Archive for the 'Assholes' Category

Apr 10 2014

Erik Erikson is just effing stupid!

Published by under Assholes

Getting the daily cappucino-before I go to have my what has become an almost weekly fight with Deutshce Telkom. I surfed over to John Cole's place to see them , quiet properly, mocking the latest bit of buffoonery out of Red State:

The RedState brain trust has come up with some stunningly dumb ideas for activism over the years, including the brilliant notion tosend bags of salt to Republican Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine (during winter! thanks, dudes!) to protest something or other. Then there was that time they proposed “Operation Leper” to punish any conservative who dared call stupid Sarah Palin “stupid.” But the tidal wave of stupid soon stranded RedStaters on their own virtual Molokai.

Today in own-goals, they’ve attempted to “parody” OkCupid’s protest of the Brendan Eich appointment as Mozilla CEO, but whoops! — they’ve stepped on their own dicks again! Here’s the OkCupid splash screen that greeted Firefox users for Eich’s days-long tenure:


And here’s RedState’s:


Cole points out Firefox should sue Erikson-just for the pleasure of making him mount a defense.

Erik Erikson is a brain dead slug.

No responses yet

Oct 16 2013

They went slowly mad……

Well it looks like the mess may be over-for a while.

Our Galtian overlords have finally had to cave in and recognize that they were only going to get one thing:


The exercise was pointless from the word go. Sane people recognized that. They also recognize how we cannot persist to allow this wreckless bunch of teabaggers to make a mockery of the American politcal system.

This moment in American political life is insane. That a group of narrow-minded zealots could push us to the brink of economic ruin, that they maintain a base of support in their frenzied, quixotic, incompetent gambit, that there is an apparatus that exists to defend this kind of nonsense—it came on us slowly but it is no less an emergency. This is broken. This cannot go on. 

And if you can’t see that then it’s not just the world that’s gone mad. You're crazy too.

2 responses so far

Sep 30 2013

The trouble with mitigation

Henry Hill: [voice over] Now he's got Paulie as a partner. Any problems, he goes to Paulie. Trouble with a bill, to Paulie. Trouble with cops, deliveries, Tommy, he calls Paulie. But now he has to pay Paulie every week no matter what. "Business bad? Fuck you, pay me. Oh, had a fire? Fuck you, pay me. The place got hit by lightning? Fuck you, pay me."


So tomorrow morning-if all goes as I expect it to. I will go into work, put my files in order, write a snarky "out of office" e-mail message, bemoaning the inability of Congress to do its Constitutionally appointed duty and passing along my sincere hope that every Republican member of Congress dies tomorrow night in a fire- and then I will shut down my computers, lock my files in the safe and head out the door to my car. And thus will begin the long lonely countdown to see if I can my next month's rent-and the house payment on the house in Shopping Mall.

No one, even the worst hater of Obama,  should be rooting for a government shutdown. And yet- I have read some pretty messed up people advocating exactly that. "Shut the damn thing down for year!". These morons actually believe that a government shutdown would not affect them at all. I weep when I think that some of the stupid people saying this, also wear the ring. They may wear the ring all right-but they long ago forgot what it stood for, or the real basis for the concept of the "citizen soldier". These people make me ashamed sometimes to be an American and a graduate of my alma mater. Notice I said sometimes-before anyone lays into me. My alma mater has also produced many fine men-but some folks do lose their way.

I wonder if some of that blase' ignorance is caused by the fact that we do during shutdowns what we always do. We muddle through it. Consider this, all you nay sayers. Hard working men like Maurice will go to work tomorrow-with no guarantee of getting paid back for his work, because what he does is necessary to the safety of his community. He does not agree with me in the least about the administration-but he will still get screwed by the shutdown.  The place I work at will have a military population doing twice the work it normally does. That will be repeated over 100's of locations.

Now to me-these things kind of miss the point. These mitigations allow shutdowns to happen. I keep thinking to myself, "Why not do the damn thing right? Have the government shutdown for real-all of it."

Air traffic would have to stop for lack of air traffic controllers.

Store shelves would rapidly become empty for lack of deliveries-or lack of safe products on its shelves.

Navy ships should just steam to the nearest port-and go cold iron.

Declare it open season for Mexicans to come streaming into Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California-because the border patrol would not be on duty.

Watch the markets freeze up because of lack of federal funds. Or better yet, watch creditor nations  sell just a small proportion of their American assets, they could send Wall Street into a tailspin, with unpleasant implications for the net worth of many Republicans and Democrats.

