Eleven Republican state senators filed a bill yesterday, SB 6883, that would bar legislators from collecting a per diem during the coming special session, which I suppose might be taken as a serious attempt to protect the interests of taxpayers, if not for the fact that its last-minute filing ignores both Senate rules and the Washington State Constitution.
ARTICLE II, SECTION 36: WHEN BILLS MUST BE INTRODUCED.
No bill shall be considered in either house unless the time of its introduction shall have been at least ten days before the final adjournment of the legislature, unless the legislature shall otherwise direct by a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, said vote to be taken by yeas and nays and entered upon the journal, or unless the same be at a special session.
I heard Sen. Joe Zarelli, SB 6883’s prime sponsor, on the radio this morning attacking majority Democrats for wasting the 60 days they had, yet I’m not really sure how filing a symbolic bill that can’t be considered helps to explicate matters during the busy final days of the regular session? Republicans complain that they have been excluded from crucial budget negotiations, but if this is the sort of “constructive” role they hoped to have played, it’s easy to see why.
Regardless, it doesn’t take an act of the legislature to pass up the $90 a day legislators are reimbursed to cover housing, food, travel and all other expenses incurred during session. So I would hope my friends in the Olympia press corps might ask Senators Zarelli, Carrell, Holmquist, Becker, Stevens, Morton, Parlette, Honeyford, Brandland, King and Hewit if they’re just, you know, grandstanding, or if they’re actually willing to set an example for the rest of their colleagues by voluntarily declining the meager compensation that is their due?
My money is on grandstanding. If they really gave a damn about their constituents they wouldn’t be wasting everyone’s time filing unconstitutional pieces of dreck.
The Democrats DID slog thru this Big Tax Increase…not significant cuts session.
To blame the minority party for all the bad press is ridiculous.
Leave it to our Goldy…the champion of ridiculous.
Nice try at shifting the focus Goldy===NO SALE!
Cut wages & benefits. It’s 60% of the dang budget. No cuts?? Yikes.
This is a sneaky scheme to exclude Democrats from the Legislature. Republican legislators tend to be affluent business owners who don’t need the per diem, whereas Democrats represent working stiffs who couldn’t afford to drive to Olympia — much less live there for 60 days — if they weren’t reimbursed for mileage. The GOP knows they can’t win elections, so their new strategy to take over state government is to starve Democrats out of Olympia. It’s sort of like a medieval siege in which the besieging army surrounds the castle and waits for the defenders inside the walls to run out of food.
As further evidence to bolster wingnut arguments that Obama’s economic policies are a miserable value, Americans’ net worth is up for the third quarter in a row.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/ar.....99/?cid=10
Oops … well, I guess that argument’s not gonna work so good — another wingnut talking point bites the dust.
GOP To Loanshark Victims: Fuck You!
Extending their 100% voting streak of padding the pockets of greedy and ruthless financiers at the expense of the poor and vulnerable, a GOP lawmaker stripped out legislation that would have protected consumers from predatory lenders who fleece borrowers with loan rates of several hundred percent a year.
“Senator Bob Corker, the Tennessee Republican who is playing a crucial role in bipartisan negotiations over financial regulation, pressed to remove a provision from draft legislation that would have empowered federal authorities to crack down on payday lenders, people involved in the talks said. The industry is politically influential in his home state and a significant contributor to his campaigns, records show.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03.....gulate.htm
Roger Rabbit Commentary: This is simply more of the “Nibor Dooh” (“Robin Hood” spelled backwards) that we expect from Republicans, who “work hard” for their money by taking from the poor and giving to the rich. I can say why Republicans would vote for Republicans, but why would anyone else?
@2 “The Democrats DID slog thru this Big Tax Increase…not significant cuts session.”
Is it possible for Komedy Klown to release gas from his ass without ejecting putrid bullshit (a notorious greenhouse gas emitter) into the atmosphere too?
All of the Democratic budget proposals I’ve seen contain nearly equal measures of spending cuts and revenue enhancements. The Senate version looked more or less like this:
Spending cuts: $840M
New revenues: $900M
Federal aid: $580M
Reserves: $500M
What’s more, from recent news accounts, it appears the new revenues will be raised by closing loopholes and taxing unhealthy consumer items, without a sales tax rate increase.
