 |
| Click Ed Gillespie's disbelieving look to play video. |
WALLACE: Ryan is saying, we don’t want to get hemmed in. Let’s leave it to negotiations with congress to get into the details. Here’s my question. Why is it all right to tell voters about the candy – hey, everybody is going to get a 20% tax cut, cut in their tax rates, but let’s not tell them about the spinach, which is you’re going to lose some deductions?
GILLESPIE: We have talked about losing deductions…
WALLACE: But you haven’t given specifics.
GILLESPIE: Well, because Chris, in a campaign environment, to start negotiating in a campaign environment you’re going to lock in republicans, you’re going to lock in democrats…
WALLACE: But you locked them in on the 20% tax rate.
GILLESPIE: I think people understand that that is a broad principle, that that tax rate needs to come down and we need to broaden the base. That is the principle, the principle is also that we are not going to change the share of taxes paid by upper income earners, and we’re going to give tax relief to the middle class and it’s going to be deficit neutral. You can do all of those things and have people understand that this election was about this and we need this kind of pro-growth tax reform agenda. And, then work out the details in the same way, by the way, Ronald Reagan did with Tip O’Neill with working across the aisle. Governor Romney has a proven record of being able to work across this aisle.
WALLACE: But you’re not explaining – because there are a lot of question from independent people – how do you pay for it? And you refuse say how you’re going to pay for it.
GILLESPIE: What we have said is that we are going to pay for it with these, by limiting deductions and loopholes – and, by the way, making sure for the middle class, that protecting the home mortgage deduction and other important deductions for them, but at the high end you would eliminate deductions and, you know, a lot of special interest loopholes that would allow you to bring down the rate 20%. Six different studies have said this is entirely doable.
WALLACE: Those are questionable, some of them are blogs, some of them are from the AEI, which is hardly an independent group.
GILLESPIE: These are very credible sources…
WALLACE: One of them is from a guy who is – from a blog from a guy who was a top advisor to George W. Bush. These are hardly nonpartisan studies.
Did Wallace actually call Romney out for relying on Right Wing propaganda? What the hell does he think Fox News is?
Still if Romney manages to be such a poor excuse for a candidate that he loses the support of Fox News, he is dead in the water.
I don't actually think that is entirely possible, their corporate overlords won't allow it, but it IS possible that they start to demonstrate their frustration on camera with the lies and obfuscation that the Romney campaign provides in lieu of actual policy details. And THAT might to lead to a few of the Fox News zombie-like viewers finally coming to the realization that their candidate is a lying sack of shit.
"Still if Romney manages to be such a poor excuse for a candidate that he loses the support of Fox News, he is dead in the water." Well, yeah, but.
ReplyDeleteI've been voting since 1976, and I can tell you one thing I have observed. Republicans stick together and vote the party, always, no wavering. They WILL vote for Romney, no matter how much they dislike him or how much he stinks. Take that to the bank! (Or the Caymens, if you're filthy rich like Mittens.)
Democrats, on the other hand, hem and haw and will cross party lines. (Democrats for Reagan!) Yuk.
Democrats are notorious for staying home and simply not giving a damn or voting. Republicans get out and vote. They do. Scary, but true.
Please encourage your fellow Democrats to vote. It's extremely important. This election (for Obama) is not a done-deal. Obama has an uphill battle, in my opinion. "Get out the Vote" means more now than ever.
My uncle is a retired Vietnam veteran, and he told me that he would never, ever, over his dead body, vote for a democrat. He barely knows what's going on when it comes to Romney and Ryan, but he will vote for them anyway, even when it is against his best interest.
DeleteThis is why you guys need mandatory voting. We have it in Australia and let me tell you - it works, it really does. What it does is it FORCES the major parties to support programs that help most of us instead of what they do in the US - where they pander to their bases for 3.9 years and for one small part of a year they lie to try and get independents to vote for them. I'm talking GOP here, the democrats are much more populist though still very far to the right of our liberal ideas here.
