Posted on 05/21/2009 10:30:22 AM PDT by MtnClimber
Edited on 05/21/2009 5:19:54 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
I did a little in the rest of the text you pulled.
It's the “tax cuts cure all ills” and “tax cuts pay for themselves” narratives used in context with Bush record. Tax cuts have definite benefits but trying to defend those two simple messages have backfired. Talk radio will claim that Bush tax cuts alone created the recovery and increased tax revenues. But at the same time Greenspan was running the printing presses on high for three-four years and Bush and congress were happily spending the money(Bernake who Bush selected had promoted this under Greenspan) . That in itself will bring the temporary recovery that conservatives credit to Bush tax cuts and increase revenues too(and the deficit/or inflation).
To carry on this myth, they (Rush, Hannity and Levin) were forced to defend the economy up until the crash last year. After the crash they were suddenly experts, it was Barney Frank and Jimmy Carter that wrecked the economy years ago. But how could they have done it years ago when the same experts just Months earlier were talking about the strong Bush economy ?
All this "party this, party that", "us and them", "conservatism vs liberalism" talking points fell lame after the economic crash. Yet they still repeat them.
Notice how they (conservative talk radio) talk about the federal reserve printing money NOW! All of a sudden it's a factor, but not 2002-2005.
Do I get extra credit for never being a liberal in the first place?
“Right wing talk radio has their own fantasies that their programmed listeners repeat blindly too. The have some simple narratives they repeat and pick their facts to defend.”
That’s called partisanship.
We can’t all walk around disinterestedly in robes, talking about beauty and truth with our heads in the cosmos.
I should add that I agree with you. Partisans annoy me. But it’s almost impossible not to be one. Everyone says they hate both parties and pretends to be above it all. No one is.
It's more like they are lying to us to to further their agenda TOO, "the end justifies the means" . This seemed cool in 2002 with super high public support and everyone wanting to be a republican. But with the loss of two elections and the economic crash, and most people avoiding the R label maybe those same simple-ton talking points, with accusations by them that those that don't buy them are bad or stupid, is a failed strategy.
I’ll give ya credit for that.
The best is when Levin and Hannity disclaim responsiblity for anything BAD Bush did (still claiming) saying “I am not a republican, I am a conservative”. Yet they both told us last Fall to go door to door to elect McCain. Last fall they were “Republicans first”, and every election before that too (in 2004 they didnt give a crap about Bush deficit spending or social spending, he was the hero) .
I posted this Levin flashback because so many ask me where my proof is. Yet when I posted it, I got attacked and insulted for “Helping the Left”.
Robots go after the messenger
“This seemed cool in 2002 with super high public support and everyone wanting to be a republican. But with the loss of two elections and the economic crash, and most people avoiding the R label maybe those same simple-ton talking points, with accusations by them that those that don’t buy them are bad or stupid, is a failed strategy.”
Though accurate, that analysis is a bit too cynical. For politics is about power at least as much (and almost always more than) ideas. And to a certain degree, rabid partisans have a point. You can’t institute your ideas if you don’t win, and you can’t win if you don’t simplify. People who demand ideological purity tend to be viewed as extemists or ivory-tower intellectuals, and consequently—either through fatigue or choice—tend to be less engaged.
This is all a variant on the truism that history is made by those who show up. Talk radio is made by those who appeal to simpletons. Philosophers get the last laugh, because they influence the coming generations. In the meantime, politics is for the partisans.
Anyway, back to my cynicism charge. One must accept politics for what it is. It’s not for intellectual purity. Your expectations are far too high. Unless you want to drop out and hang with the philosophers, you have to deal with the Olbermanns and Hannities of the hour.
The "tax cuts cure all ills" line is of your own creation....never heard it on talk radio.
The "tax cuts pay for themselves" has been proven in hard numbers....a lot more tax money came in after the cuts...exact figures are readily available, so you are a little bit less than half right, since the "cure all ills" item is debatable, the increase in incoming revenue is not.