It also needs to be repeated — again — that Washington residents have received HUGE TAX CUTS over the last couple years. The state is collecting waaaayyy less money from its citizens than it did before the Great Republican Recession. That’s why we have a budget crisis and the state has cut programs and laid off workers, wingnut dopes! And I’m not just talking about the unemployed. Plenty of still-employed Washingtonians are paying far less sales taxes because they’re hoarding money instead of throwing it at fancy wheels and other taxed items. Aggregate tax collections have fallen far faster than presonal incomes in this state, and that makes Washingtonians richer, not tax poor.
Weather Experts Forecast ‘Extreme’ Hurricane Season
Citing a buildup of methane gas from wingnut bullshit in the atmosphere, weather forecasters foresee “the potential for an ‘extreme season’ with an above-normal threat” on U.S. coasts this year.
http://www.aolnews.com/nation/.....s/19392418
Roger Rabbit Commentary: As if government and private insurance death panels weren’t enough, now we have nature’s death panels added to the mix! Oh well, after Haiti and 14 months of GOP obstructionism, what’s a few thousand more casualties?
Goldy, your site is loading hella slow this morning.
All the Republican’s have done is waste our time this entire session. They don’t really have room to talk.
@4 Credit card debt is down for the 16th straight month in a row too & oil’s sticking at around $80 a barrel. Even I’m starting think there’s some life left in the economy.
erratum @4: “miserable value” should be “miserable failure”
@8 Some of the punditry spew I’ve read lately argues that a strengthening dollar and improved export outflow of goods, not consumption resurgence, will drive the economy going forward. Consumers have to do so much debt unwinding and savings catchup that business managements still treat that economic sector as moribund. Plus, consumer credit is still contracting, with home equity loans dead and credit card companies downsizing credit loans — so where will consumers get money to spend?
The economy will recover, of course — there’s no such thing as a permanent recession — but one of the things recessions do is restructure economies and that’s happening now. Old companies and products and jobs disappear for good, and new industries emerge. It goes without saying the debt-fueled consumption binge of the previous 25 years won’t return. That’s why I own very few consumer stocks and concentrate my holdings in energy and business-to-business goods and services, such as rail transportation and oilfield services.
As for $80 oil, that’s temporary, and I’ve been acquiring stocks of oil majors lately (BP, Chevron, looking at others) in the expectation that price level won’t hold when economic activity picks up. All commodities are reviving (up 32% in last year) as business demand begins growing again, and the oil prices you see right now reflect leftover excess inventory from the Great Recession which won’t last much longer. I look for rising gasoline prices this summer.
My “investment” (if you want to dignify it that way) in AEPI, which gets all of its revenue by charging taxpayers outrageous prices for providing online education to U.S. military personnel (including those deployed to combat zones) is up almost 11 bucks since I bought it on Dec. 31 — that’s 160% a year annualized … sure beats what banks are paying on savings! Hey, yeah, I know what I’m doing is crass and greedy and all that, but if someone is going to rip off the government then I want some of that action, too. Why should Republicans get it all? Even bunnies deserve a retirement.
The Great Mother Rabbit Spirit whispered this one to my ear in a dream. My stockbroker picked Boeing (another bloodsucker of the public treasury) in early January, and that one’s doing well too, but not as good as APEI. As a stockpicker, GMRS rocks!
Rabbit KLOWN–
You forgot about the MILLIONS of new spending the Union Democrats added.
Convenient to support the big lie.
Only Dummocrats will increase spending, then cancel some of the proposed increases and call that a Spending Cut!
FOlks are tired of the Gregoire/Union Democrat shell-games.
So, I think the consumer economy will be shit, but tapping into gummint spending is good business and profitable for speculators like me. And there’s always money in oil and energy — I bought a utility stock recently.
Remember when Mark Sidran, that sorry piece of work who chaired our state utility commission, let an Australian hedge fund buy Puget Sound Energy and gave them a rate increase? Thanks to Mark, who somehow has gotten away with calling himself a “Democrat” for many years, the ex-CEO of PSE got a $7 million buyout bonus, the shareholders got a couple bucks, and the customers got higher utility bills. (Sure, I know there’s more than one person on the Utilities and Transportation Commission, but the votes were 2-1 on both the buyout and rate hike, and Sidran cast the decisive votes in favor of the greedy capitalists and against the shareholders and customers on both issues.)
Well, there’s people like him on other utility commissions, too, so I found me a utility that’s being bought by another utility and there’s a $3 spread between what you can buy the stock of the company for and the stock you’ll get in the acquiring company, so I backed up the pickup truck and shoveled in some shares. Oh, of course, the company I bought just got a big rate increase too. You know how utility commissions are — they’re run by the Mark Sidrans of the world. Well, that’s too bad for consumers, but since there’s free money to be made off that I figure I might as well give some of it to myself. Why should Republicans get it all?