Watch literally thousands of Americans die on highways, and other venues for lack of safety inspections. If it went on long enough-some folks would die from tainted food.

Deny any guards at any government facility. Just leave the gates open and walk away. Open house for terrorists! 

And lots lots more.

Now that would be a shutdown. It might actually put the fear of God in both Congress and the hapless tea party dimwits who encourage this kind of irresponsibility. I think it would ensure that any shutdown would be short.

"You are talking nonsense!", you say. Sure I am-but its no more or less nonsensical than the idea that a small group of privileged Americans get to hold the country hostage. These assholes think they have nothing to lose.  Thanks to Republican legislatures back home they all have gerrymandered districts that protect them from any Democratic challenges.

And,  I might add, some dedicated Federal workers- who contrary to the popular caricature of them as lazy moochers-have a strong sense of duty.

What we have in America when Congress screws the pooch tonight is not an immediate Armageddon.  Rather its more like a slow stiffening of our country's body with rigor mortis. The country is dying all right-but instead of blowing up in an instant it just dies slowly.

Which gives the terrorists in Congress more time to play with matches in a dynamite magazine.

“Shut down” doesn’t really capture the impact of what’s more like a spending freeze that will gradually spread through the government like ice forming in water. That means its effects may creep up on citizens who don’t interact with the bureaucracy daily. Initially, a shutdown will be little more than a symbol of US dysfunction, but each passing day will make its economic impact more tangible, especially if prolonged squabbling spooks consumer and business confidence.

The shutdown is essentially a legal problem: Republicans in Congress refused to endorse a spending bill unless it delayed the Affordable Care Act, the law delivering health insurance to poorer Americans, which starts to take effect on Oct. 1. Now, when the new fiscal year starts, government officials won’t have the authority to spend new money.

The government doesn’t shut down “essential” services that protect life or would be more costly to suspend than keep going. That means soldiers stay on duty (though their pay is delayed) and nuclear reactors stay open, but most financial regulators  and trade negotiators are sent home without pay. Medicare and Social Security will keep paying out, since they are paid for out of trust funds, though the checks may be late arriving. Many departments and contracts will be able to continue using money that is already appropriated before that, too runs out.

The longest shutdown was 21 days. I have reason to think that this one may be longer. Because we have never had a Congress this full of lunatics before. I hope I am wrong.

You can call this a lot of things, but "gridlock" should not be one of them. And you can fault many aspects of the President's response — when it comes to debt-default, I think he has to stick to the "no negotiations with terrorists" hard line. But you shouldn't pretend that if he had been more "reasonable" or charming he could placate a group whose goal is the undoing of his time in office.

The real question now is what Boehner, McConnell, et al. can do about their hard-liners. A lot depends, for Americans and many others, on their success or failure.

So I have one message to Congress, courtesy of Henry Hill: 

Fuck you, pay me. 

One response so far

Sep 26 2013

Why I am glad they don’t have CSPAN over here.

So I don't have to listen to assholes like Ted Cruz babble on for 21 hours.

Law #1: Godwin’s Corollary Law of Teabagging Congress

“As any Teabagger protest in Congress grows longer, the odds of a comparison involving the Nazis or Hitler approaches ’1.’ Corollary: The first person to mention Hitler or the Nazis on the floor of Congress automatically loses the debate.”

You  knew Cruz was going to go there. Which is why its more than appropriate that Jon Stewart and he staff watched the speach so you didn't have to.

What Jon Stewart said.




Ted Cruz needs to be one of the first to go against the wall when the day comes.

No responses yet

Sep 16 2013

And while we are on the subject……

Of Mark Steyn-a completely useless man.

Here's another point of view that highlights my steadfast belief that Mark Steyn should just go fuck himself:

“Had we rolled out something that was very smooth and disciplined and linear, they would have graded it well, even if it was a disastrous policy. We know that, because that’s exactly how they graded the Iraq war,” – President Obama.

So take that-you worthless Canadian turd.

2 responses so far

Jul 22 2013

And now for a bit of good news.

Published by under Assholes

I have said repeatedly, that the reason our Galtian overlords get away with the types of lies and slander they write daily-is because our libel laws have become so weak.

So its nice to see someone with the gumption to take one of the worst offenders in the Liars Club to task.

On Friday, the District of Columbia Superior Court ruled that climatologist and Penn State professor Michael Mann can proceed in his lawsuits against the National Review and the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Dr. Mann accuses the two conservative entities of defamation for comparing him to convicted rapist Jerry Sandusky last July.

