-
chef commented on the blog post Obama Nominating Major Campaign Contributor Penny Pritzker For Commerce Secretary
“Clearly the 1% need more of a voice in government”
HAHAHA! Great statement. Hilarious.
-
chef commented on the diary post Congratulations On Your Pay Cut! Or–Happy New Year SUCKAS, from Congress. by Cindi Burkey.
That’s right, I agree with most posts here in that I won’t complain about the end of the payroll tax cut. That was enacted two years ago by Obama, and it begins the process to defund Social Security. The 30% (correct?) contribution to ss that was lost to ss was then made up by the [...]
-
chef commented on the blog post Americans Overwhelmingly Oppose Obama Plan to Cut Social Security
I have a feeling the huge opposition by Moveon.com etc. (a surreptitious propaganda arm for the 1%) to the cuts to social security could be a ruse to extend the George Bush tax cuts for the top tax brackets.
Basically, I think they are going to extend the Bush tax cuts–which is a reduction of progressive taxation on the top income brackets–by taking social security as hostage.
Bush cut the top tax rate from 47% to 35% in 2000s. Now, they are saying, if you want to preserve your social security, you have to make permanent those Bush tax cuts. Does that sound like a good compromise to you?
All the fuss that has been created over the ss cuts tells me that ss is currently in the process of being taken as hostage in order to extend the Bush tax cuts for those earning over $1 million.
Make no mistake, the most important item here that matters to the top income earners is the steep Bush cuts to their income tax RATE, from 47% top 35%. That is a structural change, that I suspect Obama and Boehner want to preserve above everything else.
So Obama is now going to say–”since you are so opposed to cuts to ss, I am going to preserve ss for you, but in return, we will have to extend the Bush tax cuts for the top 1% (along with everyone else).”
I predict: that Boehner and Obama have an understanding, and that the following will be the “final” agreement:
1.) Extend the Bush tax cuts for those earning more than $1 million–the key and central goal of both Boehner and Obama, for that preserves the deepest, structural, curtailment of the previously progressive tax code in favor of the top 1%.
2.) Eliminate various “loopholes” and deductions on the top income earners, and call that the tax increase on the rich that will raise revenue.
3.) Not cut social security and say that we will have to extend the Bush tax cuts on the top 1% in return for preserving ss.For a moment, I gave Obama the benefit of the doubt when he said he would veto any extension of the Bush tax cuts for the top 1%. But if 1,2 and 3 are correct, if my layman’s predictions above are correct, then Obama is, as we have suspected all along, indeed a deeply Republican politician whose purpose has been to restructure taxes deeply in favor of the 1%.
I have the sense that if I am in the top 1% income bracket, the Bush tax cuts from 47% to 35% is the most important, deepest, structural change to the tax code that I would want to preserve above all in all this negotiations. That is key. And it is simple. If Obama lets that happen–extends Bush tax cuts on the 1% (even if they are extended for those earning less than $400,000)–then I know that has been Obama’s intention all along, if even I can predict the outcome of his “negotiations.”
-
chef commented on the diary post A Refreshing Concession Letter to President Obama by Ohio Barbarian.
I fully expect to be jeered by those who mock the percentage of the vote racked up by third party candidates and call Alexander and the others irrelevant at best and vanity candidates at worst.
One correction: The third parties’ performances are nothing to be jeered at. Take the example of Green party’s Jill Stein. She [...]
-
chef commented on the diary post First they came for welfare…. by szielinski.
Americans of the lesser kind along with the world at large deserve much better than Barack Obama. They truly need a man much better than him..
Thank you, Szielinski. It takes a peculiarly unfeeling politician to take on Obama’s task: 1. Make G.W.Bush’s tax cuts EVEN BIGGER. Given the damage GWBush’s tax cuts have already done [...]
-
chef commented on the diary post Welcome to Jill Stein’s Victory Party by normanb.
Plus, rather than using the dollars per vote number, we need to look at this simple fact: Jill Stein had $450,000, compared to Obama’s $1 billion.
-
chef commented on the diary post Welcome to Jill Stein’s Victory Party by normanb.
NormanB, your calculation is incorrect. Considering Obama got about 56 million votes and spent $1 billion, that comes to $17 a vote (NOT $4 a vote) for Obama, doesn’t it? This compares to less than $1 spent per vote for Jill. In addition, you do not mention that Obama has FULL COURT press through the [...]