DeleteAnd you really don't have a huge problem with idiots casting for who is hotter or whatnot. Most truly disinterested people just don't vote or cast a donkey vote (blank, or numbering 123456 down the page no matter the order). Or they vote for one of the many many looney parties like 'Guns for everyone!' or 'The Communist Society' as a joke vote. It works very well, and I'll never let them take it away. The country would devolve into a civil war or something without it!
I can't stand it when I hear how Romney is willing to "work across the aisle." I'm from Massachusetts, and that's the only experience Romney has with working across the aisle. Trust me, he had no choice, because our legislature is overwhelmingly Democratic. If Romney had balked at signing any of the bills (like he gay marriage bill), his veto would have been overturned in under 5 minutes. So he went along with it and claimed it then as HIS victory. I love when people remind him of that.
ReplyDeleteHe had 800 vetoes and almost every single one of the was overturned. Even the Reps he worked with thought he was an asshole. Hell he wasn't even there half the time.
DeleteAnon @ 2:47PM: Nope, once he decided that being a Governor wasn't good enough for him, he spent most of his time campaigning for President. You never saw him at the State House unless he was looking for supporters. Which in a way we were glad for -- Romney was a snooty pain in the arse up here.
DeletePeople can also get fed up with their party or change their perspective.
ReplyDeleteThe late Arlen Specter and Joseph Lieberman are good examples.
The internet and fast TV news cycle can sway voters in ways not seen 20+ years ago.
So while the long-standing norm was for absolute party line allegiance, more recent trends have boosted numbers of independents.
With such a close race perceived, this small percentage of swing voters can make a difference.
You remember back in 2004, people were saying they wanted to vote for a man they could "go have a beer with?" even though George W. Bush was and is an admitted alcoholic?? Go figure that one out.
ReplyDeleteFast forward to 2012. I wonder what those same voters are saying now???
Hmmm. Romney's religion strictly forbids alcohol..can't have a beer with him. The man cannot even drink a coke, or eat cookies...etc., etc.
Obama and Biden imbibe in a beer now and then, and even the White House has its own official beer. Hmmm..
Beer drinkers of the country unite! You seriously thought that drinking a beer with a candidate was important in 2004, what about now??
Oh, that's right. Now it's important that a candidate wear magic underwear, have 8 mansions, a car elevator, investments overseas, doesn't release back taxes, believes in a Heavenly Father that says you will have your own planet when you die...be eternally bound to your subservient spouse..that there are little tiny baby souls flying around heaven waiting to be born...makes $57,000 a day while unemployed, also makes $10,000 bets off the cuff...likes buying up companies and sending the work overseas and firing good, honest American workers.
Yeah. Go vote for that guy.
Oh hon, he can eat all the cookies he wants. That is the one thing the LDS church does allow. Sugar addictions and all the Mormons I know (from UT, KY, and IN) are all big sugar nuts. If you get some sweet stuff from them, you can go into a diabetic coma.
DeleteAnd they can drink decaf coke, they own stock in it so they changed that rule a while back.
The Mormons I used to live around in Orem, Utah would buy beer but have it put in a brown paper bag..so the neighbors wouldn't 'see' it...
DeleteAlcoholism is rampant in Utah and other LDS communities. They simply cannot live up the standards that are thrust upon them.
I remember young LDS women would be outside the apartment building 4-plex that I lived in talking to each other and telling each other what they were and going to name their 7 or 8 child, while they only had 1 or two at the time. Seriously.
Brighham Young told them to go be fruitful and multiply. They do.
Koch Industries threaten layoffs if Obama is reelected.
ReplyDeletehttp://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/koch-industries-sends-pro-romney-packet-employees-195709471--election.html
Could you imagine if the msm were conservative and, say, the Obamas didn't believe in NGAs?
ReplyDeleteYour dreams would go up in smoke.
Sarah Pac!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82385.html?hp=r1
I just got off the FEC website after going over Sarah PAC's filing. What I found it curious is that she spent $255,695 dollars in postage, showed she paid a Visa card for "airfare, lodging, rental car", but she also includes airfare, lodging, and rental car in her expenses. In addition, the reports states she spent $160. in aircraft fuel, but lists it twice for the same amount, same date, the same vendor, and for the same amount of money. They also spent almost $25,000 dollars to their attorney Van Flein. Another curious expense was billed from Pie-Ski for almost $9,000 for paint and repairs to her bus. They also claim they took in over $800,000, but only gave $95,000 dollars to candidates during this period.
