Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Morning Plum

* John Boehner's audition for Speaker: Tax cuts to help solve deficit. The GOP leader is giving a speech this morning that gives us a glimpse of how he might handle the gig of Speaker of the House.

In it, he's blasting Dems for calling for the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, while claiming that keeping them -- and cutting spending further -- is the way to foster the economic growth necessary to solve the deficit problem.

* Also: Boehner is calling on Obama to fire his entire economic team, which seems like a bid to force media coverage of his speech.

* Dems hit back: The DNC releases a new Web vid reminding folks that Boehner was part of the crop of Republicans who ran Congress before the 2006 Dem takeover. "There couldn't be a worse embodiment of what is wrong with Washington than John Boehner," a Dem official emails.

Key takeaway: Republicans have been working hard to leave behind the taint of the previous GOP-controlled Congress, elevating new leaders like Eric Cantor in an effort to rebrand the party. Dems hope that a high profile for Boehner will undercut this case, enabling them to argue that a vote for the GOP this fall is a vote for the old Republican Party that ran us into the ground.

* Indeed, Dems are already trying to raise cash off the specter of "Speaker Boehner."

* History lesson: Joan Walsh reminds us that Republicans are the ones who inserted the sunset into the Bush tax cuts, in order to conceal their true costs.

* DISCLOSE Act, anyone? The number of outside groups pumping cash into the midterm elections now totals more than a dozen, and we don't know where that money is coming from.

* Primary day! Here's a useful overview of today's big primaries. Highlights: Kendrick Meek is likely to win; and Repubs will pick a challenger to take on liberal quote machine Alan Grayson.

* Pundit challenge of the day: How to square all the previous talk about this being an anti-establishment, anti-incumbent year with the expected victory tonight of Meek, John McCain and other incumbents and establishment candidates?

* Where do Dems stand on Social Security? DNC spox Brad Woodhouse rips the GOP for lying about Social Security's long-term insolvency, but seems to suggest that the program needs to be "tweaked."

*Did all of Islam attack us on 9/11? Richard Cohen nails it:

If you believe that an entire religion of upward of a billion followers attacked the United States on Sept. 11, 2001, then it is understandable that locating a mosque near the fallen World Trade Center might be upsetting...If, on the other hand, you do not believe that the attack was launched by an entire religion, you have a moral duty to support the creation of the Islamic center.

* It's the hatemongering, stupid: Eugene Robinson links the Cordoba House battle to Shirley Sherrod, immigration and other race-based controversies and discerns a larger pattern "in which the far right embraces victimhood and stokes fear."

* And maybe it's time to stop giving this woman a platform? "Mosque" foe Pamela Geller keeps on makin' it up, pulling a Breitbart in order to portray Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf as a terror sympathizer. Quick, book Geller for another round of cable interviews!

What else is happening?

UPDATE, 9:32 a.m.: AFL-CIO spokesman Eddie Vale, responding to Boehner, goes there:

No matter what kind of fake tan you slap on it these are the same washed up Republican policies that only benefit Wall Street and the very rich. Working families in Ohio and across America can't help but laugh at Boehner talking about the economy when he voted against unemployment benefits, voted to fire teachers and firefighters and wants to privatize Social Security.

By Greg Sargent  |  August 24, 2010; 8:27 AM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , Foreign policy and national security , House Dems , House GOPers , Morning Plum , Senate Dems , Senate Republicans  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Happy Hour Roundup
Next: Karen Hughes: I don't remember any of my work with Imam

Comments

Greg, that Woodhouse link doesn't really clear things up does it? And just to be clear, raising the retirement age to 70 is a 19%-20% cut in benefits, I don't consider that tweaking. I feel like we're playing a political game of dodge ball.

Posted by: lmsinca | August 24, 2010 8:40 AM | Report abuse

lmisnca, I included that link just for you. :)

seriously, I don't get the game here.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | August 24, 2010 8:42 AM | Report abuse

Mornin' Greg.

What else is happening?

John Stewart had a great piece yesterday where Dan Senor from Bush's WH was on Fox and Friends demagogue against a financier of the Park 51 Imam being a funder of radical madrasas around the globe but failing to make the point this person doing the funding was Prince Alaweed, the 7% stakeholder of NewsCorp.

I wish I had a voice to pour salt on that wound that was just opened.

As the Daily Show pointed out, either Fox and Friends are really stupid because they didn't find out who was funding the Imam's projects or they are just really evil.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 24, 2010 8:44 AM | Report abuse

Just saw this and it really ought to go up front in our daily reading list...

"This morning, the New Yorker’s Jane Mayer published an explosive investigative piece detailing the role of the Koch family in orchestrating not only the Tea Party movement, but much of the modern right-wing infrastructure." http://thinkprogress.org/2010/08/23/david-charles-koch/

Posted by: bernielatham | August 24, 2010 8:48 AM | Report abuse

Regarding SS.

Are we not living longer? If we are, then benefits should be adjusted to our lifespan no? I mean, if 100 years from now we're living to 120, are people going to pretend SS will just pay for its self?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 24, 2010 8:50 AM | Report abuse

One of the finest Daily Show moments:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-23-2010/the-parent-company-trap

I myself am a believer in Team Evil.

Posted by: zattarra | August 24, 2010 8:50 AM | Report abuse

Jon Stewart has been really hot lately, but last night was beyong superb!

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 24, 2010 8:54 AM | Report abuse

Ahh thanks zattarra, didn't think the video was up already.

and

"and we don't know where that money is coming from."

Sure we do Greg.

It's the same people behind trying to make climate change look like some wacky conspiracy, its the same group that organized the initial workings of the tea party by supplying web site funding and buses via AFP and other orgs, its the same people behind Mercatus Group from GWU and CATO Institute.

The Koch Foundation

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/01/koch-rich-donohue/

You should really read the New Yorker article. Sure, Yasha Levine and Mark Ames were the first to associate Koch with all these groups initially shortly after Santelli's rants, but since then ThinkProgress has done a good job and the New Yorker article is pretty thorough. I think WaPo has covered this also.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 24, 2010 8:56 AM | Report abuse

Does anyone know Rand Paul's opinion on the Salmonella egg recall? I wonder if the FDA over-stepped their boundaries and interfered with the free market.

Posted by: turnlefthere | August 24, 2010 9:00 AM | Report abuse

@Bernie

Thanks for the link. I'm going to have to find Mayer's article in the New Yorker. Mayer is one of my favorite journalists and I always enjoy when she visits Rachel or other shows.

For some reason..even though I sit here on a very gloomy rainy morning, juggling bills..which can I afford to pay today..which have to wait until tomorrow or next week..ahhh the life of a small businessman in the new millenium...I know you feel my pain Bernie...:-)...I feel very optimistic.

The same tools being used to manipulate and dupe the middle class into voting against their interests are also now being used to report some FACTS and expose the Corporatists like the Koch family. The more light that's gets shone on these vermin the better. Eventually this information will reach a critical mass and people will finally figure out..who's zooming who.

BTW This is exactly why we should make sure we extend those Bush tax cuts...so that wealthy arseholes like the Kochs can spend even more money on creating astro turf groups like the Tea Party etc and provide more jobs for the people in desperate need like that DICK Armey. snark snark.

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 24, 2010 9:00 AM | Report abuse

Bernie, credit where credit is due. Here is the article that first associated the tea party with The Koch Foundation. But like I said, ThinkProgress put a lot of it together also along with the New Yorker article.

http://exiledonline.com/exposing-the-familiar-rightwing-pr-machine-is-cnbcs-rick-santelli-sucking-koch/

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 24, 2010 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Thanks Greg. I would like to be clear that this issue does not affect me personally, we're set to get our full SS payments at 66, only four years away for my husband. We have other retirement investments and property so it's not a selfish quest for answers I'm looking for. Like everyone else we've taken a hit because of the recession, but it has nothing to do with SS.

I do know quite a bit about seniors, especially widows, trying to live on SS payments though. To assume that some of these seniors have the option of working until 70 is ludicrous and retiring early at reduced benefits would highlight the lack of connection many in Washington have with Main Street.

My fear is that Dems will continue to dodge the issue through the election and then adopt some sort of compromise next year that does cut benefits. I'd love to be wrong.

Posted by: lmsinca | August 24, 2010 9:03 AM | Report abuse

@ turnlefthere

"Does anyone know Rand Paul's opinion on the Salmonella egg recall? I wonder if the FDA over-stepped their boundaries and interfered with the free market."

ding...ding...ding...ding.

You win the prize for the question of the day!!!!!!