Forget about a consumer recovery, or decent credit card rates, or good-paying jobs, or looking for companies that try to compete by making better products and offering them at lower prices. The world doesn’t work that way anymore. Everyone is stealing from everyone else now. The 21st century growth occupation is white collar pickpocket. You need to understand that, or you won’t be able to see future economic trends with any clarity.
Rabbit you numbskull-
Here is todays Seattle Times article chronicling the actual RISE in State Government Spending. You LIED when you said there were $840 MILLION of cuts.
How can you have CUTS when spending rises??
Word games by the Dummocrats…treating taxpayers like an open pit money mine.
Won’t work.
The Times is on to the shell-games.
You just busted yourself sill wabbit.
PLEASE explain to us how you can have an increase in spending and call it $840 MILLION of cuts??
This ought to be priceless!
If you think I’m trying to prevent Mark Sidran from ever holding another elective or appointed public office, you’re right. Before decorating the WUTC chair, he ran the Seattle City Attorney’s office like Vladimir Putin. Why Democrats suck up to this guy is a mystery.
@14 “Remember when Mark Sidran, that sorry piece of work who chaired our state utility commission, let an Australian hedge fund buy Puget Sound Energy and gave them a rate increase?”
An asshole as well being the kid I shared my 7th grade locker with at Sharples. I’ve known the fucker for nearly 50 years and he still doesn’t recognize me when he sees me, which suits me just fine.
“This ought to be priceless!”
Not as priceless as your stupid comment. You really are without a clue, aren’t you?
@12 I wondered when you’d make your way back here. What took so long? Got a lot of work to do in the goat shed this morning?
If I’m not mistaken, the spending cuts I cited @6 represent a NET figure. Sure, a few dollars may be added to law enforcement or other programs here and there, but the Democratic budget bill results in overall spending restraint, jackass. To the tune of more than $800 million. You asserted @2 the Democrats didn’t make “significant cuts” and I called you a liar, because that’s what you are. What part of this don’t you comprehend?
@15 The Seattle Times is obsessed with selling off the state liquor stores to private interests.
Given that state liquor stores make a lot of profit for the state (hundreds of millions a year), I don’t see how taxpayers come out ahead by giving away that profit stream to a tiny number of private businessmen.
The Times’ argument is this will save the state pension costs. Theoretically, the state contributes about 3% of a liquor store clerk’s $13.50/hr wage to the pension fund, which amounts to about $840 a year for a full-time clerk. It takes, what, three or four employees to staff a state liquor store? So the pension expense is a couple grand a year, and the Times wants me to believe the store doesn’t generate more than that in profits? C’mon, nobody is that stupid. Except Republicans. But the really, really silly aspect of the Times’ argument is that, for a decade or so, the legislature hasn’t been making pension contributions at all, so the “pension cost” the Times decries as an excuse to sell the stores to private interests is zero.
@20
This will get the anti-taxers jockey’s all in a wad….
The profits the state receives are easily offset by new retail sales licenses.
Think about the number of liquor stores there are in the Seattle Metro Area. Now think about the number of grocery, drug, mom & pop corner stores. Add in all the Costco’s. (In California, a non-state store area, every one of these types of business sells liquor.)
Institute a new $2000 per store off-sale permit (or higher, I picked $2000 ’cause that’s in the ballpark of a full bar in a restaurant fee).
Remove the salary/benefits/administrative costs from the state budget. Subtract the sales profit from the budget. Add $2,000 to the budget for every Costco, Rite Aid, Bartells, Safeway, QFC, Albertsons etc. etc. etc. At the very least we’re talking about a zero sum game.
And then hey righties. Competition rules the market. Business gets a revenue stream, public gets price competition. Of course I’m sure you’ll find a way to scream about the new fees being a onerous tax on businesses.
@15 Here’s the money quote from the Seattle Times article Komedy Klown is referring to:
” … the current $30.9 billion two-year general-fund budget … would increase more than $200 million under the House and Senate proposals …. Gov. Chris Gregoire’s plan … would keep overall spending essentially flat.”
In other words, including provisions for population growth and inflation, the budget will rise between 0% and 6/10ths of 1% — that’s what the Blethen Fishwrapper prints a blaring headline about, and Komedy Klown calls “the actual RISE in State Government Spending.”
