To save the failing economy that he created, Bush has appealed to Congress AGAIN to make his tax cuts permanent.How does not changing something that isn't working save the economy you ask? The answer: In a little over a year, he's no longer president. So[...]
Read The Full Article:
http://librocrat.blogspot.com/2008/01/baka.html
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!The New York Times’ Paul Krugman noted recently that, in a moment of candor, John McCain admitted economics isn’t his thing. “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should,” he said. But, “I’ve got Greenspan’s book,” he assured the audience.
If any needed evidence of McCain’s weakness on the economy was needed, simply witness how he has dealt with the need for economic stimulus. After last week’s debate in South Carolina, U.S. News wrote that the question of whether the economy needs a stimulus “vexed” the GOP front-runners, who “appeared unaware of the fiscal stimulus debate currently happening in Washington and being closely watched by Wall Street.”
At that debate, McCain said:
“I don’t believe we’re headed into a recession,” he said, “I believe the fundamentals of this economy are strong and I believe they will remain strong.”
In the course of seven days, McCain appears to have reversed course, offering his own stimulus package:
“The fact is we have some tough times ahead,” McCain told supporters in Columbia. But he said the U.S. economy will rebound. “We will get through this rough patch,” he said.
Instead of offering direct middle-class relief for individuals, McCain is proposing cutting the corporate tax rate by 28.5 percent. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, McCain’s top economic adviser, said his approach is to simply let someone else deal with the problems affecting working Americans. “The best course of action is to let the Fed handle it.”
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!In a January 17 article on the"long-term economic plan" proposed by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) whilecampaigning in South Carolina,the Associated Press reported that McCain favors an "extension ofexpiring tax cuts from Bush's first term." The AP, however, did not pointout that McCain changed his position onthe Bush tax cuts. In May 2001, when Congress first considered the tax cuts,McCain said in a May 26, 2001, floor statement that heopposedthe bill because "somany of the benefits go to the most[...]
Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.mediamatters.org/~r/mediamatters/latest/~3/218987545/200801180003
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo! Download (2) | Play (2) Download (1) | Play (2) (h/t Bill)Not content with saying that the Constitution should be amended to reflect the word of God (as if that wasn’t horrifying enough to those of us who value the separation between Church and State), Huckabee keeps playing to his evangelical base with an interview at [...]
Read The Full Article:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/18/the-situation-room-huckabee-gets-more-bi
blical/
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!Fresh headlines: # Bush calls for $145 billion economy plan AP - 18 minutes ago# Stocks fall after Bush announces plan AP - 2 minutes agoThe conclusion is left as an exercise for the student.
Read The Full Article:
http://www.reachm.com/amstreet/archives/2008/01/18/jonah/
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!Really. Mitt is utterly full of shit about everything, but a press corps which gets angry because a politician promises to deliver jobs? WTF?
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!Click here for a PDF of the full 16-page report:
Read The Full Article:
http://www.iraqslogger.com/index.php/post/5288
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!The other day, just for giggles, I looked at Chris Matthews' profile on the MSNBC website. It says, that, among other things, he is:
[A] television news anchor with remarkable depth of experience, Matthews has distinguished himself as a broadcast journalist, newspaper bureau chief, Presidential speechwriter, and best-selling author.
It's sad that over the past few years, his idea of "journalism" has degenerated to Rush Limbaugh/talk show quality, namely offensive and juvenile sexist remarks about Senator Hillary Clinton as well as other women. His obsession with Sen. Clinton reached tabloid levels the day after she won the New Hampshire Democratic primary, when he said that:
"the reason she's a U.S. senator, the reason she's a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around. That's how she got to be senator from New York. We keep forgetting it. She didn't win there on her merit."
You can read more about his near-nuclear meltdown here and here. ("It's not an obsession." Right, Chris.)
Thankfully, the good people at Media Matters watch Matthews so we don't have to. They've brought us the latest, which is - gasp - an apology from Matthews.
Here's the video:
It's a start, I suppose, although parts of it are more like "I'm sorry I was an ass. I'd like to rephrase that insulting thing I said about Hillary. Oops, I'm sorry, I was an ass again." For example:
So, did I say it right? Was it fair to say that Hillary Clinton, like any great politician, took advantage of a crisis to prove herself? Was her conduct in 1998 a key to starting her independent electoral career the following year? Yes.
Was it fair to imply that Hillary's whole career depended on being a victim of an unfaithful husband? No. And that's what it sounded like I was saying and it hurt people I'd like to think normally like what I say, in fact, normally like me. As I said, I rely on my heart to guide me in the heated, fast-paced talk we have here on Hardball -- a heart that bears only goodwill toward people trying to make it out there, especially those who haven't before.
(The entire transcript is below the fold.)
Well, Chris, I'm sure you mean no malice, and you're just a bumbling oaf when it comes to apologies. We'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Kind of.
You aren't off the hook yet. Please install a filter between your brain and your mouth, and don't forget that we'll be watching and holding you accountable to your apology.
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!
This is ?water wet, sky blue? stuff and I should probably be spending my time on something more productive, but?
It seems that Glenn Beck is now being promoted by CNN as a featured online columnist, which makes me wonder if that network has any journalistic credibility left at all.
And in this piece of drivel, he uses our current economic melt down triggered by the mortgage subprime lending crisis to accomplish two things: the first is to take another shot at Hillary Clinton, and the second is to tell us all that cutting corporate tax rates will solve everything (see, doing that will spur investment and job growth, encouraging people to spend and saving our economy).
The Repugs and their acolytes are nothing if not predictable, aren?t they? But in the real world, this tells us the following?
Congressional Budget Office data show that the tax cuts have been the single largest contributor to the reemergence of substantial budget deficits in recent years. Legislation enacted since 2001 has added about $2.3 trillion to deficits between 2001 and 2006, with half of this deterioration in the budget due to the tax cuts (about a third was due to increases in security spending, and about a sixth to increases in domestic spending). Yet the President and some Congressional leaders decline to acknowledge the tax cuts? role in the nation?s budget problems, falling back instead on the discredited nostrum that tax cuts ?pay for themselves.?And Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson echoed that line refuting Beck here.
...
The claim that tax cuts pay for themselves had already been rejected by the Administration?s own leading economists. Edward Lazear, the current chair of President?s Bush?s Council of Economic Advisers, has stated, ?I certainly would not claim that tax cuts pay for themselves.? N. Gregory Mankiw, President?s Bush?s former CEA chair and a well-known Harvard economics professor, has written that there is ?no credible evidence? that ?tax revenues? rise in the face of lower tax rates.? Mankiw compared an economist who says that tax cuts pay for themselves to a ?snake oil salesman trying to sell a miracle cure.?
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!
Powered by blogdig.net