@Greg....seriously...turnlefthere has come up with the perfect question for Paul...and perhaps Sharron Angle as well.
Is there anyway you or one of your journalist colleagues could run that by the Paul and Angle campaigns. It is a perfectly legitimate snark free question.
People deserve to know where these two stand on the FDA and other gov't organizations.

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 24, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

Quote of the day (from the Mayer piece)...

"A Republican campaign consultant who has done research on behalf of Charles and David Koch said of the Tea Party, “The Koch brothers gave the money that founded it. It’s like they put the seeds in the ground. Then the rainstorm comes, and the frogs come out of the mud—and they’re our candidates!'"

And thanks Mike.


Posted by: bernielatham | August 24, 2010 9:08 AM | Report abuse

Jeez. Is there any good news around here *at all*? Nothing for which any Dem can have a shred of optimism? All this gloom-and-doom is outright oppressive.

Posted by: TomBlue | August 24, 2010 9:10 AM | Report abuse

It's good of Eugene Robinson to catch up to the point I've been making since last week...

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | August 24, 2010 9:18 AM | Report abuse

Read that New Yorker piece on the Kochs and see what we are up against. Then tell me how appeasing those people makes sense. It doesn't. Don't run and cower. The Radical Right must be crushed. The Left must stand and fight.

Posted by: wbgonne | August 24, 2010 9:20 AM | Report abuse

eriously, I don't get the game here.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | August 24, 2010 8:42 AM
============================

Given that Obama filled the Deficit Commission with people on record supporting Social Security cuts, it's hard find a charitable interpretation.

Once again, a message that could resonate with voters: "Vote for us, we'll protect Social Security!" is diluted.

"Vote for us, maybe we won't cut Social Security as much!"

Doesn't have the same ring, does it?
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | August 24, 2010 9:24 AM | Report abuse

"I mean, if 100 years from now we're living to 120, are people going to pretend SS will just pay for its self?"

Mike, I'm sorry but this shows your disconnect with Main Street as well. SS is fully funded until 2037, it doesn't add to the deficit, there are other avenues to fund it beyond 2037, and do you really expect people retiring in the next 15 to 20 years to suffer benefit cuts because people will be living longer 100 years from now? Benefit cuts are nothing more than another assault on the middle class.

Sorry Tom if I've contributed to the sense of doom and gloom, I'm simply looking for answers. I think middle class Americans should know where their Reps and Senators stand on next years issue prior to voting in November.

I'll drop it for today though in the interest of harmony.

Posted by: lmsinca | August 24, 2010 9:27 AM | Report abuse

TomBlue.....use Zattarra's Daily Show link...you'll be rolling and spitting your coffee at the computer screen. It's hilarious.

Thanks for that link Zattarra I fell asleep early and haven't watched my dvr yet.

The right has embraced such lunacy that they are literally becoming clowns. The sendup of Fox was all the more humorous because unlike Fox...Stewart didn't have to make up a single thing. He simply put up the facts and connected the dots.

Can anyone ever remember a satire show taking someone's speech literally word for word and having a huge comedy hit. Can you say open Tina Fey's mouth and insert Sarah Palin's answers VERBATIM.

Whatever happened to a thoughtful R party...yesss I know there are still a few left...Paul Ryan..Mike Pence (who I might disagree with but can at least respect intellectually) and our winner today....a story you missed Greg..
RON Paul who came out yesterday in support of the First Amendment and in support of the Park 51 project. Again I disagree with Ron Paul's domestic policy ideas...I'm in complete agreement with his foreign policy...but whatever...Ron Paul has always maintained his credibility by not pandering and offering thoughtful remarks on the issues. Ron Paul is the Anti-Newt...the polar opposite of a pandering scum sucking politician totally out for himself. I don't agree with him...wouldn't vote for him...but I actually admire Ron Paul.

The right has a choice to make..not whether to go farther right or back to the center...but whether to eliminate the buffoons like Palin, Angle, and Bachman and the pandering idiots like Gingrich, McConnell, Boner, and Cantor, or continue to be the butt of jokes!

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 24, 2010 9:28 AM | Report abuse

"Tax cuts to help solve deficit."

Clearly, the way to solve the deficit is the Obama plan of spending trillions more. Government spending pays for itself. The Laugher Curve says so.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

TheBBQChickenMadness - Yeah, finally someone is catching on. Good on Eugene Robinson.

What shocked me was last night’s Hardball. Holy cats, Matthews came back from break energized.

Then, this morning, Mica from Morning Joe really kicked some tail.

Look, it is obvious that the GOP is trying to inject racial tension into the national conversation. The New Black Panthers, the 14th amendment, terrorist @nchor babies, Shirley Shirrod and now mosques. What the GOP is doing was obvious to anyone who has studied Republican politics from 1950 until now.

The question wasn't what the GOP was doing; the question was whether the media would have the intestinal fortitude required to call the GOP on it. Thus far, the answer has been no, with the limited exceptions of some of the lefties on MSNBC. I'm guessing most journalists are so afraid of being labeled "liberal" that nothing will change, but I hope I'm wrong.

Posted by: nisleib | August 24, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

"History lesson: Joan Walsh reminds us that Republicans are the ones who inserted the sunset into the Bush tax cuts, in order to conceal their true costs"

She's not the only one, this is pretty common talking point (wasn't I reading about this on Ezra Klein's blog, like, two or three weeks ago) and it's come up in a number of places. But it's just not accurate--and the Republicans are pretty candid about what they did and why. The reality is, they couldn't get past the filibuster and they knew it. But they could pass the tax cuts with budget reconciliation. To do that, they had to accept a 10 year window. The goal wasn't to "hide the true costs" (conservatives don't even think that way about tax cuts. Seriously) but to get it passed. And, they thought 2010 was the year to have them expire, because there would be a lot of politicians up for re-election. Then they could vote to extend, or explain why they voted to "raise" people's taxes. Turns out, that was fairly smart.


ps: John Stewart from last night: The Ambassador of Death. That was an awesome piece. The Fox news things was pretty good, too. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 24, 2010 9:31 AM | Report abuse

"Joan Walsh reminds us that Republicans are the ones who inserted the sunset into the Bush tax cuts, in order to conceal their true costs."

She "reminds" with zero specific facts and lots of hackish rhetoric.

Does anyone believe the sunset exists solely because of Democrats?

More importantly, how pathetic are the Democrats for making their stand on a semantic sleight of hand? They want taxes to go up. Republicans don't. End of story.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Edit: Should be does not exist soley because of the Democrats.

Kevin gets it right.

Democrats are so cynical and misleading.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 9:36 AM | Report abuse

"We must, together as a nation, STOP WATCHING FOX." - Jon Stewart

Absolutely brutal piece on The Daily Show about FOX News, and why we shouldn't take them seriously at all:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-23-2010/the-parent-company-trap

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | August 24, 2010 9:38 AM | Report abuse

Let's try some logic here...

Ten years ago the R's used all kinds of legislative maneuvering to ram these tax cuts through..including needing Dick Cheney to break the tie for the second round. They had to do this because the plan was so damaging to the deficit that Senate rules required them to do so.

8 years later those vaunted tax cuts had worked soooo well..stimulated our economy so wonderfully that we had the second largest financial crisis in the past century.

So can somebody explain to me what is the argument here? The R's created and passed legislation that had a ten year sunset date. Were Republicans wrong to put an end date? Were the Senate rules re our growing deficit wrong to force such an end date. Where did the R's go wrong here?

And now to the logic of extending these cuts....we've had these cuts for ten years and we are in the worst job market in a decades...but if we extend them...what?
Are we shooting for Depression era unemployment rates of 25%. Will the uber rich R's not quit until they bankrupt the country?

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 24, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

Let's try some logic here...

Ten years ago the R's used all kinds of legislative maneuvering to ram these tax cuts through..including needing Dick Cheney to break the tie for the second round. They had to do this because the plan was so damaging to the deficit that Senate rules required them to do so.

8 years later those vaunted tax cuts had worked soooo well..stimulated our economy so wonderfully that we had the second largest financial crisis in the past century.

So can somebody explain to me what is the argument here? The R's created and passed legislation that had a ten year sunset date. Were Republicans wrong to put an end date? Were the Senate rules re our growing deficit wrong to force such an end date. Where did the R's go wrong here?

And now to the logic of extending these cuts....we've had these cuts for ten years and we are in the worst job market in a decades...but if we extend them...what?
Are we shooting for Depression era unemployment rates of 25%. Will the uber rich R's not quit until they bankrupt the country?

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 24, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

Liberals are guided by the wisdom, knowledge, and fidelity of John Stewart.