-
chef commented on the diary post Welcome to Jill Stein’s Victory Party by normanb.
CONGRATULATIONS, Jill Stein. What a COURAGEOUS, hard-working, and emphatic run. THANK YOU. Jill, stay in there; we need you. Jill Stein got five times the amount of vote of the Green presidential candidate in 2008, and the same amount of vote as the much better-known consumer advocate Ralph Nader in 2004. Stein achieved all this, [...]
-
chef commented on the diary post Why I won’t be voting for Barack Obama, and you shouldn’t either by principlesoverparty.
Stunning Post on the day of the election.
-
chef commented on the diary post Why I won’t be voting for Barack Obama, and you shouldn’t either by principlesoverparty.
I’ll reprhase that: Right on target on the points!
GREAT post. -
chef commented on the diary post Why I won’t be voting for Barack Obama, and you shouldn’t either by principlesoverparty.
Impressive list. Very comprehensive. And right on target on many points. Thank you.
Like some on this blog, I am forwarding this to friends and family.
Reminds me of
-
chef commented on the diary post A Fantasy for the “Lesser of Two Evils” Crowd: Re-Elect Mitt Romney, Democrat, in 2016! by Vote Socialist.
Exactly! Good argument.
-
chef commented on the diary post Attacks on Social Security Are Attacks on Today’s Youth, The Seniors of 2050 and Beyond. by TomThumb.
TomThumb, What is the Smoking Gun? The Smoking Gun that shows that Obama means ill? That he is getting ready to dismantle social security? First, a little detour: Obama’s talking point about social security goes like this: 1.) Social security is “structurally sound” (therefore, disarming you, and leading you to think that he is on [...]
-
chef commented on the diary post Open Letter to Michael Moore: Drop Obama, Support Jill Stein by Dennis Trainor Jr.
Thank you, Dennis, thank you. I don’t understand Michael Moore’s support for Obama. It makes me wonder about Michael Moore.. If you ask people to vote for the lesser evil even if that lesser evil is out to, as someone on this blog wrote, “cut off both your arms and beat you with them,” just [...]
-
chef commented on the diary post Matt Stoller vs. Peter Coyote and the Case Against the Case for Obama by cassiodorus.
What it means is that Obama is ruthless and radical (a radical neoliberal). Of course, Obama is even more radical than G.W. Bush was, eg. on offshore drilling; jailing whistleblowers etc.; Bush never dared to cut social security. No one complains about G.W. Bush anymore, because Obama has been so shocking in his extremism on [...]
-
chef commented on the diary post Matt Stoller vs. Peter Coyote and the Case Against the Case for Obama by cassiodorus.
Thanks, Bailey. This is like watching a tragedy in slow motion: Entire peoples voting with fervor to give the mandate to a president who is out to undermine them on the deepest and most far-reaching levels once he gets back into office. It is a tragedy whose ending you already know–the president is out to [...]
-
chef commented on the diary post Matt Stoller vs. Peter Coyote and the Case Against the Case for Obama by cassiodorus.
Here’s Margaret Kimberly again:
Obama supporters who profess an intent to “hold his feet to the fire” may successfully deceive themselves and each other, but this president is no fool. Barack Obama knows that voters have no power whatsoever over him after next Tuesday, that he’ll be free to follow his own inclinations, whatever those are. [...]
-
chef commented on the diary post Matt Stoller vs. Peter Coyote and the Case Against the Case for Obama by cassiodorus.
I refer the “lesser of two evil” voters to read what Margaret Kimberly wrote (see below). Notice that Tea Party and Libertarians are never asked to vote for the lesser evil ie. Mitt Romney. In fact, Libertarians and Tea Partiers are ENCOURAGED to vote for Gary Johnson etc. if they think Romney is not extremist [...]
-
chef commented on the diary post Campaign note: Obama or the deluge (no kidding) by David Seaton.
The Supreme Court is the ultimate line of defense for propagandists who ask that you vote for the lesser evil, and thereby reward a Democrat although he came into office with a mission to tear down the social safety net and who wants to enhance GWBush’s tax cuts. Using the Supreme Court card is a [...]
-
chef commented on the diary post Campaign note: Obama or the deluge (no kidding) by David Seaton.
ie. Asking Green-leaning people in swing states to vote for Obama is identical to following a strategy of voting for the lesser evil because you are asking for the same outcome. ie. Why should Obama not go as RIGHT as he wants to go if even if he does so you are always going to [...]
- Load More
