you guys trumpet this "oh boy, it's totally discredited!!" thing.

From NRO:

"STATEMENT BY SWIFT BOAT VETERANS FOR TRUTH MEMBER LARRY THURLOW [Rich Lowry]
I am convinced that the language used in my citation for a Bronze Star was language taken directly from John Kerry’s report which falsely described the action on the Bay Hap River as action that saw small arms fire and automatic weapons fire from both banks of the river.

To this day, I can say without a doubt in my mind, along with other accounts from my shipmates—there was no hostile enemy fire directed at my boat or at any of the five boats operating on the river that day.

I submitted no paperwork for a medal nor did I file an after action report describing the incident. To my knowledge, John Kerry was the only officer who filed a report describing his version of the incidents that occurred on the river that day.

It was not until I had left the Navy—approximately three months after I left the service—that I was notified that I was to receive a citation for my actions on that day.

I believed then as I believe now that I received my Bronze Star for my efforts to rescue the injured crewmen from swift boat number three and to conduct damage control to prevent that boat from sinking.

My boat and several other swift boats went to the aid of our fellow swift boat sailors whose craft was adrift and taking on water. We provided immediate rescue and damage control to prevent boat three from sinking and to offer immediate protection and comfort to the injured crew.

After the mine exploded, leaving swift boat three dead in the water, John Kerry’s boat, which was on the opposite side of the river, fled the scene. US Army Special Forces officer Jim Rassmann, who was on Kerry’s boat at the time, fell off the boat and into the water. Kerry’s boat returned several minutes later—under no hail of enemy gunfire—to retrieve Rassmann from the river only seconds before another boat was going to pick him up.

Kerry campaign spokespersons have conflicting accounts of this incident—the latest one being that Kerry’s boat did leave but only briefly and returned under withering enemy fire to rescue Mr. Rassmann. However, none of the other boats on the river that day reported enemy fire nor was anyone wounded by small arms action. The only damage on that day was done to boat three—a result of the underwater mine. None of the other swift boats received damage from enemy gunfire.

And in a new development, Kerry campaign officials are now finally acknowledging that while Kerry’s boat left the scene, none of the other boats on the river ever left the damaged swift boat. This is a direct contradiction to previous accounts made by Jim Rassmann in the Oregonian newspaper and a direct contradiction to the “No Man Left Behind” theme during the Democratic National Convention.

These ever changing accounts of the Bay Hap River incident by Kerry campaign officials leave me asking one question…if no one ever left the scene of the Bay Hap River incident, how could anyone be left behind?

[sgtclub]

Drudge is reporting the following:

The Kerry campaign calls on a publisher to 'withdraw book' written by group of veterans, claiming veterans are lying about Kerry's service in Vietnam and operating as a front organization for Bush. Kerry campaign has told Salon.com that the publisher of UNFIT FOR COMMAND is 'retailing a hoax'... 'No publisher should want to be selling books with proven falsehoods in them,' Kerry campaign spokesman Chad Clanton tells the online mag... Developing...

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by bilmore
You're confusing me again. I got a tax cut. So did you. When did he tell me it was going to be hugely bigger than what it turned out to be?

According to his speeches and press releases, my tax cut was supposed to be about $4500. It was actually about $695. And incidentally, in case it has escaped your notice, we are among the wealthy. The top 5% of taxpayers earn about $129,000 or more a year. I assume you fall into that category.

And, I offer this, as a way of speaking of math subjects that avoids the pain to me:

August 19, 2004, 12:01 p.m.
Killing the Class-Warfare Argument
The rich are paying more taxes since the Bush tax cuts.
http://nationalreview.com/script/pri...0408191201.asp


What the CBO report did conclude was that the total tax share by the richest 1 percent declined modestly from 2001 to 2004. But that wasn’t because of the tax cut. It was because of the recession. When the economy contracts and incomes fall as they did in 2001 and 2002, tax payments by the wealthy fall the fastest. This is because of the progressive rate structure of the income tax. In other words, if everyone’s income falls by 10 percent, the overall percentage of taxes paid by the wealthy falls, because they pay a higher marginal tax rate...

Those who actually read the CBO study will discover that it confirms exactly this point. From 2001 to 2004 incomes have fallen sharply for the highest income groups. IRS data shows that in 2002, taxable income fell by about 4.3 percent, with declines steepest among the highest income groups. In 2002, income fell for the second year in a row. Prior to 2000, annual incomes hadn’t fallen since 1953. The New York Times recently reported that income fell 63 percent from 2000 to 2002 for the highest income bracket. When the rich make less; so does the government. So why do members of the Left hate the rich so much? Without them, there would be no money to finance the government.