Sounds right.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 9:41 AM | Report abuse

rukidding7 - I've said it before and I'll say it again: Liberals just don't understand how the Bush tax cuts are supposed to work.

It comes down to this fundamental truth: A rising tide lifts all boats.

So, obviously, according to GOP logic, we need to encourage boat building. And everyone knows that a boat worth less than 10 million dollars isn't even worth talking about. So how do you encourage boat building?

By giving tax cuts to people who can already afford to buy a 10 million dollar boat. Duh. It really is that simple.

Posted by: nisleib | August 24, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

"How to square all the previous talk about this being an anti-establishment, anti-incumbent year with the expected victory tonight of Meek, John McCain and other incumbents and establishment candidates?"

I'll take that one, Greg. There never was an anti-incumbent upswell. There was near universal disappointment at the lack of leadership from Obama and the Democrats. The anti-incumbency meme, like the purported clamor for bi-partisanship, were excuses and rationalizations dreamt up by the Establishment Democrats after they frittered away their electoral assets. Same with Blame-the-Left nonsense. What is truly curious is how these supposed realists leading the Democratic Party blame everyone and everything but themselves for their failings.

And now, following Imsinca's sage example, I'm gonna zip it in the interests of harmony.

Later, All.

Posted by: wbgonne | August 24, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

"Ten years ago the R's used all kinds of legislative maneuvering to ram these tax cuts through..including needing Dick Cheney to break the tie for the second round. They had to do this because the plan was so damaging to the deficit that Senate rules required them to do so."

They had to compromise with liberal Dems, because they lacked a majority.

"8 years later those vaunted tax cuts had worked soooo well..stimulated our economy so wonderfully that we had the second largest financial crisis in the past century."

Non sequitur. If you contend that the reduced taxes caused the financial meltdown, by all means make your factual case.

"So can somebody explain to me what is the argument here? The R's created and passed legislation that had a ten year sunset date. Were Republicans wrong to put an end date?"

The sunset was a necessary compromise required by Democrats, who have corrupted our language and reasoning to equate "not taxing" with spending that must be "paid for," and live in a counterfactual world of static analysis. I.e., they don't believe taxes affect the economy. And, no, Republicans weren't wrong. They had to compromise with liberal Democrats to get any tax reductions through. Strong economic growth that followed as a result.

"Were the Senate rules re our growing deficit wrong to force such an end date. Where did the R's go wrong here?"

Yes, a rule based on equating not taxing with spending, and based on static analysis, is foolhardy and contrary to reality. Rs didn't go wrong except perhaps in again underestimating that cynicism and willingness of Dems to put partisanship and power above the country's interests.

"And now to the logic of extending these cuts....we've had these cuts for ten years and we are in the worst job market in a decades...but if we extend them...what?
Are we shooting for Depression era unemployment rates of 25%. Will the uber rich R's not quit until they bankrupt the country?"

Again, please demonstrate factually how reduced taxes have caused the worst job market in decades. Not with your usual post hoc facallacious nonsense but with specific facts and sound logic. And please explain how not allowing taxes to increase will cause 25% unemployment. If that were the case, your far-left party, which has political power unprecedented in recent decades, would surely have raised income tax rates already to save us.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

"the far right embraces victimhood and stokes fear."


Franklin Roosevelt once said that all we had to fear was fear itself. Today's American right daily shows why and how this is so.

Posted by: akaoddjob | August 24, 2010 10:01 AM | Report abuse

Greg,

Republicans say if they win in 2010, they'll immediately start running for 2012.

Not in so many words, but still . . .

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/244574/republican-if-we-win-10-well-start-running-12-daniel-foster

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 24, 2010 10:01 AM | Report abuse

It isn't like the Bush tax cuts were considered logical when they were passed. Quite a few people thought they were unwise unless they were paid for. For instance:

"The Republicans, Olympia J. Snowe of Maine and George V. Voinovich of Ohio, joined two Democrats, Max Baucus of Montana and John B. Breaux of Louisiana, to send a letter to their parties' Senate leaders stating that they were committed to vote against any tax cut beyond $350 billion unless it was offset by tax increases elsewhere or specific spending decreases."

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/14/us/gop-senators-oppose-size-of-bush-tax-cut.html

Or how about the Economists’ statement opposing the Bush tax cuts, which was a statement signed by roughly 450 economists, including ten of the twenty four American Nobel Prize Laureates alive at the time, in February 2003 who urged the U.S. President George W. Bush not to enact the 2003 tax cuts.

Here is the text of their statement:

"Economic growth, though positive, has not been sufficient to generate jobs and prevent unemployment from rising. In fact, there are now more than two million fewer private sector jobs than at the start of the current recession. Overcapacity, corporate scandals, and uncertainty have and will continue to weigh down the economy.

The tax cut plan proposed by President Bush is not the answer to these problems. Regardless of how one views the specifics of the Bush plan, there is wide agreement that its purpose is a permanent change in the tax structure and not the creation of jobs and growth in the near-term. The permanent dividend tax cut, in particular, is not credible as a short-term stimulus. As tax reform, the dividend tax cut is misdirected in that it targets individuals rather than corporations, is overly complex, and could be, but is not, part of a revenue-neutral tax reform effort.

Passing these tax cuts will worsen the long-term budget outlook, adding to the nation’s projected chronic deficits. This fiscal deterioration will reduce the capacity of the government to finance Social Security and Medicare benefits as well as investments in schools, health, infrastructure, and basic research. Moreover, the proposed tax cuts will generate further inequalities in after-tax income.

To be effective, a stimulus plan should rely on immediate but temporary spending and tax measures to expand demand, and it should also rely on immediate but temporary incentives for investment. Such a stimulus plan would spur growth and jobs in the short term without exacerbating the long-term budget outlook.

http://www.corporatetaxlawyer.net/do-you-agree-with-this-statement-about-the-bush-tax-cuts.php

Posted by: nisleib | August 24, 2010 10:14 AM | Report abuse

To listen to Eugene, you'd think that opposition to Cordoba House is the hobgoblin of a few small minds on the right. Racists, fascists, Islamophobes, neanderthals-- the whole Star Wars cantina of boogeymen and cranks stand opposed to innocent Imam Rauf. *sob*

Left out of this fairly naked effort to demonize the vast majority of Americans is the simple fact that Cordoba House support has tanked in the polls for weeks.

Large majorities of all New Yorkers, every party, region and age give a thumbs-down to the Cordoba House Mosque being built near the Ground Zero site.

Thus, Eugene's silly demonization campaign should be accepted for what it is-- delusional and disconnected.

Support the will of the people, Mayor Bloomberg.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 10:16 AM | Report abuse

@rukidding: "Were Republicans wrong to put an end date? Were the Senate rules re our growing deficit wrong to force such an end date. Where did the R's go wrong here?"

Was the carpenter wrong to use a hammer to nail one piece of wood to the other?

No. But, ten years have passed, the wood is a little warped and needs to be replaced (stretching my metaphor here, bear with me) and now it's time to nail a new piece of wood up (or we can use a deck screw, this time, make it more permanent), or forget the fence or deck or whatever it is this piece of wood is a part of entirely (at least, the part with this piece).

Okay, tortured analogy. Took it too far. It's not anybody's fault, and there's not anything to blame anybody for. They wanted tax cuts--this was the way they could get them. Having them back up for a vote after 10 years really isn't the worst thing in the world, anyway.

"Are we shooting for Depression era unemployment rates of 25%. Will the uber rich R's not quit until they bankrupt the country?"

This seems unlikely. While taxes are low, they aren't crazy low, and adjusted revenues are up (or were, until the recession, and even so are higher than most of American history) over almost any time previously in history. Maybe tax cuts are a bad thing, maybe we need a more progressive tax structure (slowly increasing the percentage paid in taxes until you reach $10 million in annual income, or $100 million in annual income), or what have you. Simply extending the tax cuts by themselves cannot rationally lead to unemployment rates of 25%. Indeed, layoffs included, we have higher levels of public sector employment than we did a decade ago. There are more people employed by federal and state and local governments, making a bit more money (inflation adjusted) than ten years ago (I'm fairly certain; I'm going by my memory, now, which is not always reliable, but I'm pretty sure I'm close). Private sector wages are depressed, and there are less people employed in the private sector, which may point to the inefficacy of tax cuts as a panacea for job creation, but seems to me that it's very hard to blame our current economic doldrums on the Bush tax cuts. Deregulation, maybe (but not nearly as fun, as Barney Frank and Chris Dodd and Robert Reich participated in our post-rational financial landscape with as much enthusiasm as any Republican). Business cycles? Certainly. Lack of mandated transparency and open exchanges in financial markets? Yeah, definitely some problems there. Even the increasing disparity between the super-rich and everybody else (including the plain vanilla rich) may be a contributor.

