And So It Begins: Pelosi: We Must Govern From The Middle!

Liberal blogger digby is a bit upset by Pelosi's claim that Democrats must be responsible, not be overly ideological, and govern from the "middle." However,  don't believe it just yet. The Hill also points out that her actions thus far may not quite match the reassuring rhetoric. Is there room under the now Obama/Pelosi bus for all the liberal bloggers? Or will Democrats attempt to get away with running over the majority of voters who believe they've elected a moderate?

As the Democrats built their entire message and credibility on "blaming Bush" for years, what does it do now that there is no one else to blame and a country is looking to them for results?

A very good question, that!

by digby

Good God, I hope this is just rhetorical bullshit.

After saying the word "change" at least 175,000 times in the last year, the Democrats had better not start sounding too much like Republican grandpas or millions of people who voted for them might get the feeling they've just been taken for a bunch of chumps. I get that they are trying to calm the village and keep the restive Republicans from staging a hissy fit right out of the gate. And delivering on all this massive change was never going to be easy.

Democratic leaders are tamping down on expectations for rapid change and trying to signal they will place a calm hand on the nation’s tiller.

“The country must be governed from the middle,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Wednesday. Repeating themes from election night, she said she plans to emphasize “civility” and “fiscal responsibility.”

“The difference is we have the benefit of experience in seeing what happens when you gain control,” said a senior Democratic aide. “I do not envision a scenario where we’d go off on an ideological mission in an undisciplined way.”

And there are some indications that despite the rhetoric, Pelosi is tacking to the left. Many see her hand in the effort by liberal Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) to oust House Energy and Commerce Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.), an ally of the auto industry who generally takes a more pro-business approach to environmental regulation.

Stay tuned. We are watching.

Comments

[Fred Beloit]

It will be delicious watching the liberals go at each other's throats over petty differences (make that nuances) in policies. For a preview, I recommend reading the comments at Marc Cooper's blog. "No, I am the real revolutionary, not you. I can prove it. I still have the newspaper articles I kept about the Grant Park episode in the '60s."

[Judith]

the problem is is that pelosi thinks she IS the middle. Her positions are all perfectly reasonable, and after all, we must do what she says for our own good....its for the children doncha know!

[Spartan112]

Pro-environment is the middle right now.

[Philip McDaniel]

Puppies on parade. As the poodles line up to govern, we can all sit back and watch. Meanwhile, I see the Impeach Barack Obama groups are starting to form. Good show!

Meanwhile, anyone seen a Civilian National Security Enforcer around lately?
Any Thug Thizzles?

[mary]

The market is reacting to the election.

[IslamoLlama]

http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/13994.html

"-- Therefore, I would like you to know: I have bought a hat.

NOT PICTURED: A hat.

My pledge to you, in the spirit of President Obama’s desire that we be well and truly one nation, is this. Should any of the following things take place during the Obama administration:

1. The institution, at a federal level, of sharia law throughout the country
2. The nationalization and centralization of the production economy
3. Race-based land reform
4. The mass seizure of legally acquired firearms
5. The widespread arrest and imprisonment of conservative talk show hosts
6. The institution of any laws which prohibit criticizing President Obama
7. The destruction of Israel at the hands of an Obama-led American military
8. The introduction of any kind of mandatory national service
9. New terror bombings perpetrated by William Ayers or Bernadine Dohrn
10. The taxation of earned income and/or capital gains at a rate within 25% of its peak during the Eisenhower administration
11. The nomination of Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, or Louis Farrakhan to a Cabinet-level position
12. The disappearance of Christianity as the dominant religion in America

Then I will eat the hat.

This I pledge to you in the spirit of bipartisanship, and God bless America. --"

Cheers to that.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- The market is reacting to the election. --"

OMG! Barack Obama retroactively caused the looming recession! It's all so clear to me now. Thank you Mary.

[chris]

"I see the Impeach Barack Obama groups are starting to form."

For what? Your fringe party should be figuring out how you got a decrepit old geezer and some braindead WT woman as your ticket.

Such bitter clingers...

[Fred Beloit]

Moe, are you sure a hat is what you will eat and not just a mere cap?

[templar knight]

Here is my pledge:

1. Change my voter registration from Independent to Republican.
2. Start to work ASAP to get Republicans elected to Congress in the next term.
3. Run for office.
4. Pay down any outstanding debt.
5. Buy nothing but necessities over the next two years.
6. Move some of my assets overseas or offshore. (Prudence demands it.)
7. Disengage myself from my business, sell off my working interest, and invest the
proceeds into land.
8. Work a whole lot less, volunteer a whole lot more.