DeleteThe FEC need to do an audit or at least a cursory examination of Sarah PAC's filing.
Sarah PAC spending tops $774,000
ReplyDeletehttp://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82385.html?hp=r1
Palin’s PAC spent its cash on a variety of political initiatives, ranging from postage (at least $270,000) and direct mail and contact list rentals ($242,087) to tens of thousands of dollars in various travel expenses, such as agent services, airfare, vehicle rentals and operating and repairing a bus, records indicate. The PAC also incurred $18,000 in speechwriting fees.
Here's a comment from that article..
Delete"beisbolfan
Party: NA
Oct. 14, 2012 - 7:21 PM EST
I'm a fan of Sarah Palin. I think she is a unique figure in American politics, a woman who has fought for honest government, free-market capitalism and traditional America. I voted for her once, and would again.
But, I gott say, something looks fishy about this PAC financial statement. Out of almost 1 million dollars, they seem to have spent most of it on POSTAGE and RENTAL OF MAILING LISTS? And much of the rest on travel for themselves?
It says they gave contributions to 4 candidates "in the 4 figure range". What does that mean? $1000? I mean, my stepson gave that much to McCain in 2008, out of his own pocket. I don't really know anything about these PAC's, but I guess whatever she is doing is legal. It sounds like a lot of charities I have read about, they get 1 million dollars, and after various "expenses", they wind up giving $300 to the actual charity.
But, carry on Sarah. She is a smallr but important player in the republican campaign to keep America a free nation."
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA...yes...what is with a that "POSTAGE"...*cough METH* and "RENTAL OF MAILING LIST" *cough BRIBES* means? LOL!!!
SarahPac is just an ATM machine for the high living of the Palin family.
DeleteSarahPAC is a social welfare program for the Palin family.
DeleteOnly fools give to SarahPAC.
Even Sarah Palin and her family members are not stupid enough to contribute to Sarah PAC. They don't believe in the PAC enough to spend any of their own MILLIONS. But Sarah isn't too proud to grift hard earned dollars away from her "fans", is she? She has really fucked those people over for the past 3.5 years. I cannot wait until the day that most of them realize that Sarah has always been in this thing for herself only, and has taken them all for a ride. Not so I can laugh at THEM, but so I can laugh at HER for thinking people are so stupid that they will NEVER catch on to her grifting game.
DeleteMost of the long-time C4P crowd has caught on eventually and never even go there anymore. Several of those left are multi-account sock-puppet shills that are on her payroll. The remaining are the ones that have been most loyal to Sarah and the Tea Party and they are the ones that she has fucked over most since the beginning. I do have empathy for them, just as I would any friend or family member who might be vulnerable to a tele-evangelist sucking their pockets empty of their grocery money.
I don't think there is really a place called hell, but if there is, certainly it is reserved for those like Sarah who prey on the weaker and lesser intelligent to benefit themselves exclusively.
18 grand on speechwriting fees? She's been spewing the same word salad for years.
DeleteAlso too...google Jake Tapper and Candy Crowley. They are all calling him out!
ReplyDeleteProbably because Tapper and Crowley have been called out recently for their bias reporting AGAINST Obama. So they gotta balance it out.
DeleteCandy's no Martha Radditz, thankfully it's a town hall style debate and Candy won't be too much of a distraction in that setting.
DeleteGoing to be interesting if they split screen it. Would love to see Romney's mannerisms while Obama gives his answers. Who does he focus on? Candy? The person asking the question? President Obama?
wELL mITT MIGHT BE A SACK OF SHIT, BUT IF IT'S SHIT ON THE MENU, THAT'S WHAT THE rEPUBLICANS ARE EATING.
ReplyDeleteLet's just hope that President Obama calls Romney out on his lies during the upcoming debate.
ReplyDeleteOT - Granny Grifter has an interview answering Twitter questions here: http://tinyurl.com/9ss6dlc
Odd interview. Around the 4:00 mark, the interviewer asks Sarah a question that seems to make her squirm, but the question is inaudible.