A recent report from the Treasury Department confirms that the rich are paying a bigger share of taxes than they would if the Bush tax cuts hadn’t passed. The Treasury estimates that the top 1 percent of earners will pay about 32.3 percent of taxes this year, which is the same as the CBO estimate. The Treasury also estimates, however, that absent the tax cuts, the top 1 percent would be paying only 30.5 percent of taxes, down 10 percent from 2001....

Those who argue that the Bush tax cuts were a “give-away” to the rich assume that incomes grow at a constant rate, regardless of how heavily they are taxed. That is the fallacy of the recent CBO study. The report concedes: “Our analysis does not account for incomes changing in response to the tax cuts.” It’s like assuming that you’re not going to take off any weight if you stop eating hot fudge sundaes with whipped cream and cherries on top. This is the same whimsical logic that compelled the tax accountants on Capitol Hill to famously estimate that a 100 percent income-tax rate would bring in billions of dollars in federal revenue...

— Stephen Moore is president of the Club for Growth. Phil Kerpen is a research assistant at the Club for Growth.

It appears that the CBO study does not say what the authors claim it says. The last excerpt I highlighted in bold gives lie to the first excerpt. And the middle excerpt deals with the IRS SOI study I quoted from yesterday. Note that they don't apply the same (fallacious) logic to the SOI study that they do to the CBO study.

So much for math, Bilmore. Your source seems to have trouble with simple logic and rhetoric.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Aloha Mr. Learned Hand
Megadittos, Ty? Surely you can't be getting your material from Limbaugh?

Listened to a talkshow late afternoon yesterday about this subject. They played a clip of Limbaugh telling his listeners that they'd have to look hard to find a copy of the book because liberal booksellers would hide it or display it backwards in places like the cooking section and the fiction section. He also said it might be hard to find for legitimate reasons, however, because it's #1 on Amazon and #3 on the NYT Best Seller List.

A friend of mine works at a Borders here in Houston:

• I was working at BookStore last night, as I am wont to do on Tuesdays, and as I was straightening books on the front table, I noticed some books out of place. You see, we have these rules about the height of book stacks, highest stacks to the left and on down to the right (not a political statement, so keep your panties on, crazy right-wingnuts). Therefore, it is easy to see when something is out of place. So I decide to perform my function as a bookstore worker and fix the little mess. Then I noticed that all of the books that were out of place were either pro-Bush/Rep books or Kerry-slamming tomes. Imagine my surprise when I picked up these lovely pieces of fair and balanced writing to find pro-Kerry and anti-Bush books underneath! Some not-at-all-crazy right wing fanatic had gone to the trouble of covering books he/she disagreed with. Not only that, he/she even found the need to bring books from the politics and government section, all the way at the back of the store, up to the front for this little protest.

Later in the post, she said that she's been accused of being part of the liberal conspiracy when she's told customers that their shipment of "Unfit for Command" hadn't come in yet, but they'd be happy to call and let the customer know as soon as it got there.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by bilmore
Dude, you keep ignoring the fact that YOU YOURSELF SAID that the middle got a break too, just not as large.

Yep. Top brackets 6%. Middle brackets, .6%. Fair and balanced, right?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by taxwonk




It appears that the CBO study does not say what the authors claim it says. The last excerpt I highlighted in bold gives lie to the first excerpt.

How's that? There are two reasons why someone pays less taxes: 1) a lower tax rate (effective); 2) lower income. CBO said, based on the first excerpt, that the reason for lower taxes was lower income.

All the second thing seems to say is that CBO did not consider the incentive effects on work that a tax rate reduction would have or had

[ETA:] And whatever CBO says, they're not particularly trustworthy. It's an arm of Congress, and they simply turn out reports to please whoever requested it.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
A friend of mine works at a Borders here in Houston:

During a casual stroll through downtown this morning, I was in three bookstores. Two big-chain stores, one indie.

Tons of Franken, Moore, Ivins, Krugman, Alterman occupying the front tables and shelves.

Nary a Swiftboats book to be seen. Not one pro-Bush book unless you went to the back of the stores in obscure sections.

(I asked one 40-ish earthmother-type clerk where they kept the Ann Coulter, just for fun. I swear she got pale. )