This is definitely one of those moments in which I don't understand what Republicans don't understand.
So, Brendan Buck, House Speaker John Boehner's (R-Ohio) press secretary, thinks the Democratic talking point on tax loopholes has been "punctured" because White House Press Secretary Jay Carney has "finally admitted" that Republicans support closing said loopholes.
I haven't the foggiest idea what this is supposed to mean.
The basics are not at all complicated. Democrats and Republicans agree that the federal tax code is littered with loopholes, unnecessary deductions, and lucrative giveaways. Democrats and Republicans also agree that it makes sense to reform the tax laws, simplify the system, and save the public hundreds of billions of dollars.
The parties disagree, however, about what to do with the savings. Democrats want to close the tax loopholes and apply the new revenue to lowering the deficit and reducing the nation's long-term debts. Republicans also want to close the tax loopholes, but instead want to apply the savings to more tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans "job creators."
None of this is new. On the contrary, this is just a basic summary of the standing argument that both sides of the aisle have been dealing with for quite a while.
Jay Carney said as much today, which for some reason, Boehner's press secretary sees as some kind of moment of great triumph, which reinforces for me a broader problem.
The larger point, of course, is that Buck's strange message serves as a reminder of why the fiscal debate is going so poorly: the two sides do not share a common foundation of reality. Republicans think the deficit is getting larger (it's getting smaller), they're sure spending is spiraling out of control (spending isn't even rising), they think Democrats haven't cut spending (they have), and they see dangerous extortion tactics as necessary to reduce the long-term debt (the parties have already approved $2.5 trillion in debt reduction).
With this in mind, even after months of debate, the House Speaker's press secretary sees a routine observation as an important admission that "punctures" talking points, even if said observation wasn't an admission and doesn't puncture anything.
In other words, GOP officials aren't even speaking the same language as everyone else anymore, which limits the odds of legislative success.
Leave a Comment:
Maybe we can have some translation into Spanish, then the GOTP might understand. First off aren't the GOTP screaming, whining and crying about the "deficit being too large" - so in what world is closing the loopholes and applying the savings to the deficit not a good idea? I mean it's not as if the 2 tax cuts under Shrub, the 2 wars, and the bailout's reduced our "unemployment problem" before the melt-down.
Hey Boozer Bonehead, remember when you said if the GOTP took Congress back in 2010 you all would focus in on JOBS, JOBS, JOBS? Where the heck are those JOBS, JOBS, JOBS?!?!
Forget Spanish, it needs to be translated into BS so the Republicans can understand 2 + 2 does not = shoe.
What's more disturbing is that the right's media narratives resonate with their constituents. Don't think for a second that there isn't a very strong (and very loud) constituency that will support them no matter how disconnected from reality they happen to be.
If you mean the reality of actually having budgets and limited incomes, yes Republicans have a very large constituency.
Only the party of free stuff believes borrowing and spending money without the intention to pay it back, is reality. Or honorable.
The Blank still lives in his Randie la-la land.
@Shooter242:
1) how does using the revenue from closed loopholes = not paying for free stuff?
2) If their constituency is so large, why did they take such a thumping in the last election?
3) How is intentionally misunderstanding your fellow citizens in order to fit them into an obscene caricature of liberals honorable?
Shooter. There you go with Romneys talking points again. I've ask you 3 times to tell us about all that "free stuff" and you've never had the answer. Want to try it now? Didn't think so.
Would that "free stuff" be the Social Security & Medicare that I pay for with deductions from every paycheck? Or the "free" annual checkup that is now covered by my costly medical insurance?
Red,
Larry wants to know what free stuff. For the 47% that don't pay any Fed income tax, the entire federal system is free stuff. As for SS and Medicare, the portions no longer covered by payroll taxes is free stuff. Any questions?
Wstarn, I've got bad news for you. According to the Supreme Court, SS and Medicare are free gifts given to you and may be yanked at any time. You will have no claim of any sort. Now aren't you glad you asked?