So, where is this profligate spending going?
“Most of the money would go to pay for rising expenses to maintain current services”
Well gee, growing population means you have to spend more money just to stay in place, but then you have more people to spread the taxes around to, too.
“worker-retraining programs at two-year colleges and increased funds to aid ‘property-poor’ school districts”
Gee, who would’ve thought that in the worst recession since the 1930s we need to help workers train for new occupations and help school districts that couldn’t afford textbooks even in good times cope with plummeting property tax revenues due to plunging property values?
Can the Seattle Times and our resident goatfucker possibly get any dumber? That’ll be a challenge, but I’d put my money on them being up to the task. Stay tuned for more ribald idiocy to come …
While I can’t recall a specific Seattle Times editorial decrying the federal deficit, and won’t spend time search for one, let’s assume for purposes of this comment there’s at least one such editorial tucked away in ST’s archives.
One way of NOT reducing the deficit is to maintain or expand existing tax loopholes and benefits.
Well, today the Seattle Times does just that by opposing an cap on charitable deductions. The money quote:
“Depending on their tax bracket, donors currently receive 33 cents to 35 cents of tax benefit for every dollar given. The proposed rule would drop that to 28 cents.”
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....onate.html
Well, naturally, most of us don’t have a 35% or 33% tax rate. The 35% refers to the corporate income tax rate, and 33% is currently the top individual rate. So it’s really corporate givers and rich people that the Seattle Times is talking about in this editorial.
And, in shilling for this tax break for corporations and the rich, the Seattle Times editorial board goes for the solar plexus:
“Educational institutions and a variety of charitable organizations are understandably anxious about a proposal by the Obama administration to reduce the charitable gift deduction.”
Yeah. Well, that sounds awful on paper — discouraging corporations and rich people from giving money to educational institutions. But which EIs are the beneficiaries of this giving? Mostly expensive, private, Ivy-League universities that most people’s kids can’t afford to attend anyway. I mean, how much educational gifting by corporations and rich people goes to community colleges or schools like Western Washington University or the U.W.’s Tacoma or Bothell extension campuses?
And then there’s the little problem of what impact the cap would have. After all, it won’t affect most people — those of us in middle-class tax brackets who give $25 here, $100 there — so how much, exactly, would capping this tax break for corporations and rich people affect charities?
Even the Seattle Times doesn’t dare to be dishonest about the facts:
“Expert review of the cap on itemized deductions, such as the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, concluded the cap itself would have a modest impact”
but then the Seattle Times editorial board goes on to rationalize its position this way:
“but the combined effect with other changes in marginal tax rates and a weak economy would be felt”
… whatever the hell that means. Bottom line:
“The center’s estimate is a 4.8-percent reduction in charitable donations.”
Well, that’s something, but ask yourself this: Which is more important, reducing the federal deficit, or propping up 4.8% of all charitable giving (only a small percentage of which goes to expensive, private, Ivy League eductional institutions)?
Didn’t Goldy say something a couple days ago about inconsistency in Seattle Times editorials? Well, maybe I’ve mined another example from the murky swamps of ST’s editorial histrionics, or maybe not. I’ll leave that for others to judge.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....onate.html
(Quotes used under the fair use doctrine, or if that doesn’t apply, then under the go-ahead-and-sue-me-I’m-judgment-proof doctrine.)
Just when you think the Seattle Times editiorists are as idiotic as humanly possible, they become idioticker:
“States must protect gun rights as they ensure public safety”
That’s the headline over the editorial. The content is, well, contentless. But then, probably the best possible outcome for any editorial appearing under that headline is that it doesn’t actually say anything.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....9guns.html
@21 The public also gets a liquor store on every corner and increased social costs from alcoholism and DUI accidents.
Ask the arschloch THE DUMB BUNNY. He has the whole Goldy HA blog personally archived in his home. Then your stories may have a ring of truth to them!
RR @ 5: Here’s an example of the predatory lending practices Corker is protecting:
A father takes out a short-term (30-day) $4,000 loan on his vehicle to finance his daughter’s expenses of setting up a household when she returns from serving in Iraq. He didn’t have the cash, as all his savings (including retirement savings) had been wiped out in expenses battling his wife’s cancer. But the annualized total financing cost is 375%, including a $1,200 “loan fee”, in addition to interest and other costs.