After two years, I can always revisit my decision process, and change the decisions I've made. In my opinion, the next 2-4 years should be quite a bumpy ride.

[Spartan112]

Run for office Temp? Please let us know which office so we can forward them the archives of this website.

[IslamoLlama]

Haha. Tell you what, TK. You sell all your capital investments now while I load up on rock bottom domestic equities. In 2-4 years we'll compare notes and see who's done better.

That said, land isn't a terrible investment after a real estate collapse, so I can't fault your judgment there. But running for office? Maybe you can make dog catcher, if you're lucky.

[jharp]

6. Move some of my assets overseas or offshore. (Prudence demands it.)

Posted by: templar knight | Thursday, November 06, 2008 at 10:41 AM

Curious as to what you have in mind.

Be careful. There are just as many crooks, if not more, dealing in offshore and overseas assets.

[Scrapiron]

Now republicans/conservatives, it will take quite a while to lower yourself to the level of democrats/liberals and show Hussein O the exact level of respect shown to GWB, Chaney, McCain and Palin by the house/senate leadership down to the pot smoker on the street. There must be a school of stupid/slime out there. Help find it or you'll never get down to the democrats level.

[Worst President Ever]

Temp for VP - I think he's got most of the qualifications Republicans look for in their VP.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"Haha. Tell you what, TK. You sell all your capital investments now while I load up on rock bottom domestic equities. In 2-4 years we'll compare notes and see who's done better."

Given that Obama is planning to nearly double the capital gains tax, that's an easy one.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2007/9/19/obama-pushes-for-higher-investment-taxes.html

Add to that the fact that Obama and the Democrat Party plan to abolish 401(k) plans and instead force people to invest in government bonds, and what you'll see is a rather interesting exodus.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/10/23/would-obama-dems-kill-401k-plans.html

In short, Obama plans to not only massively punish those who invest and make gains, but is going to enact policies that will result in the forcible removal of literally trillions of dollars in assets out of the capital markets and into government bonds. Remember, he's ranted against Wall Street as a bunch of "fat cats", said he will do nothing to help the stock market or to make these people any more money, and in fact intends to tax and regulate them heavily.

Meanwhile, thanks to Obama's promises to pay his supporters' mortgages, the government will in essence be subsidizing house prices, which props up land and real estate prices, and flooding the market with cheap money in the name of "affordable housing", which drives them up even farther.

In short, Templar is positioning himself perfectly for where the money is going. You, on the other hand, IslamoLlama, are amusingly investing in the one market that Obama has promised to shiv and in the one thing that he promises to punish as the root of evil for American society -- corporations.

[Spartan112]

"Add to that the fact that Obama and the Democrat Party plan to abolish 401(k) plans"

Do you understand the definition of the word "fact"? Nothing in the article you link suggests Obama (or even house dems for that matter) would support such a plan. The article asks the question and then leaves it unanswered.

[Worst President Ever]

Geez, NDT's guy got his ass kicked in the election, and he still comes back with more lies.

Got any links to actual proposals from Obama to raise the capital gains tax to 28%? Or to pay all his supporters mortgages?

I guess you missed it, but everybody's pissed at Wall Street. Your guy - McCain - said some pretty interesting things to say himself.

And those Intrade markets, looks like the only manipulation going on was in your head.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- Given that Obama is planning to nearly double the capital gains tax, that's an easy one. --"

Yes. He's going to take it from 15% to 25%. You know what I pay in salary taxes right now? 25%. I will suffer greatly knowing that my investment returns are taxed at the same rate as my salary returns. Unless I put my money in a Roth IRA, at which point it grows tax free. :-p

"-- Add to that the fact that Obama and the Democrat Party plan to abolish 401(k) plans and instead force people to invest in government bonds, and what you'll see is a rather interesting exodus. --"

He wants to give people the option of rolling market investments into government bonds after restoring 401(k) accounts to April levels. So people on the verge of retirement aren't totally screwed. I don't know if you've noticed, but the market has lost roughly half its value in the last few months. Hence the rock bottom US Equities. This is an exceedingly good deal for anyone over 50.