But tax cuts in and of themselves? Seems a tough argument to make. Certainly, nobody really thinks that households making less that $250k getting a tax break is bad for the economy?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 24, 2010 10:16 AM | Report abuse

@nisleib: " including ten of the twenty four American Nobel Prize Laureates alive at the time"

Doesn't that mean that 14 American Nobel Prize Laureates thus supported the Bush tax cuts? What was up with those guys?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 24, 2010 10:20 AM | Report abuse

"Liberals are guided by the wisdom, knowledge, and fidelity of John Stewart.
Sounds right."

Ha Ha. We'd certainly match John Stewart against Sarah Palin in any contest that involved wisdom, knowledge or fidelity.

The difference is we wouldn't support his nomination to be VP of our nation...because we are a little more serious than to name a vacuous hillbilly or an erudite, witty, talented comedian.

You must admit Q.B. Evil against stupid was hilarious. And when John Oliver (Team Stupid) pointed out that Gretchen (I'm a beauty queen and say exactly what they tell me to) Carlson didn't know the meaning of ignoramus...then googled it and still got it wrong....I'm still laughing my arse off. Gretchen Carlson is the stereotype of what broadcast journalists hate..a vacant minded bimbo who got her job because she was a beauty queen. Wait a minute...are we running into a pattern here...vacant minded beauty queens who rise to prominence on the right?

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 24, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Gosh, hundreds of died-in-the-wool Keynesian central planners were against tax reductions in 2003. I like how they were solely focused on the "short term." Too bad growth and jobs were actually taking off and made them look pretty silly.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 10:23 AM | Report abuse

I wouldn't waste my time watching John Stewart. No doubt he can be "hilarious." You jokers take him seriously, along with your other "erudite" guides to wisdom like Media Matters. As i said, seems right. Explains much.

Your whole party is run by vacuous bimbos.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Kevin - No, I doubt all 24 offered an opinion one way or the other. That you could get 10 to sign a letter is remarkable, but does NOT mean the other 14 were with Bush. Most likely the other 14 didn't want to get dragged into a political discussion. I doubt any of them were with Bush; these tax cuts were ill advised in the extreme.

But if you want to use the Google and prove me wrong, I say thank you. Please provide a link.

Posted by: nisleib | August 24, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Off most of the topics being discussed, but I've been reading about the judge's ruling on stem cell research. A TPM reader has a fairly hopeful take on it (hopeful if you're not happy about the ruling, that is):
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/08/one_law_profs_opinion.php#more

I'm afraid this might become another subject politicians will use to divide people. To quote an anonymous commenter at NY Mag: "The culture wars continue, even at the cellular level." Made me laugh, actually.

Posted by: carolanne528 | August 24, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Egg recall comes at time of industry consolidation

Safety inspections have fallen through the cracks as a shrinking number of companies produce most of the eggs found on grocery shelves.
........................

Another clear sign that America is being destroyed by the Billionaire Oligarchs.


Remember when poultry farmers used to admonish us all with:

"Never put all your eggs in one basket".

Now we are letting the money grubbing Oligarchs do just that.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 24, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse

All, check this out: Karen Hughes is now claiming she doesn't remember any of her work with Imam Rauf:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/08/karen_hughes_i_dont_remember_a.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | August 24, 2010 10:35 AM | Report abuse

Actually Q.B. can you at least allow us to speak for ourselves. We are not against tax cuts...targeted tax cuts to the middle class.

Since 1980 and the beginning of trickle down "voodoo" economics our middle class has been shrinking.

http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewarticle/articleid/4351022

"The problem with the United States economy is that the middle class is rapidly being eradicated. The number of haves are increasing while the number of have not's are decreasing. Middle class Americans are the backbones of the American economy and spend a greater share of their income on consumption. The middle class consumer is struggling for survival while the rich are getting even richer. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the U.S economy will never recover without the return of the middle class consumer."

And so by all means let listen to McConnell and Boner and give people making a million dollars a year more tax breaks...they really need it right? snark

Let's start from a point of agreement...BOTH Dems and R's are for extending tax cuts. BOTH parties want to cut taxes. The difference in their plans becomes starkly obvious when you view this graph Greg linked last week.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2010/08/11/GR2010081106717.html?referrer=emaillink

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 24, 2010 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Too bad growth and jobs were actually taking off and made them look pretty silly.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 10:23 AM
=======================

How about using some facts, for a change?

The Bush tax cuts are the biggest cause of the doubling of the national debt during his term. They led to an asset bubble and the worst job creation on record. We are still suffering from the effects of that busted bubble.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bush-on-jobs-the-worst-track-record-on-record/
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | August 24, 2010 10:36 AM | Report abuse

So, now the serial slander-vendors of Media Matters are attacking Pamela Geller?
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/mediamattersagendasandactivities.html

LMAO! You know you're winning the argument when they loose George Soros' trained media attack dogs.

Soros' attack dogs have the audacity to climb up on their hind legs and howl about (alleged) "distortions" of Imam Rauf, after these Leftist co-conspirators spent the last decade goose-stepping at kristallnaght-style gutter riots (masquerading as “peace” protests) in support of Islamo-supremacism?

Patriotic Americans are encouraged to Enter Soros' “Hall of Shame” and recall what Leftist-fascism looks like.
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

btw, when is billionaire progressive George Soros financing the unhinged Leftist rent-a-mob rally against ObaMao’s summary execution of three (un-Mirandized) Somali teens at sea? Afterall, that tactic was clearly more "fascist" than our patriotic moistening of KSM, et.al. The one year anniversary of ObaMao’s high seas shooting spree has already passed. Get busy, Leftists.

For those interested in a more scholarly discussion of this Leftist-Islamist nexus, read "Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left" @
http://www.amazon.com/Unholy-Alliance-Radical-Islam-American/dp/089526076X

Don't be apologists for Islamo-supremacism your whole lives, Quislings.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Old Geller is Bin Laden's biggest enabler.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 24, 2010 10:48 AM | Report abuse

"Large majorities of all New Yorkers, every party, region and age give a thumbs-down to the Cordoba House Mosque being built near the Ground Zero site."

Great...then with that logic we won't even have to argue about extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest because the public is against doing that by a 2-1 margin.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/08/19/rel11g.pdf

BTW...for those who took the time to look at that CNN poll were you not amazed that a healthy 18% were for letting the tax cuts expire for everyone.

Aside from the economic arguments about raising taxes in a recession...the fact that 18% of our public understands there is no free lunch is impressive to me.

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 24, 2010 10:51 AM | Report abuse

KaddafiDelendaEst - so you are back to cut and paste nonsensical rightwing talking points again? Who do you think you are convincing? Nobody here is dumb enough to fall for the poo you are selling.

And you want to call us all Quislings. Do you even know what that means?

Greg - Ban this offensive troll please.

Posted by: nisleib | August 24, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

The same large majority of Americans were also fully behind invading Iraq. Where are they now?

Posted by: Liam-still | August 24, 2010 10:56 AM | Report abuse

"How about using some facts, for a change?"

Yes, you should. A bunch of Keynesians said in 2003 that reduced tax rates did not and would not foster growth and employment. Their statement was rather unfortunately timed in correspondence to GDP and job growth. You haven't supplied any contrary facts. As with ruk, you need to make a factual case that reduced taxes caused the 2008 financial crisis and recession. Good luck.

"The Bush tax cuts are the biggest cause of the doubling of the national debt during his term. They led to an asset bubble and the worst job creation on record.

"The Bush tax cuts are the biggest cause of the doubling of the national debt during his term."

Your opinion. Not factual.

"They led to an asset bubble and the worst job creation on record. We are still suffering from the effects of that busted bubble."

Ditto. Prove that reduced taxes hurt job creation. Or caused the financial meltdown.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 10:57 AM | Report abuse

"Prove that reduced taxes hurt job creation."

Prove they created jobs. Job creation during GWB's tenure was dismal. Do you dispute that?

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 24, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

"And maybe it's time to stop giving this woman a platform?"
---------------------------------------------

Feel free to stop any time you like. I'm for it, of course.

Posted by: CalD | August 24, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

So bin Laden needs an enabler. If we just let the mosque be built, he will leave us alone.

I guess y'all will have to figure out how to solve the slight temporal problem with that argument.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 11:05 AM | Report abuse

So, if he will not leave us alone, regardless of if the Muslim Center opens, or not, then what is the point of all the protests against it.