Mark Steyn should be good for at least a million or so.

Now, if it were only possible to sue Breitbart posthumously.

12 responses so far

Jul 21 2013

Some people remain true to form.

Some people are just incapable of change. Or understanding anything. Like Jim Hoft, The Dumbest Man on The Internet. Or his worthless colleagues at the Liars Club. Consistently-worthless pieces of s**t, each and every one of them.

And Charles Pierce had the temerity this weekend to point that out:

There is nothing in there that any sensible person would gainsay. There is nothing in there that could be interpreted as being in any way "divisive," unless you happen to be a person who considers the basic reality of the everyday contact between the races as being inherently divisive. (And, maybe, as a bonus, having said all that will make the president less likely to appoint Ray — Stop 'N Frisk — Kelly as his director of Homeland Security.) But it was unquestionably the most direct public remarks the president has made as a black man since he rose to prominence in 2004. As such, dear Jesus, has it jumped on some people's last nerves. Take, for example, the Dumbest Man On The Internet, who thinks the president's unremarkable remarks are a declaration of war on white people like him. Or some allied morons. But this swill is going to get some traction in more respectable circles because, in making those remarks, and in sounding for one of the very few times like what once was called a Race Man, the president broke what a lot of people assumed was a covenant he'd made with them when they permitted him to be president. That covenant was fashioned for him during his speech to the Democratic convention in Boston, wherein he told a divided country everything it really wanted to hear about itself. He was going to be the living demonstration of the progress the nation had made. His job, in addition to being president, was going to be as a redemptive figure. That was the deal by which the country would allow him to be its president.


See, it drives guys like William Jacobson, Hinderaker, and the rest of the herd of chronically stupid people-just up the wall that anyone might actually say the truth. Namely that it is a sad commentary on the state of the United States where: 1) People feel compelled to walk around with guns they have no business having-and the government of the respective states of Florida and Texas and others aid and assist them in that quest. 2) That people think it is perfectly fine for a non-policeman to gun down an unarmed man simply because he was walking down the street.

And to point out the criteria by which Zimmerman decided to stalk Martin and thus incite the altercation that got Martin killed-to point out that it was racial. That really spools them up.

But the facts are still the facts-as much as rumbling herd of morons who read the columns over at Breitbart's Mausoleum tell you differently. Don't read the comments there-it will make you despair of humanity in general and Americans in particular. Want to know why the United States of America is declining in the global competition? Just take a look at the Breitbart audience and multiply it a 1000 fold. Ramapant stupidity is spreading in the land of my birth.

I don't know which is more screwed up, the "Not Guilty" verdict-or the inability of the right wing to attribute it to tragic set of circumstances, which were completly avoidable.

Take this little gem for instance:

NB: I have included links for purpose of citation. I do not recommend going to any of them, except Wonkette.

As per an article released the 17th, Gateway Pundit is now circulating speculation that Trayvon Martin’s purchases—Skittles and Arizona-brand fruit juice—were to be used to create “lean” — aka sizzurp, purple drank. His source is American Thinker, which claims that a 2011 Facebook interaction between Martin and a friend included the former requesting a hook-up for codeine, to make drank.


What this guy says:


No responses yet

Jul 08 2013

The law of unintended consequences.

Published by under Assholes

The irony here is rich:

A new Kansas law allowing gun owners to carry weapons in public buildings, including schools, has thrust a major Des Moines-based insurer into the national gun control debate.

The EMC Insurance Cos. insures 85 percent to 90 percent of all Kansas school districts and has refused to renew coverage for schools that permit teachers and custodians to carry concealed firearms on their campuses under the new law, which took effect July 1. It’s not a political decision, but a financial one based on the riskier climate it estimates would be created, the insurer said.

“We’ve been writing school business for almost 40 years, and one of the underwriting guidelines we follow for schools is that any on-site armed security should be provided by uniformed, qualified law enforcement officers,”
said Mick Lovell, EMC’s vice president for business development. “Our guidelines have not recently changed.”

The Kansas Legislature passed the law after the fatal shootings of 20 elementary school children in Newtown, Conn., in December.


“It’s one thing to have a trained peace officer with a gun in school; it’s a completely different situation when you have a custodian or a teacher with a gun,” Skow said. “That changes the risk of insuring a school and magnifies it considerably.”

Insurers simply don’t know how to price the added risk yet, he said, but they know it’s there.

