Rise of the Tea Party

[BridgeTroll]

In fairness... as we all know... it isnt just GE nor is Charlie Rangel any worse(in this case) than any other congressman.  It is the way things are done in Washington.  Deals (loopholes, incentives, tax breaks)are cut for votes.  Tax loopholes, incentives, tax breaks are often used to promote certain industry or business in favor of others.  The newest fad tax loophole...Green Technology...

[buckethead]

I refused to vote for Obama, perhaps due to an ill informed libertarian mindset.

OTOH, I did hope he would get us out of Iraq, Afghanistan, (although that wasn't his platform) and hold corporations and bankers responsible for the damage they do to the economy.

My post is just to keep the conservative bashing honest. Both sides of the aisle are complicit, and I wonder if there is any hope we can actually change it. (no hope and change pun intended)

[JeffreyS]

Now we can hope he will get us out of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.  I agree that both sides have sold out time and time again.

[Dog Walker]

I refused to vote for Obama, perhaps due to an ill informed libertarian mindset.

OTOH, I did hope he would get us out of Iraq, Afghanistan, (although that wasn't his platform) and hold corporations and bankers responsible for the damage they do to the economy.

My post is just to keep the conservative bashing honest. Both sides of the aisle are complicit, and I wonder if there is any hope we can actually change it. (no hope and change pun intended)

I did vote for Obama.  First vote for a Democrat or a Republican since voting against Nixon for McGovern!  My huge hope was that he would get us out of Afghanistan and Iraq and I am hugely disappointed in him for not doing so.

And he was the first WINNING presidential candidate I've EVER voted for.

[BridgeTroll]

Bridge Troll, youve already admitted that you don't know what is being discussed, so why not just stay out of the debate until you can read up on it.

Would you consider yourself a follower of the norse religion?

I know exactly what WAS being talked about.  Your efforts to cloud the issue is... well... prdictable and we have seen it all before.

Back to the topic...

By 2008, however, concern over the growing cost of overseas tax loopholes put G.E. and other corporations on the defensive. With Democrats in control of both houses of Congress, momentum was building to let the active financing exception expire. Mr. Rangel of the Ways and Means Committee indicated that he favored letting it end and directing the new revenue — an estimated $4 billion a year — to other priorities.

G.E. pushed back. In addition to the $18 million allocated to its in-house lobbying department, the company spent more than $3 million in 2008 on lobbying firms assigned to the task.

Mr. Rangel dropped his opposition to the tax break. Representative Joseph Crowley, Democrat of New York, said he had helped sway Mr. Rangel by arguing that the tax break would help Citigroup, a major employer in Mr. Crowley’s district.

Do you worship the norse gods, Bridge Troll?

Do you worship unicorns, Stephen?

[BridgeTroll]

No.... drum roll please......................................................................................

[BridgeTroll]

No.... drum roll please......................................................................................

So what three days of the week come after Tuesday?

Would you agree that they are Wednesday, Thursday and Friday?

I am all a-quiver for the surprise ending... yes Stephen... I agree...sigh....

[JeffreyS]

OK I am waiting for the finish too but hurry dinner is almost ready.

[BridgeTroll]

No.... drum roll please......................................................................................

So what three days of the week come after Tuesday?

Would you agree that they are Wednesday, Thursday and Friday?

I am all a-quiver for the surprise ending... yes Stephen... I agree...sigh....

So you freely admit to celebrating in Wodens Day, Thor's Day, and Freyr's Day?

How can you possibly deny that you worship norse deities when you call half of your days after Norse Gods?

THATS IT??  HUGE disappointment here. All I agreed to was that wednesday, thursday and friday followed tuesday.  I certainly do not celebrate them... in fact I always thought Woden was kind of creepy...

[BridgeTroll]

Well how can you run from the fact that all of america participates in this Norse Religion stuff?

Both sides do it!  Both Sides!

The Norse worshippers and the non norse worshipers alike.

Good lord Stephen... I am sure you have a satisfyingly obscure point to this...... may we hear it?

[BridgeTroll]

Please hurry... the Presidents speech is coming on soon... and I never miss one of those...

[JeffreyS]

I don't buy it if the companies are not using the tax breaks per the altruistic intentions of the tax breaks as you say they don't. Then it won't negatively effect those altruistic interests to close the loopholes as you say they will.