You just said it will make no difference to the terrorists, who actually attacked us, so there goes your only excuse for trying to stop the Center from being opened.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 24, 2010 11:09 AM | Report abuse

QB - No, Bin Laden doesn't, "Need an enabler." Lord knows the GOP is providing all the enablers he needs. If anything Bin Laden is overflowing with rightwing enablers.

It is like Christmas time for Bin Laden, with rightwingers playing the part of Santa Clause. Is this all a part of the rightwings everlasting "War On Christmas?"

Posted by: nisleib | August 24, 2010 11:10 AM | Report abuse

[nisleib whined: "so you are back to cut and paste nonsensical rightwing talking points again?"]

Quislings for Islamo-supremacism have alot of nerve climbing up on their hind legs to howl about "talking points." The Quisling dipstick squads here have been cutting and pasting each others slanders since this story broke.

Slandering patriotic Americans as "bigots" (ad nauseum) is nothing new.

BORING!

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 11:11 AM | Report abuse

Bin Laden wants to ignite a Global Holy War.

So does Old Geller, Newt Gingrich, and Charles Krauthammer.

Bin Laden greatly appreciates they helping him to jump start his stalled hate mobile.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 24, 2010 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Don't engage QB.

He is up there among the worst trolls I've ever seen on the internet.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 11:14 AM | Report abuse

"Prove they created jobs. Job creation during GWB's tenure was dismal. Do you dispute that?"

You are just repeating the same non sequitur. GWB came into office while the economy was going into recession. He cut income taxes. The recession ended and growth and job growth resumed.

The 2008 financial meltdown and recession reversed much of that. Show us how the tax reductions caused that.

You might want to keep in mind that this is not even the standard liberal explanation. It is only an 'argument" of convenience.

I don't happen to believe that "tax cuts create jobs." I believe that investment and free enterprise create jobs, and lower taxes tend to encorouage investment and free enterprise, while higher taxes do the opposite.

If the entire post-Reagan era doesn't demonstrate this common sense truth to you, then you are beyond reason. And if even your own party didn't believe it, then they would have raised taxes back to pre-Reagan or pre-Kennedy rates and solved all our problems by now.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

"Quislings" is VERY OFFENSIVE.

It means "NAZI COLLABORATOR".

THIS IS OFFENSIVE AND VIOLATES THE WASHINGTON POST RULES AGAINST INAPPROPRIATE COMMENTS.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

"He is up there among the worst trolls I've ever seen on the internet."

A true compliment, coming from one of the most irrational, hateful, and deranged posters on the web -- a truly dangerous person.

How's the summer of recovery goin', Ethan?

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Bush Cut Taxes for the Super Rich, and ended up leaving office without having added a single net job, after eight years in charge. He also inherited an annual budget deficit from President Clinton, and turned that into a massive annual budget deficit.

That is all the evidence one needs to have, to know that tax cuts killed jobs, and added massive amounts to the national debt.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 24, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Actually Clinton created more jobs than Reagan and W Bush combined.

And Clinton increased taxes.

Posted by: nisleib | August 24, 2010 11:24 AM | Report abuse

"Quislings" is VERY OFFENSIVE.

It means "NAZI COLLABORATOR".

THIS IS OFFENSIVE AND VIOLATES THE WASHINGTON POST RULES AGAINST INAPPROPRIATE COMMENTS.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Thank you for demanding your own banning, Ethan:

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/uncategorized/dead-census-worker-battled-cancer-was-contemplating-new-career/

There is plenty more of that in the archives.

So, what are you going to do, Greg? Is Ethan banned by his own jugment?

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 11:27 AM | Report abuse

[ethan whined; "'Quislings' is VERY OFFENSIVE."]

*pffl* I'll make Quislings a deal. When the Quislings stop their orchestrated campaign of slandering patriotic Americans-- as racists, fascists, Islamophobes, xenophobes, neanderthals, bigots, etc., ad nauseum (the tired Star Wars cantina of boogeymen)-- then I'll stop reminding them that they are (in fact) behaving like Quislings for Islamo-supremacists.

Sauce for the goose...

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

"Bush Cut Taxes for the Super Rich, and ended up leaving office without having added a single net job, after eight years in charge. He also inherited an annual budget deficit from President Clinton, and turned that into a massive annual budget deficit."

Actually, Liam the Liar, both of the "facts" you claim to state here are false (assuming you intended "annual budget surplus"). What a surprise.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

I see that Pamela Geller is scheduled to travel to Europe, to address a gathering of Neo-Nazi organizations. Will she stop waxing under her nose, in order to present a proper face, to her Euro Nazi colleagues?

Posted by: Liam-still | August 24, 2010 11:35 AM | Report abuse

Kaddafi,

Why don't you use the term JUDENRAT?

Don't you think it makes it more clear to the readers that you are a bigot?

Your racist, bigoted TeaBagging friend Mark Williams seems to think so.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Tune Town Lawyer lives in a fantasy world, where he gets to believe that the facts that came out of the Bush Budget Office, and it's Treasury Dept. are not to be believed. They decided to make the results look worse than they really were, because that would make the Bush/Cheney reign of terror look much.....?

Tune Town Lawyer; What A Crackpot Ultra Maroon!

Posted by: Liam-still | August 24, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Ethan - Ignore that troll. He obviously has no idea what "Quisling" even means.

Every time he calls someone a quisling just click on the report abuse link and report him. Engaging him is feeding the troll. I know it is hard to let that kind of ignorance and stupidity go, but addressing it does no good.

Posted by: nisleib | August 24, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Link your proof, then, Liam the Liar. Or let your unsupported assertions stand on your on "authority."

LOL I normally don't even bother to read your trash any more, but it is funny seeing you tell these lies.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 11:48 AM | Report abuse

[Ethan2010 spat: "Why don't you use the term JUDENRAT?"]

Why? I suppose because that is the language of the Islamo-supremacists you defend-- not me.
http://www.adl.org/main_Arab_World/default.htm

Ethan has the audacity to climb up on his hind legs and howl about being characterized as as "Quisling" in support of Islamo-supremacism, after his Leftist co-conspirators spent the last decade goose-stepping at kristallnaght-style gutter riots (masquerading as “peace” protests) in support of Islamo-supremacism?

Patriotic Americans are encouraged to Enter Soros' “Hall of Shame” and recall the rancid anti-Semitism on parade among Ethan's Leftists.
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

Own it, Quisling.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

"Ethan | September 24, 2009 at 01:44 pm

Unfortunate, when the Republican Party no longer stands for terrorism and extremism THEN is when I will listen to the other side. The Republican Party is a terrorist party. Period. Racism and fear-mongering trump everything else in that pathetic excuse for a political movement. It is a social movement based on fear exactly like the Nazi movement. These idiot troll fools ARE the Nazi apologists who allowed Hitler to take power back in those days. That is what they have proven themselves to be today."

From the same thread, linked above, where Ethan also called us, inter alia, racists, terrorist sympathizers, and domestic terrorists. Oh, and pathetic worm, and told me to "f_ off."

Again, Greg, are you going to ban Ethan?

By his own declaration, he has serially posted very offensive personal attacks and thus violated the rules.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

[QB observed: "By his own declaration, [Ethan] has serially posted very offensive personal attacks and thus violated the rules."]

LMAO! Nice catch, QB.

Sauce for the goose, indeed!

Own your hate-mongering rhetoric, ethan.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Mark Williams is an "Islamo-supremacist"???

I thought he was your Tea Bagging hero!

---

In the blog entry, Williams wrote:

"Politically correct Judenrats like New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and (Manhattan Borough President) Scott Stringer and domestic enemies who are supporting the mosque [...] are doing nothing more than erecting a giant middle finger to be thrust at the victims of 911."

[...] Williams appended his posting to say that Judenrat "is a derogatory term for the Jews who collaborated with the Nazis. Judenrats were Jews who turned in people like Anne Frank."

"Bloomberg and Stringer are exactly that, selling out not just Jews but all Civilized Mankind [...]" Williams wrote.

---

There's your teabagging hero, numbnuts, using "the language of the Islamo-supremacist"!

Kaddafi = BigotryFAIL!

Nice try bigot.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

@nisleib: "I doubt any of them were with Bush; these tax cuts were ill advised in the extreme."

All of them? If so, why is there generally unanimity on extending the Bush tax cuts, except for the very rich? And even there, several Democrats are on board?

And, yes, I expect most the Nobel Laureates were opposed to any kind of tax cuts. Smart people generally feel that smart people know better how money ought to be spent than the great unwashed. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 24, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Toon Town Lawyer still believes that George W. Bush left Office, with the nation enjoying full employment, the unemployment offices were all being phased out, for lack of claimants, and the national debt was being paid down.

