the most important election of your lifetime: 2012 american general election thread

So, as usual in their epistemic closure, they're cherry picking for a gotcha quote instead of addressing the Presdient's point, a valid point...

yeah, they're making hay out of the valid point that obama annihilated with colossally stupid, tone-deaf phrasing. just as liberals would, were mittens to eat his feet in an attempt to say something sensible.

its funny because even in isolation 'If you've got a business, you didn't build that.' its clear that hes referring to something other than the business

mitt does that all the fucking time, all the republican candidates did in the primary season

let's make a million posts about what Ann Romney meant when she said "you people" when saying that they wouldn't release more tax info

lol i did think about that

unfortunately i don't have a nationally syndicated radio show where i make shit up for 2 hours every day, so it probably wouldn't make much of a difference

i should get one of those shows

let's elaborate these short phrases into extended ruminations on the way we know these politicians really think, because we have to fill hours of airtime

Z S it's the age of the internet just record a podcast and we'll promote it 4 u

Obama, Romney and the media are all lying.

Because of America’s progressive tax system, all taxpayers under Obama’s plan — including those making more than $250,000 a year — will get a tax cut on their first $250,000 of income. According to the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy, this means that Obama’s initiative, which would cost $150 billion, will give a one-year $20,130 tax cut to the top 1 percent of income earners. Meanwhile, the $210 billion Republican plan would give that income group a $70,790 tax cut.

In other words, this supposedly monumental debate isn’t over whether to punish or further enrich households in the top 1 percent — both proposals do the latter. Instead, this is a minute dispute over whether the tax code should give each of those households the equivalent salary of one butler (Obama’s plan) or three butlers (Romney’s plan). For every other income group, the two proposals are identical.

http://www.salon.com/2012/07/20/americas_grand_tax_lie/

Well obv

under our system, there's no way to give a tax cut to everyone making $250K and less without also giving a tax cut on the first $250K of people making above that figure. but it's really disingenuous to say that the obama proposal will "further enrich households in the top 1 percent". yes, super rich people would get a $20K or so tax cut off of the first $250K of their income. but if you're making millions of dollars and the tax rate on your income OVER $250K goes up, you're going to end up paying more money overall.

otm. shitty article.

No kidding, we have a progressive tax system, they're not talking about making the rates for the lower tiers higher if you fall into an upper tier.

It still amazes me, when speaking to people I know, that they have no idea how taxes work. A friend was explaining that he didn't want a small raise, because then he'd be bumped to a higher tax bracket, and he'd be making less than he was now. Tax brackets do not work like that.

for example, the top tax bracket right now is 35%, for income over $388,000. That top bracket would rise to 39.6% under obama's plan.

let's say you make 1 million dollars in a year. before, you paid on $214,200 in taxes on your income over $388,000 (612,000 x .35). under obama's plan, you would pay $242,352 in taxes on your income over $388,000 (612,000 x .396). that's an increase of $28,152, which more than offsets the aforementioned "$20,130 tax cut to the top 1 percent of income earners" in the salon article.

yeah, it's not that much of an increase (although the tax burden would be much heavier on the super super rich making many millions a year), but it's just not accurate to say that everyone is "lying".

I think we should add another tax bracket at $1 million that goes up to 50% or so. And then maybe a few more above that.

that article would work well as an image macro posted to facebook

and yeah were obvs in need of more tax brackets

This is funny:

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/07/qu-5.html

but relatives aren't part of a vast socialist-Fabian bureaucracy

"and supportive relatives aren't (necessarily) coercive"

-every "libertarian" on facebook

Who the hell can find a competent butler for $20K?!

After the conservative blogosphere used a selectively edited Obama campaign speech to suggest that the president belittled the achievements of small business owners, the Romney campaign released an attack ad featuring New Hampshire small business owner Jack Gilchrist as a counterpoint.

In “These Hands,” the Romney campaign repeated the out-of-context quote, “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else did that.” Jack Gilchrist, the owner of Gilchrist Metal Fabricating in Hudson, New Hampshire, incredulously asks, “My father’s hands didn’t build this company? My hands didn’t build this company? My son’s hands aren’t building this company? …Through hard work and a little bit of luck, we built this business. Why are you demonizing us for it?”

In context, Obama’s speech was not “demonizing” small business owners but simply challenging the idea that wealthy and successful individuals have never benefited from government services.

And, as it turns out, Jack Gilchrist is no different. The New Hampshire Union Leader reports today that Gilchrist benefited from millions of dollars of government loans and contracts to get his business on its feet:

In 1999, Gilchrist Metal received $800,000 in tax-exempt revenue bonds issued by the New Hampshire Business Finance Authority “to set up a second manufacturing plant and purchase equipment to produce high definition television broadcasting equipment,” according to a New Hampshire Union Leader report at the time…

Last year, Gilchrist Metal also received two U.S. Navy sub-contracts totaling about $83,000 and a smaller $5,600 Coast Guard contract in 2008, according to a government web site that tracks spending.