Can’t wait for the first lawsuit that comes from a crazed, armed, teacher who still gets injured-but the the insurance company wouldn’t pay. Because “Murica”.

2 responses so far

Feb 15 2013

What will it take to get their attention?

I have been accused from time to time, of being over the top when it comes to taking out my anger at the spoiled children who inhabit the halls of the US Congress. They do reprehensible things every day and yet I am not allowed to call for their march to the wall. 

“Think about it: We have a sequester looming, one that could wreak havoc at the Pentagon; a coming series of budget confrontations that create real challenges in the management of the Defense Department; and an ongoing war.

And a little group of willful men and women, including those who have been the loudest critics of the sequester, are keeping the next head of the department from getting into office and beginning the hard job of managing the turbulence ahead.

That’s only the first on a list of irresponsible acts. 

Until they actually feel real fear, deep down in their hearts fear,  for their positions-we will still have to deal with this nonsense year in and year out.  I despair deep in my heart of their being any positive improvement in the Congress of the United States.  These men behave irresponsibly on important issues and they get away with it. Its only about insignificant things that they get run out of town on a rail-like who they sleep with.  But when they do political things that threaten real damage to the country, like the sequester, NO ONE seems to be able to hold them to account.

Sometimes I wish the President had the power to dismiss Congress and call for new elections-as they do in a Parliamentary system. Something has to be done-its only February and we have had two graphic demonstrations of how a minority subverts the will of the majority.  What is it going to take to get them to behave responsibly?

15 responses so far

Nov 24 2012

Breitbart still sucks

Charles Johnson has observed on several occasions that while the late, not so dearly departed, Andrew Breitbart was well and truly one of the United States' biggest morons-the children who write in his stead can top it.


Sure enough, Breitbrat Ben Shapiro’s moronic attack on President Obama’s Thanksgiving address was rapidly picked up by the rest of the right wing Fake Outrage Machine. The Daily Caller has this article based on Shapiro’s post: Obama Thanksgiving Address: Calls to Unite Behind WH, Doesn’t Thank God.

Watch how the Daily Caller’s Christopher Bedford blatantly slants the story against President Obama, saying he “urged the country to unite behind his administration” twice, even though the actual quote from Obama’s speech says no such thing.


And true to form-the members of the Liars Club, led by Jim Hoft; the "Dumbest Man on the Internet" picked right up on it.

John Hinderaker, Jim Hoft, William Jacobson, the Town Hall Harlot: Michelle Malkin-who is spending the weekend looking down on Wal Mart protestors for having the audacity to publicly point out the company could do more for its workers-and of course lets not forget the collective stupidity that is Breitbart. They are all contemptible people. As stupid and vile as you might expect.

No responses yet

Nov 04 2012

Voting is the best revenge.

John Hinderaker and the rest of the contemptible cocksuckers  members of the Liars Club, are all up in arms over an offhand remark that Obama made in a stump speech a day ago. In a speech Obama mentioned his opponents and the crowd quite understandably began to boo-and Obama said, "No, no, no — don’t boo, vote. Vote. Voting is the best revenge.”

Hinderaker and the rest of the echo chamber seem to think that shows some sort of "dark side" to Obama. In the twisted universe they inhabit, only supporters of Rmoney are supposed to have emotions and proud convictions. They are all up in arms about it, making a huge issue over nothing.  Obama was right.

I got news for Mr. Hinderaker, worthless bit of slime that he is, in a democracy governed by laws-voting is the only revenge. As much as they might deserve more. And as much as I would like to see them receive some well deserved suffering for the damage these folks have done to American political discourse-in a proper society that simply is not done.

I voted by absentee some two weeks ago. And yes I voted for Obama. Because he is the guy on the ballot, and a vote for him is a vote against dismal view that Hinderaker constantly sets forth. As my favorite news magazine points out-in far better form than any word Mr. Hinderaker has ever written:

Many of The Economist’s readers, especially those who run businesses in America, may well conclude that nothing could be worse than another four years of Mr Obama. We beg to differ. For all his businesslike intentions, Mr Romney has an economic plan that works only if you don’t believe most of what he says. That is not a convincing pitch for a chief executive. And for all his shortcomings, Mr Obama has dragged America’s economy back from the brink of disaster, and has made a decent fist of foreign policy. So this newspaper would stick with the devil it knows, and re-elect him.