He also believes that bleeding, is the best treatment for patients, and when they grow weak and anemic, and unable to work, that means that they require further bleeding treatments.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 24, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

"LMAO! Nice catch, QB."

Any time. Ethan and I go way back. Been called more names by him and his fellow travellers than I can remember.

Pathetic worm was at least off the beaten path. But liberals' hurling of Nazi, fascist, racist, terrorist, etc., is ho hum de riguer here, and Ethan has always been a zealous player.

Well, I shouldn't say always. Now and again he tries to reform but always reverts sooner or later. Usually because he can't follow an argument.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

@nisleib: "Actually Clinton created more jobs than Reagan and W Bush combined."

Actually, presidents don't create jobs. That's various businesses (many of them small businesses), and the clients of contractors, and so on that create jobs. Presidents stand up at the podium, try to speak nice, and take the credit. ;)

While policies may effect job creation, policies are crafted with input and compromise, usually across party lines (to varying degrees), and the effects may linger. So Reagan-Bush policies may have had an effect on job creation during the Clinton years. Clinton policies may be having an effect during the Obama years. And, thanks to the butterfly effect, Obama's policies may--in some mystical way--reach back in time and effect FDRs "New Deal" policies. That last part is a stretch, I admit, but you never know. :)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 24, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

[Ethan spat: "Nice try bigot."]

Ethan is clearly too stupid to comprehend Williams' parody. Williams regularly co-opts the language of the Islamo-supremacists (illustrating absurdity by being absurd). He also famously used the slurs "apes" and "pigs" to illustrate the absurdity of Leftists defending anti-Semitic Islamo-supremacists. Those unfamiliar with the Quran recognize these parodies as intentional.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Articles/Quran_Hate.htm

But Ethan is a near perfect specimen of the Quisling whiner.

Guess what? Nobody cares about your whining bedwetting problem. But thanks for illustrating (once again) the Quislings' raw hatred for those of us who stand up to Islamo-supremacists.

Patriotic Americans are encouraged to Enter the “Quisling Hall of Shame” and recall what Quisling-fascism looks like.
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

Own it, Quisling.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse

I do like how this Toon Town Lawyer character keeps on responding to comments of mine, and posting extracts from them, while at the same time saying that he does not bother to read what I post.

What An Ultra Maroon!

Posted by: Liam-still | August 24, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Kevin, you are making a lot of sense. Well said.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

re: "Christmas for Bin Laden" - "Ban this person who called someone a Nazi!" etc.

Now, this is just my opinion, but I'm thinking that engaging in peepee contests about which party does the most to support Old Boogeyman Bin Laden or (good grief) who calls who a Nazi more often is, um, a waste of valuable time that could be better spent trying to guess exactly what shade the wall of your cubicle is.

Mine's darker than "bone", I'm almost positive. And bluer than "biscuit". I2% gray, maybe?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 24, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Examine the Quislings’ “demonization” charges in light of these sentiments;

“Muslims are the vilest of animals…”
“Show mercy to one another, but be ruthless to Muslims”
“How perverse are Muslims!”
“Strike off the heads of Muslims, as well as their fingertips”
“Fight those Muslims who are near to you”
“Muslim mischief makers should be murdered or crucified”

Hate speech? Incitement to violence? Sounds like it to me; but a knowledgeable Muslim would have to disagree.

Why would Cordoba House Muslims NOT consider this to be hate speech? How is it that I can post these quotes with full certainty that Imam Rauf won’t be contacting WaPo Editors (or Congress) with wild-eyed accusations of Islamophobia?
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Articles/Quran_Hate.htm

Don’t be apologists for Islamo-supremacism, Quislings.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

So is Michael Bloomberg a Quisling or a Judenrat?

Just trying to get a feel for your brand of bigotry.

That way I can compare your bigotry to that of your hero, the racist and bigoted Tea Party leader Mark Williams, who thinks that Michael Bloomberg is a Nazi collaborator.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 12:23 PM | Report abuse

@quarterback1: "Kevin, you are making a lot of sense. Well said."

Thanks, QB. Now, let's stop arguing about who called who a Nazi first, and . . . group hug!

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 24, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

"a waste of valuable time that could be better spent trying to guess exactly what shade the wall of your cubicle is."

A reasonable opinion. But this Ethan fellow has a history too malign to let this sort of gross contradiction go unpressed.

I don't normally agitate to ban anyone. In fact, I quasi-self-banned after Greg hypocritically banned Bilgeman some months ago. But I want to see an answer from Greg on this one.

Ethan has categorically demanded banning for the offense of calling someone a Quisling or Nazi collaborator, when he incontrovertibly has done the same or worse himself. He is just unlucky that I happened by at the wrong time to see his hypocricritical demand, and I well recall his history of abuse.

I want Greg's answer to whether Ethan is banned per his own edict that calling anyone a Nazi collaborator requires it.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Being called a Quisling by Hate Mongers is something I wear as a badge of honor.


Posted by: Liam-still | August 24, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse

"Don’t be apologists for Islamo-supremacism, Quislings."

Ugh. Tell me, KaddafiDelendaEst, what radical Islamic sect hired you to try and make critics of radical Islam look like irrational fruitcakes?

Because I'm not unsympathetic to the folks who are worried about radical Islam's more imperialistic tendencies, but you really come off as someone who wants to start fights and offend people, as opposed to someone who might actually want to win hearts and minds. If your positions regarding Islam are correct (and you believe them to be), then your ongoing effort to offend skeptics are counter-productive. You embrace a stereotype of bigoted Islamophobia that makes it easy for everybody isn't already part of your Super-Secret-He-Man-Dhimmi-Haters-Club to dismiss you. Which they clearly are.

Just sayin'.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 24, 2010 12:32 PM | Report abuse

The Pelosi-Obama-Reid (POR) economy kicked in during the latter part of June 2007, when its Congressional architects — Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, and Harry Reid — decided that starving the economy of energy by refusing to allow more offshore drilling in the face of $4 gas prices was a winning political position.

Pelosi claimed that because we couldn’t totally “drill our way out of this,” we shouldn’t increase drilling at all. Reid put an exclamation point on Pelosi’s stubbornness by insisting that fossil fuels are “making us sick.” Well, they only thing sickened by their policies was the US Economy.

FDR tried massive public works stimulus during the Depression. All he did is prolong it for seven years. Japan tried government stimulus for 10 years running in the 1990s. It only resulted in “the lost decade.”

What Pelosi, Obama, and Reid should do is expand the tax cut element of the stimulus plan to include all incomes, ditch almost all of the alleged “investments” in "green" pork, open up oil and gas exploration, and, eventually, watch the royalty money pour in.

I know; that’s way too much to “hope” from the POR triumverate.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 12:32 PM | Report abuse

"Group hug"?

Haha! It's QB we're talking about here, Kevin. You may as well be speaking Arabic.

I appreciate the effort, Kevin, but QB represents the Right's pure blind hatred of President Obama and all things Democratic.

We've had our differences, Kevin, but compared to QB you are a bright, positive ray of sunlight.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Kevin says, "And, yes, I expect most the Nobel Laureates were opposed to any kind of tax cuts. Smart people generally feel that smart people know better how money ought to be spent than the great unwashed."

Actually, if you read their statement, they weren't opposed to any kind of tax cuts; they were opposed to the kind of tax cuts Bush was pushing. And generally speaking I'd prefer it if smart people were in charge of this country. Aren't you?

And your point on Presidents not creating jobs is true, but if you scan up in the thread you'll see why I posted that comment.

PS - H.W. Bush's (underrated President IMO) tax increases did help Clinton balance the budget and get this country on the right track. And one of the reasons the economy cratered and the national debt ballooned under W Bush is that the Republicans allowed PAYGO to go away in 2002.

Posted by: nisleib | August 24, 2010 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Kaddafi,

You ducked my question:

Is Michael Bloomberg a Quisling or a Judenrat?

I just want to compare your brand of bigotry to that of your racist bigot hero, Mark Williams.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

@qb: "Ethan has categorically demanded banning for the offense of calling someone a Quisling or Nazi collaborator, when he incontrovertibly has done the same or worse himself. He is just unlucky that I happened by at the wrong time to see his hypocricritical demand, and I well recall his history of abuse."

Well, if that's where you want to draw your line in the sand. I just think such things harden opinions (and hearts--I'm very new-agey today). It ends up being pure self-indulgence, because it doesn't convince anybody else of anything. Ergo, the folks you are arguing about will _never_ get your point, such as it is.

Just sayin'. Up to you how you want to spend your time. Clearly, I want to spend mine playing "uninvited referee". ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 24, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Cut Taxes, that will create jobs, and balance the budget.