Note, this would be an option, not a mandate. The government bonds would be an alternative investment, not a mandate. The new rules would remove the tax-deductible status of future 401(k) investments, but I didn't see anything about getting rid of Traditional IRA accounts, CSA accounts, HSA accounts, or the myriad other tax shelters the American investor has the opportunity to use.

So, I think you're basically full of shit and need to read more white papers and less opinion pieces.

"-- In short, Templar is positioning himself perfectly for where the money is going. You, on the other hand, IslamoLlama, are amusingly investing in the one market that Obama has promised to shiv and in the one thing that he promises to punish as the root of evil for American society -- corporations. --"

I suppose we'll find out in 2-4 years, won't we?

[North Dallas Thirty]

Ah, the very definition of irony.

http://www.wthr.com/global/story.asp?s=9299280

Funny, if normal businesses refuse to pay their employees, it's a crime and the owner can end up in jail. It's also a sign of disorganization and/or corruption.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"Nothing in the article you link suggests Obama (or even house dems for that matter) would support such a plan."

Right, whatever.

http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/25/83/58.php

Got any links to actual proposals from Obama to raise the capital gains tax to 28%? Or to pay all his supporters mortgages?

Look at the first sentence in this link:

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2007/9/19/obama-pushes-for-higher-investment-taxes.html

And hear it from the lips of Obama supporters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3I1qE8h9gOo

Unless you want to call that woman a liar.

[jharp]

"Haha. Tell you what, TK. You sell all your capital investments now while I load up on rock bottom domestic equities. In 2-4 years we'll compare notes and see who's done better."

Given that Obama is planning to nearly double the capital gains tax, that's an easy one.

Posted by: North Dallas Thirty | Thursday, November 06, 2008 at 12:40 PM

Yeah, NDT. The market performed so poorly when the capital gains tax was 28% and 20%.

Jan of 1992 Dow Industrial average 3,200

Oct of 2000 Dow Industrial averagee 10,800

Capital gains taxes were 28% and 20%.

Then we have the 15% years under George Bush

Oct 2003 Dow 10,500

Nov 2008 Dow 8,700

Do you ever tire of being wrong on everything?

[Worst President Ever]

Like I said, got any links to actual quotes from Obama? Cause I can't find any in your links.

I really don't care what people say, hope, think Obama MAY do. I want to know what HE says he's going to do.

Even Pethokoukis admits Obama's NOT going to raise the Capital Gains tax to 28%. Here's a link from him that's actually recent, not over a year stale:

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/8/18/obamas-curious-capital-gains-tax-epiphany.html

[mark l.]

"He wants to give people the option of rolling market investments into government bonds after restoring 401(k) accounts to April levels."

the secret of getting 401ks to the april level is getting the market back to the april level...

dow jones was at 13k in 4/08.
currently it is at 8.7k.

The increase being discussed is a matter of waiting for the market to increase 50% from it's current level. It should undergo a bull run during the last quarter of recession, 2q09, 3q09, but I would be shocked to see it rise 50% within two years. Possible? yea. likely?no.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"He's going to take it from 15% to 25%. You know what I pay in salary taxes right now? 25%. I will suffer greatly knowing that my investment returns are taxed at the same rate as my salary returns."

So simply say that you're OK with Obama increasing taxes 10% across the board on anyone who owns stock or receives dividends.

"He wants to give people the option of rolling market investments into government bonds after restoring 401(k) accounts to April levels. So people on the verge of retirement aren't totally screwed."

Funny, they don't need to wait; all they need do is move their investments within the 401(k) plan into an offered bond fund. Or they can stop contributing to their 401(k) plan, period, and start buying Treasuries themselves.

Oh, and what makes this really funny, IslamoLlama, is that both you and Obama are insisting that the stock market has a worthless rate of return and that people should invest in Treasuries instead -- but are plowing your money into "domestic equities".

"The new rules would remove the tax-deductible status of future 401(k) investments"

Which is basically forcing people to pay taxes on the money when they put it in AND when they take it out. What do you think that's going to do to 401(k) participation?

"but I didn't see anything about getting rid of Traditional IRA accounts, CSA accounts, HSA accounts, or the myriad other tax shelters the American investor has the opportunity to use."