When I voted for Obama, it was a clear knowledge of the things he hasn't done that I wanted him to. A clear knowledge that he has not gotten out of both stupid wars Bush got us into-he's gotten us out of only one, and that was only with the help of the worthless Iraqis themselves; with the clear knowledge that he has been stymied for the last two years by a group of worthless people in Congress, all of them Republican, who were more concerned about torpedoing the economy for their own political advantage ( witness the debt ceiling debacle);  with a clear knowledge that the ACA while a great step forward is not the best legislation that could have been produced-and had the American people and the Republicans in Congress not been so stupid we could have had much better. I voted knowing all of these things. But in the end the choice came down to this and this alone:

This election does not represent a choice between left and right. It represents a choice between balance and a new, extreme form of conservatism. This new conservatism cannot accept any tax increases as part of a deal to reduce the deficit. For all his attempts to sound moderate in the campaign’s closing days, Romney has not altered the response he gave during a Republican-primary debate rejecting a hypothetical deal involving a 10-to-1 ratio between spending cuts and tax increases. This refusal to acknowledge the need for more revenue is a recipe for eviscerating government—and the cuts, as Ryan’s budget shows, would fall disproportionately on programs for Americans with the lowest incomes.

The new right has broken with conservatism’s past—and our country’s most constructive traditions—by adopting a new and radical individualism that largely ignores our country’s gift for community.



Hinderaker and the rest are, in part, responsible for that extremism. Being the grifters that they are they are, they live to keep everyone stirred up so that more money flows into their pockets. By voting against the things that he advocates and for a vision for the country that accepts the world is changing-no matter how much  William Jacobson refuses to accept it-I am getting my revenge.  They deserve it too-and if it makes their cherished "conservatives" take a hit, then I will have done my civic duty well.


UPDATE! It would seem the money grubber in Chief, old Mittens himself is jumping onto this line"For revenge. Instead, I ask the American people to vote for love of country,". Ok. Fine.

For love of country, because I don't want it screwed up by yours and the "zombie eyed granny starver's" twisted vision of it, and for revenge on the stupid people who enabled the hollowness of your ideas. Either reason works for me-so long as Mitt Romney loses.


12 responses so far

Oct 20 2012

Looking for someone to blame

Whenever I get depressed about the sad state of American politics-which in the month of October is just about every day-I don't have to look far for people who should be held to blame for polarizing our politics.

The collective group of idiots who populate the Liars Club.

To review, the Liars Club is that group of conservative bloggers,who no matter what the subject is, will ensure that whatever story they post on their blog is casting the current President of the United States in the worst possible light-and casting themselves in a light of "brilliance". Or at least that is how they want you think they are. They consist of the National Review, Powerline, Gateway Pundit AKA Jim Hoft, also known in saner circles as the "dumbest man on the internet", William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection, Weasel Zippers, Jammie Wearing Fools ( the last word is a correct title-they are fools),  any Town Hall author-but especially Hugh Hewitt. And last but not least, the emotionally crippled children who carry on the legacy of their thankfully expired namesake-Andrew Breitbart.

All of them are quite useless and all of them to figuratively to be beaten to death with a Louisville Slugger.

When they can't find anything news worthy to tar and feather the President or any other Democratic Party member about-they just make shit up.

What probably depresses me the most is that -one can just know when one reads a tag line by them on Memeorandum, that they are completely and certifiably insane. While they all have different day jobs-some are professional   hacks "journalists", others are part time writers-but they are all certifiably stupid. I hate them all with a well deserved passion.

They are as John Cole describes it, Serious Persons:

Serious Person- Also frequently appearing as “Very serious person,” this is applied to a person held in great esteem by The Village, who is repeatedly entirely wrong about everything, usually with tragicomic results. Conversely, those who have pretty much been right about everything the last twenty years are referred to as “not serious.” Serious persons believe the only solution to any foreign policy issue is bombing brown people (preferably Muslim, when at all possible), and the only solution to domestic affairs is cutting entitlements and demanding that the poor and working poor “sacrifice.” 



In other words, they have no fucking clue what they are talking about. Nor do they have any idea at all the world has changed and its not going back to the 80's-EVER.

Why do I hold them to blame? Because they write for an audience that clearly is as ignorant as they appear to be. Notice I say appear to be-because deep down they know what they are doing. They have no desire to have an honest discussion about anything. Their sole purpose in writing is not to celebrate the joy of communicating a well thought idea. And to take the time to do some research about it. Or to even pause to write about the truly beautiful things in life that have nothing to do with politics.