Bleed the patient.


What! You say the Tax Cuts did not create jobs, and balance the budget.

Cut those Taxes again. Let us keep on doing the same thing, and expecting different results.

What! You say bleeding has not cure the patient, and he now appears weaker and unable to work.

Bleed him some more. Let us keep on doing the same thing, and expecting different results.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 24, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

"I appreciate the effort, Kevin, but QB represents the Right's pure blind hatred of President Obama and all things Democratic."


-- where "the Right's pure blind hatred . . ." = principled conservative who refuses to submit to deranged attacks or let left-wing lies and distortions go unchallenged.

Keep scrambling, Ethan. You are hoist by your own petard, and don't think we haven't noticed your lack of effort to respond.

After all, what can you possibly say in the face of your gross self-condemnation? Too late to untype your words now. Why aren't you doing the honorable thing and self-reporting to Greg for banning?

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

@nisleib: "And generally speaking I'd prefer it if smart people were in charge of this country."

Well, yes, in the abstract. Although I've noticed that people who have high opinions of their own intelligences often lack a certain humility that might be nice when making decisions that impact hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people. And I mean that in a strictly non-partisan sense.

"they weren't opposed to any kind of tax cuts; they were opposed to the kind of tax cuts Bush was pushing"

Well, that's good. I'm all for tax cuts. Doesn't have to the Bush-style tax cuts. I think some radical middle-class tax cutting might be a good strategy, myself.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 24, 2010 12:46 PM | Report abuse

"Just sayin'. Up to you how you want to spend your time. Clearly, I want to spend mine playing "uninvited referee". ;)"

I understand, and I don't expect too many bystanders to get it. Ethan, however, has a long and vicious history, through which I never demanded his banning. All I want here is Greg's answer whether he will ban him, because Ethan himself has declared a standard that requires it.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

"Just sayin'. Up to you how you want to spend your time. Clearly, I want to spend mine playing "uninvited referee". ;)"

I understand, and I don't expect too many bystanders to get it. Ethan, however, has a long and vicious history, through which I never demanded his banning. All I want here is Greg's answer whether he will ban him, because Ethan himself has declared a standard that requires it.

Posted by: quarterback1 | August 24, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Kevin, this is the kind of cr@p we've had to put up with on this blog just because we are Democrats and approve of Obama (most or some of the time).

It is truly disgusting hatred and is often based on outright bigotry and prejudice. But what makes it worse is the fact that, as you've found out, it is totally senseless and irrational.

That people like QB come on here to do what he does at a time when we need to be coming together to solve our country's problems is what leads people like me to believe that the GOP is less interested in what's right and good for America than what is good for the Republican Party and their benefactors.

Frankly, to me, it could not be more obvious that the "base" Republican voter is only interested in the Republican Party's electoral chances, and not in moving the country forward in the best way possible.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 12:54 PM | Report abuse

[Ethan2010: "Is Michael Bloomberg a Quisling or a Judenrat?"]

Decide for yourself. In my book, Bloomberg is a willing collaborationist (Quisling) with the Islamo-supremacists. Williams believes he's already a hostage council member (Judenrat). What's your point? Are readers supposed to be shocked by any of this language after the Left spent the past decade wallowing in their anti-Semitic protest gutter?

But don't dodge my questions, Ethan.

“Muslims are the vilest of animals…”
“Show mercy to one another, but be ruthless to Muslims”
“How perverse are Muslims!”
“Strike off the heads of Muslims, as well as their fingertips”
“Fight those Muslims who are near to you”
“Muslim mischief makers should be murdered or crucified”

Hate speech? Incitement to violence? Sounds like it to me; but a knowledgeable Muslim would have to disagree.

Why would Cordoba House Muslims NOT consider this to be hate speech? How is it that I can post these quotes with full certainty that Imam Rauf won’t be contacting WaPo Editors (or Congress) with wild-eyed accusations of Islamophobia?
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Articles/Quran_Hate.htm

Don’t be an apologist for Islamo-supremacism you whole life, Quisling.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Kevin - I'd say a lack of humility is pretty common for anyone who gets to be a high up muckity-muck in the government. I think the same thing applies to executives at large corporations. I don't think intelligence has all that much to do with ones lack of humility.

And I'm not opposed to tax cuts; I just don't think the answer to any question should be, "Give it a tax cut."

If you believe in supply side/voodoo economics, (I, obviously, don't,) then you believe in the Laffer Curve. But the Laffer Curve is A CURVE. Does it postulate that taxes can be too high? Sure. Does it postulate, also, that taxes can be too LOW? Of course it does. So how come all these supply siders are always wanting to cut taxes? Our taxes are at the lowest point in 50 years and we are engaged in two (one now?) wars, how does cutting taxes make any sense?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve

Posted by: nisleib | August 24, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Edit - that was supposed to read, "I just don't think the answer to ALL questions..."

Posted by: nisleib | August 24, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

"Bloomberg is a willing collaborationist (Quisling) with the Islamo-supremacists. Williams believes he's already a hostage council member (Judenrat). What's your point?"

My point is that they are both references to the Nazis.

And you are making that comment of someone who is Jewish.

If you don't see something wrong with that, that's on you. But don't be "surprised" when people call you a bigot or hatemonger, because there is literally no other explanation for the comments you make.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

@nisleib: "And I'm not opposed to tax cuts; I just don't think the answer to any question should be, 'Give it a tax cut.'"

No, but it is sometimes the answer.

"Our taxes are at the lowest point in 50 years and we are engaged in two (one now?) wars, how does cutting taxes make any sense?"

Well, there's a few things at issue. One of which is stop engaging in expensive wars (I like to think of Obama in the Oval office late at night, remotely flying a drone over another terrorist camp, then pressing the "boom" button and saying to himself, "Just saved the American military another million dollars. You're welcome, America). Another of which is not about cutting taxes, but preserving existing tax cuts--for everybody, or at least for folks making under $250k.

Then there's another option, which is kind of a demand-side, rather than supply-side option--cut taxes on folks making under $250k or $200k or $250k to next-to-nothing, and see if that sort of demand side stimulus has an effect. Certainly, if you can cogently argue that the problem with the original stimulus was that it was too low, and did not spend enough money, then you can argue that the tax cuts on the middle-class have been too small, and need to be much larger for there to be a significant increase in stimulative demand side spending.

BTW, dismissing the Laffer curve is liking dismissing the 2nd law of thermodynamics. The Laffer curve doesn't dictate tax policy, it doesn't say tax cuts for the rich create jobs, it says there are two rates at which tax revenues will become statistically zero: 0% and 100%, and that the optimum place for economic growth, tax revenues, and tax payment (compliance being a big part of tax revenues) will be somewhere between those two points. Which is hard to deny.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 24, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

[Ethan2010: "My point is that they are both references to the Nazis."]

WRONG! Quisling refers to a Norwegian collaborator. Judenrat refers to Jewish councils who were hostages to the Nazis.

Ethan's PC conflations would forbid Leftists tortured hate speech over patriotic moistening of KSM, since their shrieks of "torture" (ad nauseum) are also veiled Nazi references.

Conversely, Leftist Quislings had no problem at all equating Bush and Israel with the Nazis.

Hypocrisy on stilts! But don't dodge my questions, Ethan.

“Muslims are the vilest of animals…”
“Show mercy to one another, but be ruthless to Muslims”
“How perverse are Muslims!”
“Strike off the heads of Muslims, as well as their fingertips”
“Fight those Muslims who are near to you”
“Muslim mischief makers should be murdered or crucified”

Hate speech? Incitement to violence? Sounds like it to me; but a knowledgeable Muslim would have to disagree.

Why would Cordoba House Muslims NOT consider this to be hate speech? How is it that I can post these quotes with full certainty that Imam Rauf won’t be contacting WaPo Editors (or Congress) with wild-eyed accusations of Islamophobia?
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Articles/Quran_Hate.htm

Don’t be an apologist for Islamo-supremacism you whole life, Quisling.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

"Certainly, if you can cogently argue that the problem with the original stimulus was that it was too low, and did not spend enough money, then you can argue that the tax cuts on the middle-class have been too small, and need to be much larger for there to be a significant increase in stimulative demand side spending"

You can argue that, but there are plenty of ways for government to allocate money to benefit the economy.

Income tax cuts is one way.

Investment into infrastructure is another.

Investment into education, community colleges, job training programs is another.

Targeted small business/homeowner tax credits and breaks is another.

