Total Pageviews

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Secession!..Are you kidding me?

I was willing to allow the Republicans to sulk for while but the media keeps bomb boarding me with stories of a new kinder, gentler GOP who's now willing to compromise. I don't believe a national party can do a 180°in a week's time. It's still the same people in office, and they're still not willing to raise the tax rates on the millionaires and billionaires. They think because they kept the House of Representatives,it  means that people do not want to raise taxes. I'll get back to that later.

Here in Texas, we have a lot of whiners who are acting like spoiled children over the election results. They (about 85, 000) have petitioned the White House for secession, even though our constitution doesn't allow secession. These low information citizens haven't the foggiest idea of what it would mean if they got their way. What they really are saying is that they don't want to live in a country unless a white republican is president. The White House is required to respond to the petitioners who gathered 25,000 signers, so I hope they use some low-level staffer for that purpose.

The GOP wants to ignore the exit poll where 68% said we should raise taxes on the top 2% as part of the plan to avoid going over the fiscal cliff. I still don't think the president has a mandate, but he does have a lot of leverage this time around. I do like the approach he is taking by negotiating from a position of strength. The president has requested $1.6 trillion in tax increases, which is twice the amount of the grand bargain he originally proposed. He would probably settle for $1.2 trillion in tax increases, which is in the middle. The GOP does not want to raise tax rates on the top 2%, even though we would see immediate results if that were to happen. They would rather talk about eliminating loopholes and deductions, which would have to be negotiated over a longer period of time. It's still about the arithmetic because eliminating loopholes will not get to $1.2 trillion of tax increases over 10 years. The extra revenue would have to come from eliminating the home-mortgage deduction and charitable contributions which will in turn hurt the middle class and slow the recent growth of the housing market. If nothing else, the Democrats put taxes back in the conversation because Republicans were trying to make a case that spending was the only problem. I think once we get over the tax increase barrier, it's going to be easier to talk about creating jobs and avoiding the fight over the debt ceiling.

Louisiana governor, Bobby Jindal, said the GOP needs to stop being the “stupid party" and should stop catering to Wall Street and the rich. You can find similar statement from Newt Gingrich and other GOP surrogates, but the fact remains they were the ones leading the march to stupid. Bobbie Jindal pushed creationism on Louisiana schools, and Newt called President Obama “the food stamp president" who had a 'Kenyan, anti-colonial' world view." Paul Ryan said President Obama won because of a lot of urban votes. What's that supposed to mean? It's a known fact that people that live in the big cities outnumber those who live in rural areas. Then again, Paul Ryan says that the GOP has a mandate because they were reelected. I guess that he discounts the fact that the Democrats picked up at least eight seats (and they're still counting in Arizona) and that was against Republicans in gerrymandered districts. Democrats received more than 500,000 more votes than their republican opponents.

The GOP doesn't have a choice but to change because the days of saying, “I’m for smaller government, lower taxes and liberty" will no longer win elections. Voters want more than partisan talking points. The GOP can't just throw out Marco Rubio and expect to get the Latino vote because it's much more than immigration. The GOP lost the Asian vote by a lot, and they're usually conservative and have a high medium income. They also lost the young voter, the Catholic and the moderate voter. Election results are temporary because it was only two years ago that we thought that the Tea Party had a lot of political influence. We also thought that we couldn't beat all the big money for special-interest groups.

We mustn't lose sight that big money did win in downhill elections. It's said that Karl Rove only got his donors, a 1.29% margin on their investment, but that's only in the senate and presidential election. We didn't discuss global warming  at all or Afghanistan much, so we will continue not having a national discussion on those matters for a while. That suits the defense contractors and those who do not want t curb their greenhouse emissions.

Rand Paul's immigration proposals are to the left of any Democrat because he's insisting on a path to citizenship (with conditions) for the 12, million undocumented people who are already here. As a true libertarian, Senator Paul wants legislation to decriminalize marijuana use. He thinks he will get something done because no one questions his conservative credentials. We'll see.

The local Republicans are pretty quiet, but that's understandable because that's what I did after the 2000 election. The only difference is that I had to accept my minority status in this county, so I lost interest in the local and state issues (if I ever had any) and devoted all my attention on national issues. I accepted the saying that “the pendulum swings both ways" but our local conservatives will never accept that saying. Several local Republicans think that all they have to do is use the word “liberal" in the pejorative and say that they are conservative. That may work in this county but enjoy it while you can because being superior is always subjective.