No they do what they do for the purpose of getting people angry. They want their supporters to be angry at the nasty black man in the White House. They want people like me-smarter than any of them-to get angry in return. And then if I write something that actually catches them in their lie-or points out again how they love to lie-they will simply turn up the volume and make it about me and/or some aspect of my personal life.  They truly are reprehensible people.

They exert too much influence in American politics today-and sadly the news media by and large seems to take cues from them. In the case of Fox News, they appear to get story lines from them.

And they get away with it. They shouldn't but they do-because too many Americans are stupid. Right Charles Pierce?

The threat to the country, and to its commitment to self-governing democracy over the previous decade, and especially at the end of it, when the institutions of self-government seemed powerless to stop a cascade of destruction brought down on all of us by the institutions of private capital, the strength of which most of us never had begun to guess. That, through lassitude and a nearly bottomless thirst for snake oil, we had been complicit in the coring out of the strength of the institutions of self-government seemed terribly beside the point at the time, given the ruin that seemed to be looming to all points of the compass. But now, in the first real election conducted entirely after the crisis, and after the depths of the recession that it caused, we do not have that luxury anymore. The stakes are plainly clear. The decision, at this point, may well be irrevocable, and the first opportunity to make that decision is in the simple act of voting, and of explaining to ourselves why we vote. We vote because it is something we do together, for one another. We do not vote to take something back from someone else. We do not vote in a bubble, even if we think we do. Voting is communal, whether we want to look at it that way or not. We will have a self-governing political commonwealth or we will decide not to have one. And, right now, 20 days out, you'd have to be crazy or Nate Silver to think you know what which way that decision will fall.

The lies of the aforementioned members have a lot to do with that. And so I place the blame squarely on them-and hate them with a fervor that will be a flame unrequited until they are exposed as the charlatans they truly are.

10 responses so far

Sep 22 2012

Don’t kid yourself-a lot of people really believe it.

Facebook sentiments are a rather inaccurate measure of public opinion to be sure. But if the views of my more conservative Facebook "friends" are any measure-all of the people who are pronouncing Romney's campaign "dead" based on his rather infamous "47 percent of the country is irresponsible" remarks, are acting pre-maturely. About this years Presidential race, I am totally pessimistic. Romney will come back from it, and there are more than a few people out there who wish to delude themselves about their relationship with their government. Even as the Treasury makes monthly deposits in their bank accounts.

I think that depresses me the most. Hearing people who are equally, if not more a recipient of governmental largess whine and complain about how their fellow citizens are "parasites" and other even less complimentary terms.Paul Krugman was right,

"For the fact is that the modern Republican Party just doesn’t have much respect for people who work for other people, no matter how faithfully and well they do their jobs. All the party’s affection is reserved for “job creators,” a k a employers and investors. Leading figures in the party find it hard even to pretend to have any regard for ordinary working families — who, it goes without saying, make up the vast majority of Americans.


That is the simple truth-a lot of people buy into the myth-because it makes them feel superior and better about themselves. That they are 100% wrong is not a possibility they are prepared to acknowledge. Because to do so is to acknowledge they are both selfish and heartless. For that reason I reprinting this post that explains what the tax numbers really mean-and why no sane person wants to be a part of them if they can avoid doing so. The "lucky duckies" are not so lucky-in fact their lives are downright hard. Pity the two top members of the GOP ticket don't see that.

The story behind the story.

One of the most popular mantra's of current conservative thought is the theme that I call, "Freddie the Freeloader". Namely that part of teabag orthodoxy that holds that the nation is literally full to brim with people more than content to live off of "welfare" and do nothing for themselves or society.

It frequently manifests itself every few months or so, as the Lucky Ducky statistic. Lucky duckies is a term that was used in Wall Street Journal editorials starting on 20 November 2002 to refer to Americans who pay no federal income tax because they are at an income level that is below the tax line (after deductions and credits).

It does not tell the whole story, and if anything it should not serve, as it is so often done, as an indictment of the worth and character of the individuals who fall in that 43%-than as an example of the law of unintended consequences- of well meaning tax law provisions balanced against wages that have been essentially flat lined for the past ten years.  If the number of "non income tax payers" has gone up in the past two years ( which it has) it highlights a statistic I'm not so sure the connessiurs of Lipton really want to be highlighting. Wages are not growing in the US-they are flat for all but a very few. Second-unemployment is twice what it was when the Wall Street Journal first coined the term. Prices for everything-have gone up though.