If those things should be funded then fund them keep the tax code simple.

[BridgeTroll]

Well how can you run from the fact that all of america participates in this Norse Religion stuff?

Both sides do it!  Both Sides!

The Norse worshippers and the non norse worshipers alike.

Good lord Stephen... I am sure you have a satisfyingly obscure point to this...... may we hear it?

Well it goes back to the basic absurdity of trying to find joint authorship of an idea, long after the fact has become fait accompli.

Just because you use the names of the old norse gods for the days of the week doesnt make you complicit in norse mythology or philosophy does it?  You are simply subscribing to the order of the day and the times, and operating in the widely accepted paradigm.  After all, you do have choices.  You could call the days after their numerical value, you could use their french names, you could simply refuse to utter the dreaded norse names after all.

But you don't.  This doesnt mean that you believe in the All Father, his thunderous son or the queen of the norns.

Similarly, the idea of tax breaks for wealthy individuals who contribute to good causes or spend their money in a specific way was a conservative notion that was championed by conservatives on behalf of the wealthy in order to avoid the competing New Deal philosophy that social costs were best paid for by tax money.

The conservatives won the argument, and the outcome has been just as mixed as if the Liberals had won.

But that doesnt mean that operating within the common framework gives any kind of shared 'responsibility' for the origin of the ideas.

And its absurd to try and obfuscate the matter anyways.

The tax breaks represent a pre existing negotiation, and trying to undo the loopholes will have unintended consequences if the conditions that required this negotiated solution arent addressed.

You simply cannot go around blindly, ineptly trying to restructure this stuff without risking disasters.

Seems kinda weird hearing the "We cannot change that because thats the way we have always done it argument" from you...

[finehoe]

The Multi-State Survey of Race and Politics (http://depts.washington.edu/uwiser/racepolitics_research2011.html) has just conducted a poll of Republican voters in interviews that lasted an average of 40 minutes. Two distinct camps emerged: Tea Party and non-Tea Party. This captures the divide:

More than twice as many Tea Party conservatives desire to see the president’s policies fail (76%) than non-Tea Party conservatives (32%). (As a corollary, 53% of non-Tea Party conservatives wish to see the president’s policies succeed versus 18% of Tea Party conservatives.) Why might this be the case? Why do so many Tea Party conservatives wish to see the president’s policies fail, relative to non-Tea Party conservatives? Perhaps it’s because three quarters (75 %) of Tea Party conservatives believe that President Obama’s policies are socialist compared to 40% of non-Tea Party conservative, a disparity of 35 % points.

The study then examined how susceptible the respondents were to core Tea Party themes - on Obama's birth certificate, religion, etc. Then they threw race into the mix:

If the interviewer was perceived as white, conservatives were less likely say “don’t know” or “no opinion” than if the interviewer was perceived as non-white. In the latter case, respondents were far more likely to opt for these options. We also found that conservatives were more likely to view President Obama as alien if they believed themselves to be interviewed by someone white than a non-white interviewer.

[Dog Walker]

The Multi-State Survey of Race and Politics (http://depts.washington.edu/uwiser/racepolitics_research2011.html) has just conducted a poll of Republican voters in interviews that lasted an average of 40 minutes. Two distinct camps emerged: Tea Party and non-Tea Party. This captures the divide:

More than twice as many Tea Party conservatives desire to see the president’s policies fail (76%) than non-Tea Party conservatives (32%). (As a corollary, 53% of non-Tea Party conservatives wish to see the president’s policies succeed versus 18% of Tea Party conservatives.) Why might this be the case? Why do so many Tea Party conservatives wish to see the president’s policies fail, relative to non-Tea Party conservatives? Perhaps it’s because three quarters (75 %) of Tea Party conservatives believe that President Obama’s policies are socialist compared to 40% of non-Tea Party conservative, a disparity of 35 % points.

The study then examined how susceptible the respondents were to core Tea Party themes - on Obama's birth certificate, religion, etc. Then they threw race into the mix:

If the interviewer was perceived as white, conservatives were less likely say “don’t know” or “no opinion” than if the interviewer was perceived as non-white. In the latter case, respondents were far more likely to opt for these options. We also found that conservatives were more likely to view President Obama as alien if they believed themselves to be interviewed by someone white than a non-white interviewer.

Suspicions confirmed!!