He takes out the loan, because he doesn’t want to see his war-veteran daughter homeless. He figures he can pay it off, and avoid some of the finance charges by paying it off early. Wrong. He tries to pay of $1,300 early, but is told he can’t do that – he has to pay off the entire loan, or re-write the loan for a smaller amount (which would include another loan processing fee). Under the new loan, he would still owe the principle of $4,000 even after paying $1,300 and several months of payments under the new loan.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/st.....?icid=main|main|dl3|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailyfinance.com%2Fstory%2Fcredit%2Fcostly-cash-how-a-retiree-wound-up-with-a-375-loan%2F19378471%2F
Republicans and other assorted wingnuts are fond of saying how people such as Mr. Preston White are in such positions because of the “bad choices” they made. So, I’m wondering: which bad choices did Mr. Preston make:
(a) Using the proceeds from the sale of his home and his retirement to pay the cost of his wife’s cancer treatment?
(b) Living in the U.S., where a cancer victim can end up owing tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars just to be kept alive?
(c) Not discouraging his daughter to serve in the military, since she might have been better off financially if she had instead concentrated on serving her own family instead of the U.S.?
(d) Helping out his daughter in relocating her family after her military service, instead of potentially leaving her and her family homeless in a distant state?
@21
Since we like to explode the CW on Drug laws…
Washington DUI arrests per capita about 1 in 177 residents
California DUI arrests per capita about 1 in 450 residents
DUI related fatalities (2008 latest stats I could find) per capita
Washington about 1 every 27,000 residents
California about 1 every 24,000 residents
So the incidence of DUI arrests is far higher in Washington while the incidence of Alcohol related deaths is slightly higher in California. I don’t have any citation on whether the deaths are more likely to occur leaving a public drinking space vs. a private residence but with the sheer numbers of public drinking spaces in a massive state like California dwarfing that of Washington, I doubt that the availability of liquor for private consumption is the problem.
I don’t think from these statistics you can claim that California has a FAR greater social problem from alcohol than Washington.
GOP Fundraising Letters Masquerade As Census Forms
Well, well, the righties have found the government useful for something, after all — namely, extracting money from the rubes by making them think they’re filling out an official census form.
http://censusprojectblog.org/2.....hypocrisy/
Oh, and while we’re on this subject, let’s not forget how College Republicans bilked vulnerable senior citizens:
“Fund-raising group milks vulnerable senior citizens
“By David Postman and Jim Brunner
“Seattle Times staff reporters
“The College Republican National Committee has raised $6.3 million this year through an aggressive and misleading fund-raising campaign that collected money from senior citizens ….
“Many of the top donors were in their 80s and 90s. The donors wrote checks … to groups with official sounding-names such as ‘Republican Headquarters 2004,’ ‘Republican Elections Committee’ and the ‘National Republican Campaign Fund.’ But all of those groups … were simply projects of the College Republicans, who collected all of the checks.
“And little of the money went to election efforts … nearly 90 percent went to direct-mail vendors and postage expenses, according to records filed with the Internal Revenue Service.
“Some of the elderly donors, meanwhile, wound up bouncing checks and emptying their bank accounts. ‘I don’t have any more money,’ said Cecilia Barbier, a 90-year-old retired church council worker …. ‘That was all my savings that they got.’ … Barbier … made more than 300 donations totaling nearly $100,000 this year, the group’s fund-raising records show. …
“Monda Jo Millsap, 68, said she emptied her savings account by writing checks to College Republicans, then got a bank loan of $5,000 and sent that, too, before totaling her donations at more than $59,000. …
“[S]ome leaders of College Republicans have objected to the tone and targeting of the fund raising done by … the … company that handles the direct-mail campaign. ‘We felt their fund-raising practices were deceptive, to say the least,’ said George Gunning, former treasurer of the College Republicans. Gunning … and … other board members fought to cut ties with [the company] but were blocked by … the chairman of the College Republicans ….
“The board debated the fund-raising practices after the family of an elderly Indiana woman with Alzheimer’s disease demanded that her donations be returned. The woman’s family said it had sent a registered letter asking that she be taken off the mailing list, but the solicitations continued. Only after a newspaper reported on the story did the College Republicans refund $40,000 to the family, according to Jackie Boyle, one of the woman’s nieces. ‘I think this is a nationwide scam,’ Boyle said …. ‘[T]hey need to be investigated.’ …
“The Washington State Attorney General’s Office received at least six complaints about the College Republicans fund-raising letters …. The complaints cited ‘fund raising representations’ and ‘senior exploitation.’ …
“There are far more retired people giving to College Republicans than to any other IRS-regulated independent political committee, IRS records indicate. The Times was able to determine the ages of 49 of the top 50 individual donors to the College Republicans. The median age of the donors is 85, and 14 of them are 90 or older.