On a lighter note,it will be interesting to hear from those who went to the see the movie "2016: Obama's America"  and were gullible enough to believe the theme.  Nah,like the Fox viewers they will continue to believe because it's easier than saying " I was wrong."


Mike said...

The republicans are still in a frenzy trying to blame the Benghazi incident on the president and his administration. Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain are promising to do everything in their power to withhold the nomination of Susan Rice as secretary of state.

In is a first news conference after the election, a fiery President Obama had a message for McCain and McCain... "Picking on the U.N. Ambassador, Susan Rice, who had nothing to do with Benghazi, is outrageous." He said they should go after somebody their own size, namely himself, and that he was looking forward to it..... I'll bet you $100 that either Lindsey Graham or John McCain will be Sean Hannity's guest in the near future.

The president stood his ground on tax cuts for the wealthy and being the ambassador for the middle class... He said that was his mandate...he also said it's easy to solve 50% of the fiscal cliff:give the 98% of individual tax payers making less than $250,00 and 97% of small businesses a tax cut.

born2Bme said...

I personally think that maybe the $250,000, might be a little low because in other parts of the Country, the COL is way higher than ours, so that $250,000 doesn't go as far as it does here. It might should go up to $350,000 at least.
I also read an article that said the the higher educated a person is, their tendency to vote Democrat is higher. Makes sense to me. LOL

Mike said...

As you know that's taxable income which would calculate to about $600,000 in gross income....Some in the senate would like it to be around a million dollars to get more republicans on board.

Whenever the figure is, it's got to generate enough revenues.

The $250,000 and below was chosen because that's where 98% of individual taxpayers are...That's also where 97% of the small businesses are.

That extra 3 or 4% will not make the rich any poorer or slow down our recovery.

The conversation is no longer about whether to tax; it's about how much...:-)

born2Bme said...

Ok, I didn't realize that about the income and I'm sure most people don't know that either.

Mike said...

And it's only the amount that exceeds the $250,000 threshold that's taxed at the higher rate....I think hedge fund managers should pay tax at ordinary rates rather the lower capital gains rate.

Edith Ann said...

Maybe a tad off-topic, but I am so confused.

I just read Judy Anderson's idiotic letter in the paper. Okay, if FOX convinced folks that Romney was going to win (and they did convince a whole shitload of folks) how do those same folks explain why Obama waited 4years to do his evil work? I mean--what if FOX had been right? Wouldn't Obama have already taken everyone's guns, wealth, etc., and redistributed them on the off chance he only had 4 yearsto do it?

What did I miss?

born2Bme said...

EA, I get that from some people too. After the election, one of my FB "friends", now ex friend, were posting how the end of the US is coming. I just told him if it hasn't happened in 4 years, it's not going to happen and to just get a grip.
People are so gullible.

Mike said...

I believe in that group of the redistribution line are the defense contractors,farm subsities and tax incentives for the oil companies...And that's without mentioning the tax breaks for the rich.

Today,Mitt Romney said the reason he lost was because Obama gave gifts to his supporters....Did you get your gift EA? Did you get yours born? I didn't get mine.

We need to pitch in and send mirrors to people like Judy,so they can get a good look at the reason they keep losing elections.

Mike said...

Man, Lindsey Graham and John McCain are hyperventilating over the possible nomination of Donna Rice for defense secretary and they want a Watergate type investigation committee when we've just begun hearings using the same protocol for previous attacks on our embassies.

Condoleezza Rice warned of us of a mushroom cloud; yet she was nominated for secretary defense. We never found the WMD she warned us about and 4000 of our people died because that faulty information.

John McCain is one to talk about nominating qualified people; he chose Sarah Palin as his trusted running mate.

born2Bme said...

Perry just stepped into some doggy doo.
Man, I hope he is voted out in the next election.

Mike said...

Governor Perry stepped in it a long time ago, right now he is just enjoying himself wallowing in it.

I assume you're talking about not participating in the health care exchanges. The GOP controlled Texas government need to repay Medicaid the money they borrowed to balance the budget...

Mike said...

What's going to be a priority for the Texas legislation? Drug testing Texans who seek unemployment insurance or benefits from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program.....

1. Drug testing is costly but some think those cost can be offset by deleting people from the rolls. In other states it's been found that less than 2% of the recipients are drug users
2. Why not eliminate the program altogether instead of insinuating that those needing assistance are deadbeats and drug abusers?
3. That has to be a violation of the 4th and 14th amendment.
4. it’s just another solution looking for a problem, unless there's substantial evidence that those on public assistance are habitual drug abusers.