The argument that says that there are only two options -- income tax cuts and stimulus spending -- is simply inaccurate.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

"Quisling refers to a Norwegian collaborator"

Who did he collaborate with?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Kevin - I didn't dismiss the laffer curve, I dismissed supply side economics. Why? Because the people who belive in supply side economics are ALWAYS asking for tax cuts, and mostly for the rich. And since supply side economics relies heavily on the laffer curve you would think that some of these supply siders would admit that taxes can be too low. But that never happens.

As to the tax cuts for those making under 250K I'd say okay, but it has been shown that direct spending (infrastructure) is far more stimulative than tax cuts.

Posted by: nisleib | August 24, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Who did he collaborate with? ... THE NAZIS!

Why can't you bring yourself to say it, Kaddafi?

Could it be because you know that openly offending Jewish people makes you look like the bigot you actually are?

Take your hate and bigotry somewhere else, scum.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

ns-leib, what support can you offer for your contention that "taxes are at the lowest point in 50 years..."

As for the urge to cut taxes I can offer a couple of responses:

(1) Many in America believe that the government can be kept small by starving it. Obama& Co proved this wrong via massive deficit spending.
(2) Many in America believe that wealth properly belongs to the people who created it. This is in stark contrast to the liberal point of view which is that everything belongs to the government and it only kindness that let's people keep some of what the "earned".
(3) Many in America equate low taxes with freedom.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | August 24, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

[Quisling whined: "Who did [Quisling] collaborate with?"]

The real Norwegian Quisling collaborated with the fascists Axis powers during WWII.

Today's Quislings collaborate with the Islamo-supremacists of Cordoba House.

The analogy holds. If Ethan is offended by the analogy with a Norwegian fascist-collaborator, then stop defending the sharia law Islamo-supremacists of Cordoba House, Quisling.

Now take your serial slanders of patriotic Americans back to yoiur anti-Semitic gutter riots (masquerading as "peace" protest) in support of Islamo-supremacism.
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

Own it, Quisling.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

@nisleib: "As to the tax cuts for those making under 250K I'd say okay, but it has been shown that direct spending (infrastructure) is far more stimulative than tax cuts."

Then it's neither supply side or demand side, it's government spending on infrastructure that is stimulative? It's infrastructure-side economics!

BTW, I think real infrastructure investments are stimulative, but I think the full stimulus is slow--there's no doubt our Interstate system paid for itself in economic development over the years, as did rural electrification, etc., just not right away.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 24, 2010 2:09 PM | Report abuse

[ethan spat; "Take your hate and bigotry somewhere else, scum."]

*pffl* My deal still stands. When the Quislings stop their orchestrated campaign of slandering patriotic Americans-- as racists, fascists, Islamophobes, xenophobes, neanderthals, bigots, etc., ad nauseum (their tired Star Wars cantina of boogeymen)-- then I'll stop reminding them that they are (in fact) behaving like Quisling collaborators with Islamo-supremacists.

Sauce for the goose...

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 2:34 PM | Report abuse

"there's no doubt our Interstate system paid for itself in economic development over the years, as did rural electrification, etc., just not right away."

That's why, if you believe in good governance, you do these things intermittently as funding permits.

You do NOT allow infrastructure to fall into disrepair -- like Bush did -- so any infrastructure spending can be seen as an economic stimulus.

If we had spent money upgrading our country's pathetic infrastructure INSTEAD OF giving tax breaks for every housing developer under the sun (Florida, Nevada come to mind) we probably wouldn't have had a housing bubble burst and we would have NEVER HAD A RECESSION.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

"The real Norwegian Quisling collaborated with the fascists Axis powers during WWII."

WRONG.

wikipedia:

"The term was coined by the British newspaper The Times [...] after the Norwegian Vidkun Quisling, who assisted Nazi Germany after it conquered his own country so that he could rule the collaborationist Norwegian government himself."

Bigot, the term "Quisling" is a direct reference to a man who collaborated with *THE NAZIS*.

Why don't you just come out and say it? Why the cowardly dance? FACT: "Quisling" is a reference to someone who was a NAZI COLLABORATOR.

And it is wildly, stunningly offensive to call a Jewish person a Nazi.

Only the most weak-minded, cowardly, irrational bigot would resort to such offensive tactics as to call a Jewish person a Nazi collaborator. And that is exactly what you have done. You are disgusting, offensive, and a bigot.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Skip - Below is a link showing that taxes are at there lowest point in 50 years:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2010-05-10-taxes_N.htm

And Starve the Beast has never worked. The Republicans are no more willing to cut spending than Democrats. And don't try blaming the Bush years on the Democrats, that is just silly.

You say, "This is in stark contrast to the liberal point of view which is that everything belongs to the government and it only kindness that let's people keep some of what the "earned"." That is a straw man. I'm a liberal, I don't believe that. Many of my friends and family are liberal, none of them believe that. In fact I don't know any liberals that do.

The difference is Republicans seem to think that infrastructure such as highways and wars and a whole host of things are free, and that they don't need to be paid for. Or that, amazingly enough, we can pay for them by giving Paris Hilton a tax cut. They say they don't need the government yet they say it while driving on federal highways and flying in planes that don't collide in mid-air because of the government. Or maybe they do realize these things cost money, but are just too greedy to want to pay for it.

Posted by: nisleib | August 24, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

If Ethan doesn't want to be called out as a collaborator with fascists, then Ethan should avoid collaborating with fascists. That might take some of the sting away-- but I expect the shame will always follow you.

I’d also like to point out how bigotted, ignorant and intolerant it is of Quislings (in both parties) to embrace Islamo-supremacists who faithfully obey Islam by observing “honor killing” fatwas.

By what authority do Quislings applaud sharia law vendors who excommunicate (takfir) secular Muslims opposed to “honor killings”?-- practices which are (of course) endorsed by the Corboba House sharia law advocates?

Correct me if I'm wrong but have Cordoba House’s handlers in the Apartheid Kingdom of Saudi Arabia or the Muslim Brotherhood approved any anti-sharia "honor" fatwas?

Don’t take my word for it: “Honor Killing” is absolutely Islamic.
http://www.islam-watch.org/SyedKamranMirza/honor_killing.htm

Own it, Quislings for fascists.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

[Ethan whined: "Only the most weak-minded, cowardly, irrational bigot would resort to such offensive tactics as to call a Jewish person a Nazi collaborator."]

Again, your serial slanders of patriotic Americans are better directed at the rabid anti-Semitic gutter rioters (masquerading as "peace" protesters) in your own camp.
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

Hypocrisy on stilts!

Own it, Quisling.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 3:15 PM | Report abuse

"If Ethan doesn't want to be called out as a collaborator with fascists, then Ethan should avoid collaborating with fascists."

Honestly, you need a psychiatric exam.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 24, 2010 3:55 PM | Report abuse

sure tax the business owners more, cant get much worse then it is now right i can expect to pay more for food, gas, clothing, wile at the same time plan on not getting a raise in pay, maybe my employer will lay me off or close the doors for good. good luck hope you survive

Posted by: getsix1 | August 24, 2010 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Ethan - Now do you see the wisdom behind "Don't feed the trolls?"

I know it is hard to sit by while some know-nothing wingnut slanders you and everyone like you, but he isn't damaging you. He is damaging himself. Nobody who reads his drivel will be inclined to think positively upon his positions or him. With people like him your best bet is to just stand aside and watch as they rhetorically hang themselves.

Posted by: nisleib | August 24, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

[ethan whined: "you need a psychiatric exam."]

Physician, heal thyself.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Why does Ethan continue to dodge my questions?

“Muslims are the vilest of animals…”
“Show mercy to one another, but be ruthless to Muslims”
“How perverse are Muslims!”
“Strike off the heads of Muslims, as well as their fingertips”
“Fight those Muslims who are near to you”
“Muslim mischief makers should be murdered or crucified”

Hate speech? Incitement to violence? Sounds like it to me; but a knowledgeable Muslim would have to disagree.

Why would Cordoba House Muslims NOT consider this to be hate speech? How is it that I can post these quotes with full certainty that Imam Rauf won’t be contacting WaPo Editors (or Congress) with wild-eyed accusations of Islamophobia?
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Articles/Quran_Hate.htm

Don’t be an apologist for Islamo-supremacism you whole life, Quisling.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 24, 2010 4:31 PM | Report abuse

so is this where all the cool people hang out?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 24, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Boehner is a total tool and even in the unlikely event that the Republicans take the House, his colleages would throw him under the bus faster than he can whine, 'hell no!" Cantor would trample over Boehner's limp body to be leader and he's not the only one champing at the bit. If Boehner, and his lack of intellect were ever in charge of a majority, it would be the end of the Republicans.

Posted by: wd1214 | August 24, 2010 10:41 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company