The babyjesuschristsuperstar on Board: filling the moral void of Clinton’s legacy

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Recent Molly Ivins article:

One is a fantastic horseshit fantasy, but two and three are great ideas. Why isn't some smart moderate Dem out there pounding out those planks?

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
You're a Dem.

TaxHottie is a Dem.

Wonk is a Dem.

Need I go on?

I am not really a tax lawyer.

We all spend or have spent inordinate amounts of time here.

So yes, you do need to go on. In my times spent at big and mid-size firms, I think a total of four (4) lawyers in the tax and trusts & estates departments were Dems. Out of, like, at least 30. And 2 of the 4 wanted to get the hell out.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
You're a Dem.

TaxHottie is a Dem.

Wonk is a Dem.

Need I go on?

Are you suggesting they have a threesome?

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
One is a fantastic horseshit fantasy, but two and three are great ideas. Why isn't some smart moderate Dem out there pounding out those planks?

Two and three lack sufficient detail, from what is written there, to be more than fantasies. Maybe not horseshit fantasies, but fantasies nonetheless. Especially two. Three seems more doable-er.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Are you suggesting they have a threesome?

For chrissakes, you know me better than that. Wanker should only ever wank (for the good of humanity) and I don't do girls.

[Captain]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
You're a Dem.

TaxHottie is a Dem.

Wonk is a Dem.

Need I go on?

Most of the tax lawyers I know are communists.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Two and three lack sufficient detail, from what is written there, to be more than fantasies. Maybe not horseshit fantasies, but fantasies nonetheless. Especially two. Three seems more doable-er.

Here's more detail: http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=...ntentid=253473

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I am not really a tax lawyer.

We all spend or have spent inordinate amounts of time here.

So yes, you do need to go on. In my times spent at big and mid-size firms, I think a total of four (4) lawyers in the tax and trusts & estates departments were Dems. Out of, like, at least 30. And 2 of the 4 wanted to get the hell out.

Thats the problem with the GOP. High douchebag count. I want to say I'm for that personal accountability thing they trumpet, but then I meet the little Hitler Youth who are so rabidly GOP and get turned off. I feel dirty and think "Ewww, what a pack of tools."

But then I listen to Dems and think "What a pack of horseshitters... these idiots still believe the crap their professors told them in freshman year."

I think my wife has the best take on politics. She asks our accountant who to vote for and will literally turn and walk away from any conversation wherein people argue about politics. Her take is "What's it going to accomplish?"

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
For chrissakes, you know me better than that. Wanker should only ever wank (for the good of humanity) and I don't do girls.

Of course, but I figured I'd at least light the fuse and see what I got...

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Here's more detail: http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=...ntentid=253473

"We challenge Washington to put its own house in order. It should cut congressional and nondefense staff by 10 percent, reduce federal consultants by 150,000, cut pork-barrel highway projects by 50 percent, and restore caps on discretionary spending. To revive economic growth, Congress should reimpose strict pay-as-you-go rules for spending and tax cuts.

Second, we need to reform the tax code to promote economic growth, not special privilege; reward work; and make it easier for families to afford college, own a home, and save for retirement.

Private-sector growth is the prerequisite to opportunity for all. Congress should enact tax policies that encourage investment and drive innovation that helps the whole economy grow, not policies that prop up inefficient or dying industries. It should create a binding Corporate Subsidy Reform Commission with a mandate to cut $30 billion per year in unnecessary subsidies for the next 10 years -- and use the money to invest in innovation and growth. If the U.S. military can close bases it no longer needs, American business can let go of special privileges that retard rather than increase economic growth.

We challenge Washington to enact the family-friendly tax reform plan proposed by Paul Weinstein of the Progressive Policy Institute. It would eliminate 68 redundant, unnecessary, or special-interest tax breaks. Instead, Americans would receive four simple tax incentives: a $3,000-a-year college tax credit; a universal home mortgage deduction available to people who don't itemize their taxes; an expanded family tax credit for couples with children; and a universal pension that replaces 16 existing IRA-type accounts with a single, portable retirement account for all workers."