Lot of talk shows out there, so someone may have said it at some point.
“But with the loss of two elections and the economic crash, and most people avoiding the R label maybe those same simple-ton talking points, with accusations by them that those that don’t buy them are bad or stupid, is a failed strategy.”
That’s the price of being in power. You get blamed for whatever happens. Sometimes it takes more than one administration. Sometimes it takes generations, as with the New Deal, but eventually every party in power has to bear responsibility for the fact that they didn’t create a utopia.
proof:
Man Calls 911 Over Son’s Messy Room
http://news.aol.com/article/911-messy-room/487937
BEDFORD, Ohio (May 18) - An Ohio man who argued with his grown son over a messy bedroom said he overreacted when he called 911.
Andrew Mizsak called authorities Thursday after his 28-year-old son — who’s a school board member in the Cleveland suburb of Bedford — threw a plate of food across the kitchen table and made a fist at him when told to clean his room.
The son, also named Andrew, lives in a room in his parents’ basement.
The father declined to press charges and told police he doesn’t want to ruin his son’s political career.
The son, who also works as a political consultant, said he’s lucky to be living in the house rent free. He also promises to keep his room clean.
******************************************************************************************************************************************************************
And in that time, Republicans sent tax money more efficiently than any Democrat could dream of doing.
You have that exactly on the mark!
Also Bush governed as a activist president, some things Talk radio liked, some things they didnt, but Bush was always active and without great communication skills. So this made it worse on his legacy for getting blame. The Bush-bots will claim Bush didnt get stuff he wanted passed, but Bush was an activist who set his priorities and that's what voters remember.
Unless you're a democrat who really did exacerbate the problem.
As I recall, we were cooking along just fine with the Bush "tax cuts for the rich" when the dims got control of congress in 2006 by lying about how awful Bush was for six solid years every stinkin' day and night. Everything that they had set up to tank the economy and win the election in 2008, like McCain as our candidate, Soros all ready to pull his billions out of the world economy -- which he did last September precipitating the crash and forcing W to start the bailouts -- and the legislated failures of the mortgage and car manufacturing businesses came together for them, but it was a perfect storm for America.
Conservatism works, and we really should try it. It hasn't been used by the government in this country for twenty-one years.
As I explained directly in the reply you responded to ; the tax cuts came along with record money printing and government spending. Those two increases alone will increase tax revenues(until the crash) , but create a deficit as they did. In fact if tax cuts REALLY created the revenues those revenues would still be coming in now, the tax cuts were never repealed, but the low interest rates were.
Tax cuts increasing revenue has never been proved, and in many or most cases is theoretically untrue. Instead it sends the message government is free, which Obama is using. But its a litany that the listeners repeat as fact. You are proving the exact point I made in my example.
I know I am a heretic's, how can I even contradict the 'doctrine' ? that no one has to pay taxes ever.
It most certainly has!
IRS's own figures show the increase in revenue coming in.
The spending and money printing is unrelated to my point unless you're to weasel around it by adding straw man comments to it.
Looks like you're trying to work around it by attaching the other two points.
My only point it that the tax cuts resulted in increased tax money coming in and yes, it has been proven.
Go back to the Reagan tax cuts which did the same thing....the incoming revenue increased. Don't try and mix it with unrelated things.
Tax cuts stimulate the economy perforce. More money in people’s pockets means more saving and more spending. Saving is investing — economy stimulation. Spending is economy stimulation. The more spending and investing, the more tax revenue. It has been proven over and over, when JFK did it, when RR did it, and when W did it. The problem is that congress spends it all like drunken sailors — no insult to sailors intended.
As far as your straw dog, printing money results in massive inflation ala Jimmah Carter’s regime. If W’s strong economy were a result of fiat money, inflation would already be where zer0’s policies will send it soon, on the roof.
What nonsense.
That was undeniably proved in the 80's under Reagan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.