 The federal income tax is only one of several taxes Americans pay. Other taxes, like excise taxes, sales taxes, and especially the payroll tax (a.k.a. FICA),  are not refunded or zeroed out. They get paid regardless of ones standing on the income graph.  If you include payroll taxes in that total number of tax units computation I mentioned earlier, the percentage of people with zero income tax or payroll tax drops to 11.6%.

And that does not include state taxes-or sales tax.

Furthermore, the tax protestors have neglected to tell you an important piece of economic demography: 90% of those with zero tax liability made less than 25,000 dollars cash income last year.  In a family of four, factoring in both the poverty threshold of 21, 800 and the income tax entry level of 26,000 ( before taking the earned income tax credit), I’m not so sure they have a lot to brag about. The popular number of a person making 44,900 paying no income taxes is only valid for a filer who can take Child Tax credits on two children and an earned income tax credit. A single filer, has already jumped on board the taxpayer train a long time ago.

Ask your self this, what would happen to the number if the home mortage exemption went away? It would probably drop significantly-to the detriment of a lot of people-including people who do pay taxes and complain about it.

Consider this example: A man makes 50,000 per year salary, he has three kids, a job, a wife who takes care of said kids and two cars. Lets just sat for arguments sake he has a relatively small house. (Say between 175000 and 200000).  At 50,000 a year, that man is starting off making 4166 a month before taxes. Throw in say 6% into a 401K means that he is starting out before anything else comes out of his check at about 3850. The guy is going to start his tax return at about 9,862 in taxes. Subtract deductions for his family, his mortage, and his state taxes-he's probably getting money back. But he's working hard just to stay afloat-is this really the person you want to make fun of?  He's supposed to be the core Republican demographic.

And lets not even ask the question of what percentage of corporations pay no taxes shall we?

The simple truth of the matter is that a lot of lower income Americans are paying taxes and not getting ahead in the process. If there is to be any type of tax reform-it has to start from the facts, not simply the fictions people want to believe.

One response so far

Aug 10 2012

They must have touched a raw nerve

One of the surest indicators that a campaign or event is on the right track-is the amount of reaction it gets from the Liars Club. To review, the Liars Club is that reprehensible assemblage of the dregs of the blogosphere, who whine like pussies about any and every thing.
And it would seem a political ad by a PAC supporting the President has them most, most, upset. So much so that the truly disgusting member of the Liars Club, Mr John Hinderacker is just three steps short of total apoplexy. Him and the rest of his fellow whiners seem to think that’s some kind of grave sin –to correctly point out that Mitt Romney’s former employers engaged in actions that hurt people, a lot of people, and created preconditions that led to other more deadly complications.
As is usual-there is only one real response to Mr. Hinderaker and his gang of ignorant fools and it involves the usual words: “f*ck” and “you”. Logic didn’t work on these folks-and emotional appeals are useless, so what is a person to do?  Maybe start by pointing out the underlying facts and policy issues that are the basis for the ad are unassailable.
Here is the real story. Regardless of how many people Mitt Romney laid off when he owned Bain Capital, when he was the governor of Massachusetts he thought that no one should die because they didn't have employer-provided health care. And he did something about it. But he has totally disavowed that philosophy. So, decisions made by Bain Capital cost a man his job and his health care, which ultimately meant that his wife delayed seeing a doctor and didn't have any insurance when she found out that she was sick with cancer. Romney had a solution for that problem when he was governor, but he has no solution for that problem now.
His new motto is "tough luck," which is the same as his original motto. If we stick with that storyline, we'll win this election without having to make any distortions of any kind.
Now Hinderaker and the rest of the slime don’t like Mitt Romney getting blamed for the quick death of this man's wife. This- while their favored candidate of the same name-sure does seem to lie a lot himself. And while he may not be directly responsible for her death-his company’s failure to act with compassion cannot simply be ignored. As pointed out by Doug J, “ The actions of rich and powerful people have consequences. Sometimes these consequences involve the deaths of other people. Deal with it. This isn’t beanbag. Ayn Rand’s heroes didn’t sit around whining about what the moochers and looters said about them. Today’s Galtians shouldn’t either.”
Translation? You fuckers over at Powerline do this kind of bullshit all the time-so don’t whine when the mud comes back at you like a boomerang.
Now as with all stories of tragedy-there is a grey area attached to the man in the ad’s story. His wife had health insurance until she lost her job. Which if there was a plan like Romney’s in effect-something his own spokesman pointed out- the consequences might not have been as severe. This the Liars club has convienently ignored, while all the while publicly dismembering Mr. Soptic-the man in the ad. But as I noted above, those details have little to do with the central policy issue this add effectively highlights.
But I also think the reaction of [the idiot conservative blogs] (paraphrasing added by me-SS) goes way too far. An unproven allegation is not the same as a disproven allegation. And stories like this really do happen. When older workers lose their jobs, they frequently end up in jobs with lower salary and benefits, leading to a downward financial spiral that can last for years. When people have no health insurance, they frequently react by delaying medical care. The Institute of Medicine famously concluded that 18,000 people a year die prematurely because they didn't have health insurance. That estimate may be too high, but there's plenty of evidence some lower number is accurate—and that many, many more suffer financially, physically, or both.
These facts matter, perhaps more than the specifics of Soptic's story, because the fate of the under- and uninsured is a central issue in this campaign. President Obama’s position is that the federal government has an obligation to make sure every American has health insurance, regardless of age, pre-existing condition, or employment status. That’s why he signed the Affordable Care Act, which puts in place a coverage system that will go a long way towards accomplishing that goal. Romney, of course, wants to repeal the Affordable Care Act. He also wants to change Medicare and Medicaid so that they provide less financial protection, while introducing tax changes that would likely weaken employer-sponsored insurance.
If the cost of getting that point across is making sleazeballs like Hinderaker uncomfortable-then by all means do ten more ads. Maybe I might be more concerned about allegations of the Democrats living in a pig sty-if it were not for the fact that Hinderaker lives in one himself. By his own choice. And appears to love it.
So spare me the phony indignation, you pompous twit.

