[YaYa123]

CNN's Lou Dobbs looked stunned as he called Bush's speech "Bold". "Bold".... Jim Ellis of Business Week agrees, but he wouldn't agree that it would be effective. , Lou Dobbs says he was surprised at it's boldness. "Big gamble" says Ellis, "is most of the benefits are going to be in the off years." (Whatever that means). Judy Woodruff says the House has it's own plan, and interviews John Edwards within in just a few minutes of the speech ending. "is the president right", she asked John Edwards. "No" says Edwards..."this is a taxcut for the rich."... "it's an enormous budget buster" says Edwards. The president's plan is "loaded up for the richest Americans instead of putting help in the hands of the ones who need it...and it's not fiscally responsible.", says Edwards. "What they're doing is put ornaments on it, but it's not helping normal people. He's accelearating taxcuts for the rich."

John Edwards is so fullofshit..his eyes are brown....and so predictable, I'msorry I bothered to report what he said.

The discussion after this, between Paul Begala and Tucker Carlson was really fun. Maybe the transcript will be up soon, and I'll add it here. Little Tucker finally managed to score...but then again, President Bush's position is pretty easy to defend.

[Wphile]

John Edwards is a moron. Sheesh...I heard the speech - ALL TAX rate cuts are accelerated. That includes my brackets, JohnnyBoy you moron, and I ain't rich. Of course, according to the Dems anyone earning more than $27,000 and who pays taxes is rich. The Dems are so ridiculous!

[Dog Gone]

"Most Americans who have investments in the stock market have it through their IRA or their 401K, so that is tax-free anyway," said House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California.

That is an utter lie. Dividends that are within an IRA or 401K are not taxed at the time they are put into those accounts, but they certainly are taxed at the time they are withdrawn. That's hardly "tax-free".

[GretchenEE]

Hi Yaya, long time no see.

"Big gamble" says Ellis, "is most of the benefits are going to be in the off years." (Whatever that means).

Perhaps Ellis means most of the benefits will come during non-election years, and there is that pesky issue of voters who forget to be grateful to those whose hands blessed their coffers, so the "gamble" is political for MOC. If so, the speaker is entirely missing the point: how to stimulate the economy, not to assure re-election of Congress members!

If so, how could there be a more blatant example of money tied to votes?

Just can't help but remember the words of one of our founding fathers (Jefferson?, and I'm summarizing poorly) who intoned the warning that once the people figure out they can vote themselves money out of the public treasury, there will be big trouble.

[cake_crumb]

"John Edwards is so fullofshit..his eyes are brown....and so predictable, I'msorry I bothered to report what he said."

Edwards is a moron. He has no original thoughts. Everything that comes out of his mouth is the DLC party line, except for the outright lies : those are his alone. He brags about "Writing legislation" which was passed...and when you look up the bill he's bragging about (hard to do, since he also gets the names of the bills wrong) he isn't even listed as a sponsor.

He's a smoke and mirror creation of the Democrat Propaganda Machine. No wonder CNN interviews him so much.