David Corn

Good post!

It doesn't take much to predict everything blowing up in the republicans faces - the only real question is . . . .

Will the D's take advantage on the issue.

Maybe it depends on what Bush says?

Thanks

Repugnant masquerading as "Liberitarian" aka Neil Boortz like to use the spectre of the ATM to promote (scare people toward) their "Fair Tax" plan.

I haven't done a whole lot of research into how such a plan can be used to fund the "necessities" of government, but it seems not a bad plan on the surface.

Obviously "the basic necessities" of life (food, clothing, housing, healthcare, educational fees and supplies and BEER) should not be taxed, but then should the gasoline one uses to get to work (a necessity, in my opinion) not also be exempt?

I'm hoping someone can better explain this "Fair Tax" plan to me. I've tried to listen to Boortz, but he turns me off with his consistently abrasive treatment of callers and guests. I guess he just has to follow the formula of Limpballs, SHaun hannITY and the rest if he's gonna garner listeners.

-T

"Will the D's take advantage on the issue"
You are funny, Capt! When have the Dems ever taken advantage of an issue that could massively sway the public in their favor? If they just spoke out to the public with the truth about matters and voted accordingly they could lock in support for the next generation. They are like the automakers who won't sacrifice a little profit now even if the investment would bring them greater profits in the future. The Dems are more concerned with immediate reelection so they get too scared to ever rock the boat even if it could benefit the party and country later.

"Some Say" the AMT is a ticking time-bomb...

The thing about analysis of politics and that it trivializes the underlying issue, fair taxation. If you wrote a column that talked about the Dem's chances of getting this self-funded tax bill through, then the politics would relate more directly to the policy.

--------------------
Executive Excess on Capitol Hill
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20071126/cray_hayes

All this back and forth would be more understandable if the bill itself were controversial, but on the merits and on the politics, it's a no-brainer. On Wednesday the Washington Post did an excellent job of unraveling why such a red-meat issue for Democrats has lost steam in the Senate, focusing especially on Schumer, the Senate Democrats' chief fundraiser, who, the Post reported, switched his position not long after James Simons, a hedge fund manager who earned $1.7 billion last year (you read that right), donated $28,500 to the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee, which Schumer chairs.

And of course the New York senator also represents Wall Street, which these days is chock-full of fiscal conservatives and cultural liberals who are leaning more Democratic than Republican. Hedge funds and investment firms, the Post reports, more than doubled their giving from 2006 to 2007, handing nearly $12 million so far to campaigns, parties and PACs--a stunning 83 percent of which has gone to Democrats. And the majority of staff working for the new industry trade association--the Private Equity Council--are former Democratic Hill staffers. "If you're a Democrat and you have to choose between the alternative minimum tax and the hedge fund industry, that's one tough ideological choice," Viva Hammer, a former Treasury Department staffer, told the Post. "It's a choice between your votes and your wallet."
--------------------
It goes on to talk about John Kerry as well.

Hedge funds would hedge their bets, no?

If you manage a hedge fund would that make you an economic garden keeper?

The AMT has become an ATM for the government, affecting more people than had ever possibly been conceived initially. No one understands it, and everyone, including a lot of CPA's and attorneys I know, is shocked when it hits them. Its complexities probably account for 80% of TurboTax' sales.

The Democrats run a very grave risk in the tax arena, the same as with immigration reform. Charley Rangel's tax reform must be tax-neutral, or the Repulicans will hang it around the heads of every Democrat next November.

Similarly, Democrats must run like scalded dogs from any proposed immigration reform that confers instant legitimacy (e.g., drivers licenses) on alien workers. Poor Governor Spitzer has gone from the penthouse to the outhouse in a nanosecond, and the concept has absolutely roiled the Clinton campaign.

There are similar hot buttons for the Republicans, but the discussion of those is to be saved for another thread.

A hedge fund manager that gives a huge unearned salary to themselves is a "Hedge Hog?"

HA!

Whereas Senator Dianne Feinstein voted to support the nomination of Judge Michael Mukasey as United States Attorney General, thereby elevating to the highest position in law enforcement a man who refused to renounce the right of the President to resort to torture and who refused to recognize waterboarding as a form of torture, and by this action Senator Feinstein failed to oppose President Bush and failed to stand for the ideals of the Democratic Party, which abhors torture and stands firmly against its use by the United States at all times and places; and
Whereas Senator Feinstein voted to confirm Judge Leslie Southwick for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit despite his clear record of racism and gender discrimination, thus failing to stand firmly with the Democratic Party, which supports gender equality and opposes racism in any of its manifestations; and

Whereas these examples are far from the only instances where Senator Feinstein, after seeking and securing the support and endorsement of the California Democratic Party, has failed to support the policies and principles of our party

Therefore be it resolved that the California Democratic Party expresses its disappointment at, and censure of, Senator Feinstein for ignoring Democratic principles and falling so far below the standard of what we expect of our elected officials.

*****

Here here and ABOUT TIME.

"Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation. "

~ Henry Kissinger (1923 - )

Here is a little prediction. It is not likely to be more accurate than any other but:

The D’s demand Bush brings down the number of troops. Bush will not do that because of a demand but he will do it because the surge has worked so well.

Then (as always) about the time the troops are scheduled to cycle out there will be some escalation of violence so since the last surge went so well we will need to send another surge.

The total number of troops will ebb and flow up and down with no end in sight.

We are winning, we are turning the corner, just a few more troops and we have them beat, the bad guys are on the run, we have to hit them while they are down, just a little bit more, we almost have them, we have to stay to preserve our glorious victories, we have to stay to make sure those that died did so for a grand cause, leaving is surrender, we are too close to the ultimate goal, if we leave now everything we have done is for nothing, and on and on.

They drag on the inevitable.

Nobody, no world power, no military can ever win an occupation. When the occupier leaves the insurgents will always claim victory over the occupier. We have to accept that and move on. Bush screwed the pooch and is just playing out the clock with the lives of our troops and the taxes the next generation will pay.

Bush vetoed another bill today saying the democrats are spending too much? In nearly the same breath he wants $200 billion more to postpone facing his failure.

His precious ego is not worth one red cent let alone the thousands of troops and hundreds of thousands of innocent lives lost.