Blanks, do you mean the party of "free stuff" whose supporters don't pay full taxes on their incomes? Which is the same party that supports billions in subsidies and tax loopholes for companies that don't need them. More "free stuff". How about the party that insists on spending money on military hardware the military doesn't want - but contributors to their campaigns do. That's "free stuff", too. Or how about the party that starts wars, doesn't raise taxes, puts the whole cost on the national credit card and then b*tches about repaying the money they've spent? That party?
Or, as it's better known, the Republican Party?
Doug, at least those people pay income taxes. Half the country doesn't. I'm all in favor of cutting corporate welfare, especially to Wall St. But sadly Obama is knee deep in corporate cronyism.
It's interesting that Ivy League Obama, is sainted as the savior of the middle class, while middle class John Boehner is reviled as part of big money. Don't be gullible. When your President is selling access at $500 million a pop, Republicans shouldn't be your first worry.
Hey Shooter...how about those 1.2 trillion in spending cuts that WERE SIGNED INTO LAW in 2011? Party of 'free stuff'? That would be the 1% that are fighting the 'loopholes'. What makes this 'press release' so STUPID is that the GOP whined and sniveled and promised that they would do loopholes if the tax cuts could be above $400,000 instead of $250,000. THEN after it was signed into LAW they pretended that a loophole was a tax hike.
Those on the right are nothing if not malicious.
There is some truth. The RW first response is almost always involving force of their will and demand, regardless of anyone else's loss. This is also evident when they try to paint anything other than aggression as feminine and view females as inferior. For example lashing out at "feminizis" and LGBTQ, etc.
A lack of acceptance of "order" they demand. Authoritarian could mean malicious if we value liberty and justice for all.
Also here's the real story the morphed into "half" the country paid no federal income taxes. (in 2009)
http://www.politicususa.com/half-americans-taxes.html
I think it's simple, if stupid. After 2008 the GOTP found a message to sell that put them inthe driver's seat in Congress. Having won that battle, they have no plan to win the war. They wanted the majority, no matter what it took, to govern, they'll say, or do anything to keep the majority except Govern!
I picture Pres Romney still running for pres for the next four years while failing to be pres when I want to cheer myself up. Let's draft Hugh Romney House Speaker!
Actually it's true. Gridlock is good.
Sadly, I agree with your assertion, some gridlock does help. but gridlock only happens if every one is trying to go in conflicting directions at the same time. It ain't gridlock if the bus driver is passed out drunk under the table.
The republicans are about to prove that when you cut government spending the economy suffers greatly not the other way around as they have been saying for the last 32yrs with Reaganism. The government is the biggest buyer in the market and now republicans want to take away government spending. Now everyone will see the 'free' market will not make it up as their big lie is exposed, everyone will suffer from their big lie...there is not out of control government spending and demand creates jobs but people need money in their pockets to spend so removing the biggest spender will devastate our economy.
Republicans have no place in good government...they bring only destructiion.
And the uninformed and misinformed will blame the government.
Or reflects the mirror images coming in from our dear friends in the Conservative party in double A Britain .
As for using the terms "place" "Republican" "good" and government" in a single sentence for top prize Alex .
The Rethuglican Party is a cancer on the body politic.
As I see it, the Republican-led House of Representatives has been woefully negligent in fullfilling one of its legislative duties, to introduce bills to collect revenue, according to Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution:
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Thus, they had to resort to another facet of their duties:
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
Now, the Senate Republicans happily admit that they want to close tax loopholes, but not for the purpose of reducing the deficit. No, no, no ... they want to continue to reduce revenue even more.
I fail to see the logic.
This is why the GOP ave in when Obama wanted the rates to go up....they never thought that they were going to actually have to cough up the money
"The parties disagree, however, about what to do with the savings. Democrats want to close the tax loopholes and apply the new revenue to lowering the deficit and reducing the nation's long-term debts. Republicans also want to close the tax loopholes, but instead want to apply the savings to more tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans 'job creators.'"