At 6:29, she's asked whether she would run again. With a wink, she replies; "I am obviously still thinking about running in the future for an office that would allow that um the effective policies that America needs. We have a good track record... word salad, word salad, word salad."
She also said she's bringing Trig to watch Bristol dance (clomp around) on DWTS tomorrow. Poor Trig.
She's bin readin' the Blogs again! All of 'em! Also too!
DeleteI saw that too...on a pro-Baldy website they said this about that strange jump in the tape...
Delete"Gov. Palin was amused by one viewer's question asking if she would take him hunting and another one inquiring how many situps she could do. She said she didn't know."
Here's the link to the website...
http://sarahpalinjournal.blogspot.com/2012/10/gov-palin-doesnt-rule-out-future-run.html
Pass the eye condoms. What bordello in LA was she filming from? Hyper manic Sarah says she's taking "Prop" to LA (where she's filming from) when Beefy hoofs it across the stage. That's "stupid" for "Watch the show!" No way is she taking Trig to the studio, he's in a safe house in Alaska, hopefully.
DeleteSarah at her best, hit with hard hitting twitter questions and not allowed to consult her Twittionary nor Twittaurus. The "gotcha" question was cut out lol.
Proof Sarah reads the blogs. We've been demanding a trig appearance and Sarah obeys. We own her.
DeleteI'd like to think I'm openminded enough to at least LISTEN to a candidate's position, before deciding on who I will vote for.
ReplyDeleteI'm STILL waiting for Romney's ACTUAL stance, on anything...after, what? A year and a half?
I've heard how he'll make sure the sun shines every day; how everyone will have a high paying job (except for WOMEN, of course); and how everyone will not only pay less taxes, but also, magically, see the nation's debt come way down.
But, as to HOW he can pull off such ridiculous miracles, remains a total mystery.
That anyone has been able to conclude from this, that he deserves their vote, is another miracle/mystery.
You naysayers think Sarah Palin has no career path ahead of her, give that another thought...
ReplyDelete5 Washed-Up Celebrities Trying To Cash In On Obama-Bashing
http://tinyurl.com/8v5yrrz
This says it all:
ReplyDelete"I think people understand that that is a broad principle, that that tax rate needs to come down and we need to broaden the base. That is the principle, the principle is also that we are not going to change the share of taxes paid by upper income earners..."
Look, the 1% is not the base, for goodness' sake, just look at a pyramid. Mostly those at the bottom - THEY are the base, THEY are holding up the entire pyramid. So it makes sense that THEY will be 'broadened' so that the upper income earners's rate is not going to be changed.
14% and less for, say, Romney.
Gillespie's heart just isn't into it. I think he sees the writing on the wall, but won't cut his losses because he needs the paycheck.
ReplyDeleteVery few of the zombie-like followers pay attention to facts, they just distract them from what they want to believe.
But lets face it, the uniformed zombies would't vote for President Obama if their life depended on it, and it DOES. The neo cons will vote for Romney, the Mormon liar just to vote against the blah man.
If my vote cancels out one of their's, It means the system works.
Wow. Chris Wallace was doing a journalist's job. It isn't everyday we see Fox News guys going rogue.
ReplyDeleteIt is incredible Ed Gillespie was able to keep a straight face in his weak arguments and defenses. I can't believe these people think they are fooling anyone with the vague/don't read the fine print slippery salesman pitch.
Ryan keeps saying they want to "broaden the base" on paying taxes. What exactly does that mean? Start making those pay who don't make enough to pay taxes now? He exempts from consideration higher income peoples' rates. In any case the numbers of taxpayers in Romney's bracket is small. Adding more bodies from that base would not amount to any perceptible broadening of numbers. He also exempts middle income taxpayers, mumbletypegging around about mortgage deductions, which by the way are many fewer in numbers since the Wall St. guys got their hands on mortgages. In any case, I think the mortgage deduction is one of the few they could eliminate for middle income folks that would add up to very much money. I think that deduction is one of his targets to get rid of. Otherwise, what does that leave? Single mothers waiting tables? Lots of those out there. Truck drivers? Disabled? Social Security recipients? This guy is slime.
ReplyDelete