The family-friendly tax reform plan is revenue-neutral, supposedly, so it's gotta be the 1st and 3rd paragraphs, and while they have more words, they aren't really more specific.

I'm cynical today.

Sebby -- actual in-person politically tinged conversations I turn and walk away from. Or participate in a different conversation, if trapped at a dinner table.

ETA asking the accountant is pathetic, though.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
"We challenge Washington to put its own house in order. It should cut congressional and nondefense staff by 10 percent, reduce federal consultants by 150,000, cut pork-barrel highway projects by 50 percent, and restore caps on discretionary spending. To revive economic growth, Congress should reimpose strict pay-as-you-go rules for spending and tax cuts.

Second, we need to reform the tax code to promote economic growth, not special privilege; reward work; and make it easier for families to afford college, own a home, and save for retirement.

Private-sector growth is the prerequisite to opportunity for all. Congress should enact tax policies that encourage investment and drive innovation that helps the whole economy grow, not policies that prop up inefficient or dying industries. It should create a binding Corporate Subsidy Reform Commission with a mandate to cut $30 billion per year in unnecessary subsidies for the next 10 years -- and use the money to invest in innovation and growth. If the U.S. military can close bases it no longer needs, American business can let go of special privileges that retard rather than increase economic growth.

We challenge Washington to enact the family-friendly tax reform plan proposed by Paul Weinstein of the Progressive Policy Institute. It would eliminate 68 redundant, unnecessary, or special-interest tax breaks. Instead, Americans would receive four simple tax incentives: a $3,000-a-year college tax credit; a universal home mortgage deduction available to people who don't itemize their taxes; an expanded family tax credit for couples with children; and a universal pension that replaces 16 existing IRA-type accounts with a single, portable retirement account for all workers."

The family-friendly tax reform plan is revenue-neutral, supposedly, so it's gotta be the 1st and 3rd paragraphs, and while they have more words, they aren't really more specific.

I'm cynical today.

Sebby -- actual in-person politically tinged conversations I turn and walk away from. Or participate in a different conversation, if trapped at a dinner table.

ETA asking the accountant is pathetic, though.

Fine, fine, fine: Here. I should bill you for this.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by ltl/fb

Sebby -- actual in-person politically tinged conversations I turn and walk away from. Or participate in a different conversation, if trapped at a dinner table.

ETA asking the accountant is pathetic, though.

She's tough as nails. Doesn't give a damn. When we argue, she just sits there and stares. I bloviate and demand a response. She says "why?" and goes ahead and does whatever it is she wants. Asking the accountant who to vote for is totally in line with her attitude of "can't be bothered - things to do."

I wish I could run from politics talk. I tend to start getting into it and causing a few problems.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Fine, fine, fine: Here. I should bill you for this.

That's the one that is revenue-neutral. It's the 4th paragraph only (maybe the 2nd). Not the actual saving money part in the 1st and 3rd paragraphs ($30 b/year etc.).

sebby- but the ACCOUNTANT? Jesus.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Two and three lack sufficient detail, from what is written there, to be more than fantasies. Maybe not horseshit fantasies, but fantasies nonetheless. Especially two. Three seems more doable-er.

BTW, does anyone really think our troubles with the Middle East and Radical Islam will magically disappear if we invent a car that runs on water? Everyone does realize that the "war" we're in is deeper than the oil issue, don't they? Yes, oil is part of it, but the larger issue is the fact that we're more globally intertwined than ever, and the enmeshing process with the Islamic World isn't so easy.

Think of how desperate and crazed the Islamists would become if we stopped buying oil tomorrow. Their economies would collapse, the royals would flee with all the money to Switaerland and Nice and we'd be left to establish relations with impverished Caliphates. In a sense, we're very lucky there's oil to keep these nations in running water, electricity and 70% literacy. Because from what I see, left to their basest devices, the Islamic Sector of the world would be one huge civil war of lunatic illiterate religious zealots.

[SlaveNoMore]

sebastian_dangerfield
I wish I could run from politics talk. I tend to start getting into it and causing a few problems.

I take it "politics talk" is the new hip term for crank.