Of course, they are both wrong: You take the money and invest in infrastructure and other projects that actually create jobs. It frustrates me to no end that my party, while not nearly as bad as the GOP, still clings to the deficit reduction BS. Every dollar not invested into our infrastructure and labor force delays economic recovery.
There is no end to the delusion or the illusion. (Where does blame go in musical Chairs?)
If we accept that we looking forward, then we may be making a very bad assumption.
It is merely normal to walk forward, but if we never try to walk backward, then we will never full see the advantages of walking in same direction as our eyes leads us.
There is not a child who in having never seen a telescope, who would not at least once look into the wrong end and see a small and distant world.
So here in the adult world we are in the process of getting old, so old in fact that we starting to relive our childhood, thanking the world for Alzheimer's.
The current economic, tax, deficit, debt and politically unwelcomed dream, is either not real or we are looking at in entirely the wrong way.
Suppose the reality is that the economy is hopeless. This is supported by facts as simple as "we don' understand how we have used energy to leverage production". Leverage energy powered productivity to the point where, we could, numbers allowing and God willing provide for the masses displaced from employments. Suppose further that this venerable model has already ended its useful life, and we have adequate car, homes highway, hospitals and electronic gadgets places near or in our more polite bodily orifices.
Then if the political system, the economic leaders, and the wealthy ne'er-do-better groups are aware that there is NO ECONOMIC growth potential left in the system. NO ECONOMIC growth potential left, because the cognoscenti of those can see no compromise, no benefit of risk, no unconformable possibilities (respectively) means a game-over end play. If the game-over is played well, what is left that would otherwise be invested on the old system is simply divided up between the wealthy players; politicians can endless talk in circles, business leaders can pad accounts with cost cuts, and the wealthy have fixed percentage so vast that they can just slow dance into eternity.
For this those who have played musical chairs, the end play, is that the winners all have chairs and the contemptible poor have nothing.
If you are not convinced of what I peak then how it is that every pundit, talking orifices, politician, elected official, and commissioned stooge is ignoring the ECONOMY. Yes that thing the ECONOMY that rest wholly on the stock market that has fluffed up a false sense of security.
When we awake from this nightmare we might notice that entire valuation of the stock market just equals the loss of wealth from those do not count at all.
Rip van winkle is not a good economist, and the three branches of government and the two branches of the economy (media and business), play a good tune, but old Rip finally wakes up he will change his name to Ripped Off.
Yes the game is over and we are all walking backward into this tragedy.
The entire argument (that the two sides are not even sharing the same reality) relies on a fatally flawed assumption…that both sides are "negotiating" in good faith, and that 'legislating' is even viewed as a positive outcome by one side.
"Government is the problem" is the GOP mantra and they've been doing their damndest to prove that mantra correct. I don't believe that the Republican party wants to *have* a nation; they want their confederation of 50 little tyrannies. So any actual attempts at governing with the GOP as partners is futile.
Negotiating with the GOP is akin to going on a first date, and deciding on dinner: You suggest Italian, they suggest ground glass and anthrax.
Here's a concept; a tax "loophole" is a tax cut that only those who qualify (read as the wealthy) can access. Eliminating a "loophole" and applying the "savings" to cutting taxes just means that the wealthy no longer have to be duplicitous about their filings.
This is all they ever DO. Try to take swipes at Democrats and try to fool folks into believing their b.s.
They get some thrill and self gratification.
We already have been asking, where are the jobs and we pointed out that there is agreement on loopholes. Ask RobDon if I said that. BOTH candidates talked about closing loopholes, now one person won, so that should be a clue for them.
Instead, they argue about revenue and closing loopholes are not revenue. WHAT? Trying to argue the President and Senate must do it for them. Blame game… this is just plain stupid.
