Going all the way back to the Great Depression and the Roosevelt administration – conservatism ( forget the Democrat and Republic labels – there used to be liberals and conservatives in both parties) has always been a layer cake of crazy, unashamed hypocrisy, voodoo economics, ethnocentrism and paranoia. They have been somewhat successful at wrapping up some morally corrupt points of view in the flag and exploiting the patriotism of the American people for some less than American ideals – the eternal promise of a forward thinking just nation that would not give into the kind of base wantonness that plagued Europe for centuries. Every presidential election cycle is a chapter in the sleazy history of conservatism. Events lead up to the little plastic figures on top of the cake. We have already reached a climax of sorts with the good as done nomination of Mitt Romney as the conservative presidential nominee. Romney as conservative presidential candidate is very telling of the conservative mindset. It matters what they say – though a decoder ring is frequently required, but it is what they actually do or attempt to do that lifts the curtain on the conservative agenda. How did conservatives get to this point. For eight years deficits did not matter, as conservative hero Dick Cheney once revealed in a blurb of sudden honesty, “deficits don’t matter”. Suddenly and incidentally deficits started to matter as soon as conservative were out of power in Washington and they had tanked the economy so bad – if we defined terrorism as robbing the nation – most conservatives would be in prison now. Conservatives held the debt ceiling hostage. That was telling in itself, but they let their cards show for anyone who wasn’t glued to the latest reality show. After the debt ceiling standoff they voted for the Paul Ryan budget bill that raised the deficit and keeps it high until 2063, thus the future debt ceiling. You know what was great, super, best for the USA about the Ryan budget. It included more tax breaks for millionaires. Flash back to just before that monumental moment of depraved dishonesty about what conservatism stands for – to the 2010 mid-term election. What was the defining issue of that cycle. The Affordable Care Act or health care reform. Flash forward to today. The conservative nominee signed pretty much the same health care reform into law in Massachusetts – a plan that the very conservative Heritage Foundation thought was a great idea. For those that fellow such issues conservatives could be held liable for giving the country ideological whiplash. Deficits don’t matter, deficits cause everything from zits to unemployment. Health care reform is good for America and the health care industry, health care reform is a Marxist plot to destroy our freedom. Whatever his faults or merits Mitt Romney, the guy who believes corrupt capitalism and government by plutocracy are solid values, is the perfect guy for this conservative clown cake election cycle.
The line that leads from the conservatism that hated FDR to Nixon when he was Eisenhower’s VP to Reagan to Bush 43 is not a straight one. In every chapter the far Right has become more brazen and more radical. Nixon – who helped create the Environmental Protection Agency and Reagan seem almost like liberals today. Rich Nontaxpayers
Last year, Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, the ranking Republican on the tax-writing Senate Finance Committee, declared that taxes on the rich should not be raised until the poor are taxed. “I think many taxpayers are skeptical that the answer to our fiscal problems is for them to sacrifice more, when almost half of all households are not paying any income taxes,” Mr. Hatch said.
In April, Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the House majority leader, said it was “unfair” that 45 percent of people don’t pay any federal income taxes. Asked if he wanted to increase taxes on these people, he replied, “You’ve got to discuss that issue.”
Yet conservative Republicans say they are against rising taxes and want even more tax cuts for millionaires.
Once upon a time, Republicans were more concerned about the number of rich people with no income tax liability.
On Jan. 17, 1969, just days before Richard Nixon’s inauguration, the departing treasury secretary, Joseph Barr, disclosed that in 1967, 155 Americans with an income of more than $200,000 had no income tax liability, including 21 with an income above $1 million.
This was considered such a scandal that Nixon sent a tax package drafted by the Johnson administration to Congress with his endorsement. When the Tax Reform Act of 1969 was enacted, including a minimum tax to force rich people to pay something, he praised that provision.
[ ]…Ronald Reagan defended his tax reform proposal on the grounds that it would reduce the number of nontaxpaying rich people. In a June 6, 1985, speech, he said:
We’re going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that have allowed some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying 10 percent of his salary, and that’s crazy. It’s time we stopped it.
Among the specific measures Reagan supported to increase tax fairness was an increase in the tax on capital gains to 28 percent from 20 percent.
Not counting payroll taxes like Medicare and Social Security low-income workers still pay a larger percentage of their earnings in taxes than the very wealthy. If someone makes between $8 and $15 dollars an hour that is not hard to fathom. They are hit especially hard by sales taxes.
Conservative Republicans have tried to make Solyndra big scandal – look at all those tax payer dollars down the drain and its all Obama’s fault. That is another big slice of conservative hypocrisy. If conservatives currently serving in Congress were to suddenly stop all their favorite federal hand-outs for business they’d find themselves facing a business “friendly” opponent – the same is true at the state level. Corporate Socialism – How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense
Nationwide state and local subsidies for corporations totaled more than $70 billion in 2010, as calculated by Professor Kenneth Thomasof the University of Missouri-St. Louis
In a country of 311 million, that’s $900 taken on average from each family of four in 2010. There are no official figures, but this one is likely conservative because — as documented by Thomas, this column and Good Jobs First, a nonprofit taxpayer watchdog organization funded by Ford, Surdna and other major foundations — these upward redistributions of wealth keep increasing.
