Friday, December 30, 2011

Cruising the Web

So Michele Bachmann reportedly refrained from attacking Mitt Romney because she and her husband thought that she might have a chance to end up as a vice-presidential candidate on a Romney ticket. What kind of dream world was she inhabiting? I guess it's the same one that thought she might have a chance in a run for the presidency.

Jonah Goldberg explains why Charlie Sheen was the Man of the Year. It seems that 2011 was the year in which those who are losers pretended to be winners.
Speaking of protest, consider the Occupy Wall Street movement. Not since the Hebrews killed themselves at Masada has there been a group that more obviously won by losing. Of course, the Jews at Masada were freedom fighters battling Roman imperialism. The Occupy Wall Streeters think they’re fighting imperialism when they throw a tantrum about having to pay their debts.

The Occupy movement’s meager tangible accomplishments (We recycled our own urine!) are inversely correlated with their lavish press coverage. The protesters were named Time magazine’s person of the year. Though in fairness, Time diluted its sycophancy by including the Arab Spring protesters who’ve (so far) ushered in a glorious new era of Islamism in places such as Egypt. Winning!

(Though perhaps not as clear cut a “win” as President Obama’s decision to declare political victory and pull our troops out of Iraq prematurely, so we can lose a war we sacrificed so much to win.)

Peggy Noonan makes several good points today such as that the rise of Newt Gingrich worked out to make Romney a better candidate. And she deplores the trend of people, like Herman Cain or maybe Michele Bachmann and others, who run for the presidency not because they think they have a serious shot at it but who are seeking an increase in their name recognition or getting a cable TV contract or sell a book. Now with the debates and TV appearances becoming the primary tool in running for office, it takes a lot less money to get your name out there. Expect to see more of this.

The Hill reports that, despite GOP efforts to block funding for the enforcement of the ban on regular incandescent light bulbs, experts think that the companies will still obey the law.

Barney Frank is still lying
about his role in blocking regulation of Fannie and Freddie.

Here is Politico's top ten list of pundit mistakes this past year.

8 comments:

mark said...

Peggy Noonan is accusing Cain and others of running a fraudulent campaign? And that's a "good point", Betsy? Who is she to know what Cain was thinking? I believe you're in for quite the scolding from tfhr.

Noonan had another "good point"; in the failure of republicans to give Huntsman a good look. Instead of pining away for a "real conservative", repubs have overlooked him in favor of the likes of Trump and Cain.

mark said...

While Goldberg and people here don't approve, the occupy movement has been successful in making an issue of income inequality. This will be particularly harmful to Romney when he finally relents and releases his taxes (nice shout-out to the birthers from his sons). Mitt has made millions of dollars all at a lower tax rate than a middle-class worker. Not bad for someone who considers himself unemployed.

If Goldberg supported the decision to invade Iraq (I'm betting he did), he has no credibility on the issue.

ic said...

"Mitt has made millions of dollars all at a lower tax rate than a middle-class worker."

Either the tax loop hole is too big, or the middle class is paying too much. It's an argument to change the tax code, and to get rid of loop holes. Romney has taken advantage of what he is legally entitled to. Romney has never called for higher taxes on other people, unlike the liberal billionaire Buffett who wanted others to "pay more taxes", so he could receive bailouts, stimulus, and lobby for special treatments.

Romney has never spent $4 million of taxpayers' money for 17 days of vacation.

tfhr said...

mark pines for the day that he can play banjo in a OWS drum circle.

You have to love how critics can determine whether a candidate for a particular office is "serious" or not. It usually depends on their own preference or bias but they some how feel the need to denigrate others when expressing themselves rather than offering up their support for an alternative. For instance, mark will relentlessly ridicule others but always falls short in any effort to back his choice, Obama-Biden. I

mark said...

ic,
No, Romney didn't do anything illegal (although I guess we won't know for sure until he releases his taxes). And I have no idea what Obama's vacation has to do with anything.

What you're pretending to not understand (although Romney gets it) is how bad it will look for a person earning millions a year to be paying a lower tax rate than a man or woman working their butts off for a modest salary.
It wasn't illegal for Romney to pose for a picture with money stuffed in his jacket, or knock down a huge house to build a mansion. Just kinda looks bad.
Romney will justly talk about his successes in creating jobs at Bain Capitol. Dems will correctly focus on his failures, especially when he picked the company clean while jobs were lost. Repubs will call it class warfare. Fine with me.

mark said...

ic,
No, Romney didn't do anything illegal (although I guess we won't know for sure until he releases his taxes). And I have no idea what Obama's vacation has to do with anything.

What you're pretending to not understand (although Romney gets it) is how bad it will look for a person earning millions a year to be paying a lower tax rate than a man or woman working their butts off for a modest salary.
It wasn't illegal for Romney to pose for a picture with money stuffed in his jacket, or knock down a huge house to build a mansion. Just kinda looks bad.
Romney will justly talk about his successes in creating jobs at Bain Capitol. Dems will correctly focus on his failures, especially when he picked the company clean while jobs were lost. Repubs will call it class warfare. Fine with me.

tfhr said...

mark,

You're stuttering (double posts at 2:17 PM) and even though you've repeated yourself, you still don't make any sense.

Your sudden concern about seeing Romney's tax returns is puzzling since you didn't raise much of a fuss over Tim Geithner's history of not reporting income. For a guy that wants to raise taxes on Americans, I would expect you to at least want your administration's top officers to stop EVADING taxes. Instead you happily back the man that abandoned his principles when he chose Geithner to run the US Treasury and extension, the IRS!

Well I guess since Obama didn't pick Charlie Rangel for the job we should all be grateful for that! Rangel has that nice place down in the Dominican Republic where he charges his guests but doesn't report it as income. I guess after all of those years of writing tax laws for the rest of us to decipher, he lost the ability to understand the most basic facts about reporting income.

Why you cannot understand ic's point about $4,000,000.00 spent on a vacation is anybody's guess since you didn't elaborate. I don't deny the man an opportunity to spend the holiday away from DC with his family, I just wonder why his wife and kids have to fly out by themselves at such high expense. This wasn't the first time it has happened and it's getting ridiculous. You would think he would be a more careful steward of our tax dollars, even if just for the sake of the "optics", but this willingness to waste money when he could display some leadership within his own family shows weakness, not to mention a cavalier disregard for the tax payer.

mark said...

Here's a story about Bain Capital. Guess which side will be telling it:
"Randy Johnson worked at an American Pad and Paper (AMPAD) plant in Indiana that was bought by Bain Capital in 1992. After Bain took over they laid off workers, cut wages, slashed health care benefits and eliminated the retirement plan. The workers at the plant went on strike. Rather than negotiate with the workers, Bain closed the factory and laid off the 250 workers that were left. A few years after Bain bought AMPAD, they piled on debt and plunged it in to bankruptcy, closing more plants and laying off hundreds more workers. Despite the devastation to families and communities, Bain Capital made $100 million off the transaction."

If you guessed "dems", congratulate yourself.