Democrats want to close the tax loopholes and apply the new revenue to lowering the deficit and reducing the nation's long-term debts.
what a crock! just like every program obama pushes will not add one dime to the defeciet. bull! this president and the democrats have been lieing for the last 5 years. come on just like Obamacare was going to save money, and Obama would be the most transparent president. complete fraud.
Might I suggest a course in remedial spelling? And remedial math. Some counseling in anger management might help as well...
other than spelling and your personal attack you have nothing to rebut. nice
oh, and how is the math wrong?
I love this line. Usually, savings is what occur when you cut spending...thus when there is a sale, one says, "I saved a few bucks."
The reality is the parties disagree about what to do after the loopholes are eliminated and the tax code simplified. The Democrats want to leave the rates the same so more taxes will be collected. The Republicans want to lower the rates so that the tax burden stays the same.
No, savings is when you stick money into an account instead of spending it. When you pay a bit less for an item that you really didn't want anyhow, you didn't actually save. You lost the amount that you actually spent.
In your scenario, the repubs want to leave the deficit where it is while the Democrats want to reduce it.
In this case, It's like the Democrats want to use a bonus to pay down the mortgage more quickly to save on interest payments, but the repubs just want to throw the money away on a pimped up pickup instead of driving the same sedan that they've had for the last four years.
Can someone throw this tweet in Boehner's face the next time that he says closing loopholes will destroy the economy?
I have yet to understand how the repubs can pivot so quickly from pushing for loophole closing as the solution to financial problem instead of leaving the Bush tax cuts for anyone below $400,000. Now they are claiming that closing loopholes will destroy the economy (see senator from Kentucky, not McConnell, and Boehner a week or so ago). Now this guy claims that they are in favor of loophole closing after all. What is their problem?
rand paul believe like most libertarian that all income taxation is a disaster. Paul ryan advocated closing loopholes and lowering rates. it's all about "effective tax rates" the difference between tax reduction and spending as a means of economic stimulus is that tax reduction allows people to chose the markets that "win" from the stimulus where as spending allows Obama to funnel unborn tax payers money to his friends at fake energy compnays.
Incoherent Looneytarian hogwash...what a treat! :-/
ahh ad hominum attack a true sign of a person who cant win. so what do they do? attack the man not the argument.
The first requirement for refuting an argument is that an argument has been presented.
You, sir, have not presented an argument. Personally, I think "looneytarian drivel" nicely sums up what you have posted.
Opinions may vary...
How about if President Obama removes the cost of the two wars and the Medicare Part D prescription drug giveaway to big Pharma out of the budget, the way President Bush did. That would reduce the debt by at least four trillion dollars. Wouldn't that make the Republicans happy?
Yeah, maybe that's what we could do, but ooohhh the yelling and whining, we'd hear…
Just sweep it out of sight under the rug… Naw… I would like deficit reduction, too. But we need the economic rebound that the Rs have vowed to give us, but anything but cooperation in that endeavor.
I think the end of the wars would help, as long as they don't cook up another one (or three).
so you want to make it harder for the elderly to get thier medication? you want to let women in far off nations be gassed by cruel dictators. dang you liberals are progressive.
And we get the usual nonsense post by someone not living in reality land. First clue elderly have been forced to either buy meds or buy food, not both, every since Nixon approved the HMO scam. The real kicker, Nixon knew it was a scam to boost Healthcare Insurance providers profits as heard in the Nixon Tapes, in fact Nixon himself stated that HMO's were a scam.
Whomitmay,
You’re talking about the past that relegate toward today. You’re typical Lib Junk. What you asked for is what you get. January 1, 2014 reality will begin with your Obama care. Double down on Health Insurance Premiums. Then you'll see the real lost middle class compliments of people like you. And you sir, will be held accountable. You talk like a Bad Debt Junkie. You’ll commit to your cause, with the least amount of resistance with NO true commitment. You survive at everybody else’s expense without a worry in the world.
Says the troll spouting a particularly petulant version of the Peewee Herman defense.