In Irondequoit, just outside Rochester, N.Y., and a few miles from where I live, developer Scott Congel wants $250 million in sales taxes to finance rebuilding the Medley Centre mall while adding condominiums and a hotel. Typically local governments issue bonds, which are paid off using sales tax receipts that are diverted from public purposes to the developer’s benefit.
That’s how corporate socialism works — privatize gains, socialize losses.
If there is a big real estate development project or new industrial park being built in your area, the chances are almost a hundred percent that you’re paying for it to some degree. All that crap about business being selfless entrepreneurs who pull themselves up by their own boot straps is at least partly a myth. If they did not get help from some level of government, they have an inside track on money and investors because of their family connections – like Tagg Romney for instance. Tagg was already wealthy and now he is following in dad’s footsteps – why work for a living when you can screw over people and take their money, Romney Family Investment Group Partnered With Alleged Perpetrators Of $8 Billion Ponzi Scheme.
As good as conservatives are at inventing new conspiracy theories you would think they would come up with something new. The hacks at Breitbarf are trying to recycle the Bill Ayers meme against Obama. Not able to find any actual damning evidence they just make things up. Being pathological lairs is a value, it is just not a good value. #Breitbart.com Bombshell Exclusive: Professor Did Not See Barack Obama at Bill Ayers’ House! The parade of derp continues
This caught my eye for reasons to follow, Internet To Be 11% Less Stupid On Friday, 19% Less Wolverine-ish. By: TBogg
In an effort to call attention to some minor legal squabbles at a very low court level, Ace O’ Spades is calling upon all conservative bloggers to Shut The Fuck Up this Friday because … fuck it, seriously, I don’t know what the hell they think they’re doing but it’s hard to see any downside to this, so I guess I shouldn’t complain.
Anyway, here’s the dealio, you figure it out:
For now, I’m just going to write this, to let people know my plan.
On Friday, this site will be absolutely dead-silent, which is what Brett Kimberlin and his stalker crew seeks, and what the media and our supposed Representatives in Congress would permit.
The only post on Friday will be a bold-faced Open Letter to Congress, urging them to act and not attempt to pass the buck to others.
They are our representatives; we would like some representation.
They vowed to defend and protect the Constitution; they can honor that vow now.
I will post links of Congressmen’s and Senator’s email addresses and offices and phone numbers, and urge every concerned American citizen to let them know, in no uncertain terms, that a crime in progress against the First Amendment (and people’s safety) is occurring, and we humbly request they take this seriously.
They are literally going to get someone killed. That is their endgame here.
Will the media and Congress pretend “we didn’t know” when this happens?
Again, if this Kimberlin is really getting up in someone’s face he needs to stop. Ace is not the best source, has always sniffed a little too much polish while cleaning his jack boots. He does do a good impression of a drama queen. Anyway I find his appeals ironic as this story from one of his fellow travelers in the world of delusions gets smacked down - WorldNetDaily Birther Lawsuit Against Esquire Dismissed
A U.S. District Court dismissed a lawsuit on Monday against Esquire Magazine over a satirical blog post that said Joseph Farah, a prominent proponent of the “birther” movement, had denounced a book alleging that President Barack Obama was not born in the United States.
Farah, CEO and editor-in-chief of the conservative-leaning website WorldNetDaily.com, had sued Esquire Magazine, its parent company Hearst Communications Inc., and writer Mark Warren for defamation, invasion of privacy, interference with business relations and violations under a federal trademark law.
In dismissing the suit in Washington, Judge Rosemary Collyer ruled that the post was satire related to a matter of public interest and should be protected under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which deals with freedom of expression.
Collyer also concluded that the trademark law cited by Farah applied only to commercial speech, not to satirical non-commercial speech.
Warren published a blog post in May 2011 on esquire.com that said Farah had announced plans to recall and pulp all copies of a book he had published questioning Obama’s eligibility to be president.
The post came after Obama had released the copy of his birth certificate at the end of April.
[ ]…Obama – whose father was from Kenya and mother was from Kansas – released a long-form copy of his birth certificate last year as proof he was born in Hawaii to try to put to rest speculation that he was not born in the country.
According to the court ruling, Warren’s post was published on an opinion page under the website’s “The Politics Blog” and was tagged as humor.
The post described fictional interviews with Farah and sources from World Net Daily in which Farah was described as having said, “We’ll do anything to hurt Obama, and erase his memory, but we don’t want to look like …. idiots, you know?”
Farah had sought over $100 million in actual and compensatory damages and more than $20 million in punitive damages. Esquire magazine officials could not immediately be reached for comment.
The two stories demonstrate a conservative tendency to present two opposing truths as the one true truth. Conservatives believe in free speech and freedom of the press as long as it is their speech and their press. If they appear to casual observers as sanctimonious double-talking twits, well that’s OK because you have to drink the special punch to understand.