“Donors interviewed this week frequently expressed disbelief when they were told how much they gave to the College Republicans. ‘That can’t be true,’ said Francis Lehar, a 91-year-old retired music publisher, when he was told … he gave the College Republicans nearly $23,000. …
From January through September, the Massachusetts man wrote 90 checks to the group, records show.
“The letters are computer-generated … form letters, but the recipients often view them as personal correspondence. … For … donors, the mail was part nuisance, part companion. Several spoke of sorting the mail and writing checks almost as their job this campaign year. …
“[C]ompanies related to the fund raising get most of the money raised by the College Republicans. About $9 million of the College Republicans’ reported spending this year appeared to go into fund-raising expenses …. The large amount of money devoted to fund raising … is unusual among … so-called 527 independent political groups. …
“[The companies] have publicly described their strategy. ‘Direct mail fund raising means asking for money and asking for it often … [y]ou must literally force them to send money.’ …
“Most donors interviewed said they get up to 50 solicitations in the mail each day. That pile can include four or more from the College Republicans. ‘My house looks like a post office, and I’m not exaggerating,’ said Anne Kravic, a retired school-district employee in Parma, Ohio. … ‘I wouldn’t say that a single week passed I didn’t send something and sometimes twice a week,’ … she said. Her small monthly pension cannot keep up with the life of a political financier. … ‘My bank account has been overdrawn already,’ she said.
“Elliot Baines is an 84-year-old Florida retiree who says he has a hard time just carrying the mail he gets each day now. ‘It’s almost too much for me to handle,’ he said. Baines was surprised to hear he had given more than $63,000 and that it had all gone to College Republicans. He said he was swayed to give … by the power of the letters. ‘I thought if I paid them off once it would send them away, but it just encourages them to send more,’ he said. ‘It is just a rat race in this house to pay off these people and hope that they quit. But they don’t. They keep sending.’
Quoted under fair use; for complete story and/or copyright info see http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....bs28m.html
Hey Goldy–
How about HB3204 with a 10-year projected TAX INCREASE of $11,625,898,000
Hey Rog–
Only Dummocrats are stupid enough to try and reconcile an overall Budget INCREASE in Spending with a Spending Cut!
Idiots.
@31 What spending increase? I don’t see one.
Speaking of lying and grandstanding–
Obam-Mao LIED about the impact of Obam-Mao-Care on the middle class. MILLIONS will be impacted.
http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....itics%2529
Obam-Mao is a serial lying zealot.
Hope & Change??
Socialism & Big Lies is more like it.
Three of four leading money managers who correctly called last year’s market upturn predict a bull market between now and the 2012 election, according to Business Week, a conservative business newsweekly. The money quote:
“For Obama, gains in stock and credit markets may be the clearest evidence that his policies are working, after losses tied to subprime mortgages spurred a financial crisis that erased $11 trillion in stock market value and sent the unemployment rate above 10%.” (Emphasis added.)
http://www.businessweek.com/ma.....620633.htm
Roger Rabbit Commentary: Republicans criticizing President Obama’s economic policies and portraying him as a failure have a hard time explaining the 60% stock market rise over the last year, and if these money managers are right, will have an even harder time explaining how a bull market represents “failure” when the 2012 election rolls around. Why does anyone listen to these Cassandras?
@33 “MILLIONS will be impacted.”
If I’m not mistaken, that it’s purpose. I mean, why do it, if it doesn’t affect anyone?
The news media today are full of reports that Democrats are moving closer to passing a healthcare reform bill through the reconciliation process. It could be a reality this month. I can hardly wait until the wingnuts’ heads explode! I’m gonna stand with a bucket in Green Lake Park to catch Komical Klown’s brains as they rain down from the jetstream carrying them here from Montana.
Rog you clever rabbit–
MILLIONS impacted with TAX INCREASES!
Precisely what Obam-mao said would NOT happen.
As you’ve always said Rog…there is Wall Street & Main Street.
Main Street ain’t buyin’ Obam-Mao and the Dummocrats–
Friday, March 12, 2010
The 2 main issues for Americans and the 2 weakest for Dummocrats.
PS–If Pelosi had the Health Care votes lined up…it would go to a vote. She doesn’t have the votes.
Cynical… Something really interesting… Looks like DUMMOCRAPTIC candidates like health care…