One response so far

May 13 2012

The Liars Club

Is that group of increasingly reprehensible bloggers who make up the "professional right wing blogosphere". (Membership names listed below).  Besides the fact that they generally have their facts wrong-they are just about universally a group of douchbags loathsome group of people to be around. Their blogs are essentially interchangeable, fact free-and in general-poorly written and edited.

So imagine my surprise when , this guy paid them a visit last week:


NEW YORK — In an effort to reach out to conservative media, presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney and wife Ann met for two hours Wednesday with several dozen conservative bloggers, reporters and columnists in an off-the-record gathering at a private Washington, D.C. club, according to attendees.

Romney, who struggled with some members of the conservative media during the Republican primary, is banking on their support in his campaign against President Barack Obama, regardless of whether they were previously in his corner or not.

The attendees came from numerous conservative sites and right-of-center publications, including National Review, Daily Caller, American Spectator,Washington Examiner, Human Events, RedState, Right Wing News, Powerline, Townhall, Ace of Spades, RiehlWorldView, White House Dossier and PJ MediaRNC chairman Reince Preibus also attended.

Details of the Romney meeting did not previously leak out because of the off-the-record ground rules…

As to why he was not invited, Andrew Breitbart could not be reached for comment.

But rest assurred, his snot nosed, idiotic, children where there.


The meeting, which included writers from RedState and as well as a list of conservative publications reported by Huffington Post — National Review, Daily Caller, American Spectator, Washington Examiner, Powerline*, Townhall,, RiehlWorldView, White House Dossier, and PJ Media (though not, as an early report had suggested, the conspiracist site WorldNetDaily). RNC chairman Reince Preibus also attended.

Notably, the meeting also included some grassroots bloggers with no real institutional ties to the Washington Republican Establishment, including the Twitter virtuoso Ace of Spades and John Hawkins of Right Wing News.

John Hinderaker and his blog Powerline, are especially vile-especially given the fact that in this election, as in the last, he is something of a special pleader:


[* Powerline Proprietor John Hinderaker is the newest Koch installation on the Cato Institute Board of Directors, his firm does work for Koch and the blog was prominent in the takedown of Dan Rather via blogswarm. This memory will be important below.]


I despise John Hinderaker-and everything he and the rest of that crowd represents. If you want a great example of why I am down on American politics-look no further than this: The GOP nominee having to grovel before this group of lunatics.


PS-If you want a pretty good accounting of what a loons Hinderaker and his supporters are-look no further than here.

I'm tired of seeing your vile trash everytime I open up Memeorandum.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

5 responses so far

Next »

  • Categories

  • Previous Posts


  • Want to subscribe to my feed?

    Add to Google
  • Follow me on Facebook!

    Just look for Skippy San. ( No dash).
  • Topics

  • Meta