Same old conservative GOP in Texas

born2Bme said...

How is this going to be handled if Texas doesn't participate in the exchange. If the states don't do it, the government does?
How is this going to help the GOP, or Perry, for that matter?
It seems the citizens of Texas will get it one way or the .

Mike said...

They are trying to buy time thinking they we'll get overwhelming numbers in the house and senate,in 2013, to repeal Obamacare....I know they won't have the numbers next year.

This is an article written by David Horowitz for the right wing blog Red State

"The other lynch pin of Obamacare implementation is the creation of state-run health exchanges. These exchanges will be used to help individuals comply with the mandate to buy health insurance – insurance that will become more expensive as a result of the law. Once again, by refusing to set up these exchanges, governors can seriously disrupt the bulk of the law before it goes into effect in 2014, buying us more time until we can repeal the law next year.

born2Bme said...

Perry might just find himself on the losing end in 2014 over this. There are so many people that want this and he is purposely trying to stop them from getting health insurance.
Where does one start a petition?

Mike said...

Perry can't stop it from happening ,he is just protesting and basking in the sunlight.

Here is some more info from Time magazine which will make it easier to understand.

"In a move that boxed in Republican governors who rail against federal intrusion, the authors of the ACA left the crucial job of exchange management to the states. At the same time, the ACA says the federal government will run exchanges for states which don’t set up their own. This clever gambit left red-state governors with a Sophie’s choice of sorts. They could set up insurance exchanges and participate in the implementation of one of the most divisive laws in modern American politics. Or they could refuse, and invite the federal government into their insurance regulatory apparatus, which has historically been governed at the state level.

The Democrats in charge of the Department of Health and Human Services would be happy either way. Controlling more exchanges would be beneficial to advancing their regulatory priorities; ceding control to states would probably save money on IT costs over the long run. (The exchanges will be run through web sites, on which individuals and small groups will be able to compare plans and buy insurance policies.) Either way, the ACA insurance regulations written by the feds would have to be followed.

In a rare moment of consensus, several liberal and conservative health-policy watchers are saying fed control is the better way to go. Jon Walker, a writer at the liberal web site Firedoglake, says more federal control will be more efficient, and argues exchanges would be better run by officials invested in the success of Obamacare. Michael Cannon, of the libertarian Cato Institute, opposes Obamacare, but cites as-yet-unknown costs for states if they choose to run exchanges; he says the feds have so much control over the insurance regulatory apparatus that state control won’t mean much anyway.

It’s a rare example of consensus from both sides of the political spectrum on the issue of health care reform.

Read more:

Mike said...

It's the other part which will cost Texas taxpayers money ... He's refusing to participate in Medicaid expansion completely paid for by the federal government which is what I think you are referring to.

" The Affordable Care Act is offering billions of federal dollars for Texas to provide insurance to those people. But Rick Perry has said no thanks."
Here's how this works: Texans without insurance or money to pay for costly cancer treatments or emergency care or anything else get what care they can at public and private hospitals. And according to the Republican state comptroller, that was $10 billion of care a few years ago. Where does that money come from? You. Your pocket. Health insurance premiums are higher to help hospitals make up for the loss. And so are local property taxes.

Perry's irresponsible leadership has already allowed Texas to fall $6 billion behind on Medicaid payments. Now he is turning down a 100 percent paid expansion of Medicaid that would save money and create a healthier population. Federal taxes paid by Texans would be returned to the state and reduce the local tax burden by billions. Instead, Perry is demanding that the federal government use your tax money to pay for Medicaid health care in other states.

Mike said...

Papa Johns is raising their prices because of Obamacare?
Peyton Manning is giving away 2 million of them..and Denny's is charging a surcharge and laying off employees for the same reason..gimme me a break .

President Obama is at 58% approval,and former supporters of Romney are taking pot shots at him but it's low hanging fruit....If they want to impress,they should denounce Limbaugh,O'Rielly,and Hannity....What a differance 3 weeks makes.

born2Bme said...

Papa John's and Denny's will feel the wrath of the public. They can posture all they want, but people don't have to eat there, and won't, if prices go higher than the competition, or there aren't enough employees to handle large crowds.

Edith Ann said...

As I was filling the weekly pill box for my 85 year old father, a thought occured to me--

While he receives no government 'assistance' except Medicare, what about those medically needy folks who do receive Medicaid(the vast majority being seniors)? Are we really going to drug test them? My dad takes a pill that would get him booted off the program in a heartbeat!

When are they going to remember 'think first, then act'?