Gilchrist wisely took advantage of these funds, which help small businesses like his survive in their early years. He also took a U.S. Small Business Administration loan in the late 1980s totaling “somewhere south of” $500,000, plus matching funds from the federally-funded New England Trade Adjustment Assistance Center.

Dreams of Affirmative Action (and a chance to run through the whole checklist):

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/310378/selective-transparency-victor-davis-hanson

Maybe Obama smoked more marijuana than he has admitted to or received lots of Cs and even some Ds in International Relations — grades that would make it almost impossible for most students to get into Harvard Law School.

yeah but george w bush got into good schools because of his awesome grades and individual accomplishments

good post re campaign strategy http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/07/24/and-here-comes-the-turn

and damn how dishonest is that romney ad my lord tsk tsk

What the London Daily Telegraph calls one of Romney’s “advisors” told the paper that Romney was better positioned to understand and respect the ‘special relationship’ between the US and Great Britain than President Obama, whose father was from Kenya.

Said the advisor: “We are part of an Anglo-Saxon heritage, and he feels that the special relationship is special. The White House didn’t fully appreciate the shared history we have.”

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/07/romney_camp_mitt_will_bring_a_white_mans_touch.php?ref=fpblg

he feels that the special relationship is special, and a relationship

mitt_will_bring_a_white_mans_touch.php

that's racist, but also: lol at the idea that electing mitt romney would improve the relationship between britain and the u.s.

its really high up on the list of priorities for most americans tho

yeah, i mean what an odd thing to say something racist about. why not say it about something ppl care about?

our relationship w/brittan seems... fine. ok guys i dont think we need to use racism on this one. next.

"where can we deploy racism most effectively fellas? any thoughts."

"great britain. got to be."

*high fives* "we are so winning this election"

yeah, i mean what an odd thing to say something racist about. why not say it about something ppl care about?

OTM

I feel like I should be offended but how can you get mad at such ineptitude?

the 'special relationship' is something that, oddly, american conservatives suddenly care about whenever it's in danger of being forgotten

or whenever Churchill busts are returned

deep in the right wing there's still a lot of knee-jerk royalism. i never believe that shit matters when i read about it but it's still gross.

is "hang/give joint press conference with boris johnson" on his itinerary for london? i hope so.

hang or hang w/

1. hang boris johnson
2. ???
3. profit

I'm offended by Romney/his team's rationale here, but I am LOLing at the societally sanctioned insensitivity this kind of person is allowed - nay, encouraged - to flaunt.

Special relationship means, in 2012: 'we send soldiers to a conflict, these people will also do this with very little effort on our part.' Neocons are less bothered about British *royalty* (princesses/duchesses in pretty dresses aside) than shared experience of/nostalgia for WWII (and unambiguously winning same, unlike ALL WARS SINCE). They genuinely have no idea/couldn't give a shit about anything post-1947.

I guess the only question I have left is: is that dressage horse a Paso Fino or a Lipizzaner?

Second verse, same as the first:

Mitt Romney promised “complete transparency” when he took charge of the scandal-plagued Salt Lake City Olympics, a pledge that included access to his own correspondence and plans for an extensive public archive of documents related to the Games.

But some who worked with Romney describe a close-to-the-vest chief executive unwilling to share so much as a budget with a state board responsible for spending oversight. Archivists now say most key records about the Games’ internal workings were destroyed under the supervision of a staff member shortly after the flame was extinguished at Olympic Cauldron Park, after Romney had returned to Massachusetts.

“Transparency? There was none with [the Salt Lake Organizing Committee] when he was there,” said Kenneth Bullock, a committee member who represented the Utah League of Cities and Towns. “Their transparency became a black hole. It was nonexistent.”

According to Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul, “Mitt Romney resigned from SLOC in early 2002 to run for governor of Massachusetts and was not involved in the decision-making regarding the final disposition of records.”

So he retroactively retired from Bain to work on the Olympics and had nothing to do with decision making there, despite being listed as CEO. Then he retired from the SLOC in 2002 to run for governor and had nothing to do with decision making there. What exactly does this motherfucker actually DO?

exciting to think about what venture he'd be busy kicking off during the last year of his presidency

His signature might be on the bills, but he can't take responsibility for PASSING them, he had retired to work on his presidential memoirs.

Campaign is denying that it was an official advisor:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/romney-camp-anglo-saxon-report-false/2012/07/25/gJQAS9D38W_blog.html

ah the fact too good to check.

One thing Obama's side was very good at in 2008 was hanging back and letting the other side step in it. (Something that obviously took a lot of discipline in the first few weeks after Palin was named.) The fact that Biden and Axelrod felt the need to respond to this within the hour is not good.

What do you guys think of former Salt Lake City mayor/3rd party candidate Rocky Anderson? I'm considering giving him my vote.