401(k) accounts allow a person to save $15,500 per year tax-advantaged ($16,500 per year in 2009, and more with catch-up contributions for people over 50) regardless of their individual income. In contrast, IRAs are capped at $5,000 ($5,500 for 2008), HSAs are limited to one-twelfth of the annual deductible amount for the high deductible health plan that must be associated with them (usually somewhere around $200 a month), and Roths are capped at $4,000. In addition, maximum Roth contributions are dialed back starting at individual incomes over $101k and cease to exist at $116k, and, if you're already covered by another tax-advantaged retirement plan, tax-deductible IRA contributions are dialed back starting at $50k and cease to exist at $60k.

So basically, what Barack Obama wants to do is this:

-- Raise taxes 10% across the board on capital gains, which would include mutual funds, stocks, dividends, and home sales

-- Eliminate any sort of meaningful tax-advantaged retirement savings for anyone making over $116k, since they wouldn't be eligible by income limits

-- Reduce the amount that Americans can save tax-advantaged

What this boils down to is a massive tax increase on American savers so that Barack Obama can "redistribute" the wealth of those who are frugal and save to those who do not and give them welfare.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"6. Move some of my assets overseas or offshore. (Prudence demands it.)

Posted by: templar knight | Thursday, November 06, 2008 at 10:41 AM

Curious as to what you have in mind.

Be careful. There are just as many crooks, if not more, dealing in offshore and overseas assets."

Forget overseas crooks, watch out for US laws. Off shore accounts aren't as easy as one might think and are of coourse controlled by our government. Seems it's illegal to seek certain "shelters".......

LLama, you know this crap......you should be helping people instead of buying Wyoming farm land.

[Todd]

Hopefully, Nancy Pelosi really gets it and isn't just paying lip service to governing from the middle.

Democratic 1970's style tax-and-spend policy is very bad policy, with the only thing worse being the Republicans post-1980 borrow-and-spend policy. Borrow and spend is just incredibly toxic piling on this horrendous national debt, keeping us in hock to the Chinese, the Saudis and others. Policies leading to a balanced budget are a must if this country is to get a sound economy back.

It's time for both Democrats and Republicans to come clean and publicly state that centrist policies devoid of economic dogma are the real answer.

[mark l.]

"-- The market is reacting to the election. --"

OMG! Barack Obama retroactively caused the looming recession! It's all so clear to me now.

it is down 10% in the two days since obama's victory.
not like it was up 17% the week preceding election...

I'll withhold judgment, but mary's point is well worth consideration.

15% capital gains rates when a market is expanding is far better than 28% of a market that is flat. the only way you get the 28% is if the economy is winning.

[North Dallas Thirty]

LOL....silly jharp, insisting that Clinton raised the capital gains tax and the economy boomed.

You do know, of course, that the Clinton era STARTED with a 28% capital gains tax, which was then cut to 20% in 1997 by Congressional Republicans over Clinton's objections?

You also know that the major boom in the economy in terms of stock prices, wage growth, and investment income took place AFTER that tax cut?

So here in your own party we have demonstrated proof that cutting the capital gains tax is a good thing for the economy.

But in order to protect Barack Obama, you rewrite history and try to claim that Clinton RAISED capital gains taxes and that that's what caused the economic boom of the late '90s.

[Worst President Ever]

HELLO - Links to quotes from Obama, please. I really, really, really don't care what third parties say, think, imagine he's going to do.

This is Obama's REAL position on Capital Gains tax - as documented in the link below. Note HIS the TOP rate IS 20% - that's not 28%, not 25%, but 20%.

"Families with incomes below $250,000 will continue to pay the capital gains rates that they pay today. For those in the top two income tax brackets - likewise adjusted to affect only families over $250,000 - Obama will create a new TOP capital gains rate of 20 percent."

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Factsheet_Tax_Plan_FINAL.pdf

[North Dallas Thirty]

Then we have the 15% years under George Bush

Oct 2003 Dow 10,500

Nov 2008 Dow 8,700

Except there's one tiny problem......this does not include the tech crash, which should be applied as Bill Clinton's number. It only includes the market high reached under Clinton, and nothing thereafter.

Would you like to show the market high for Bush so that it's a fair comparison?

[WAHOO WILLIE]

""-- The market is reacting to the election. --"

OMG! Barack Obama retroactively caused the looming recession! It's all so clear to me now.

it is down 10% in the two days since obama's victory.
not like it was up 17% the week preceding election...

I'll withhold judgment, but mary's point is well worth consideration."

Mark, dont let my widdle snookums DaLLama fool you...she does econ in school (assuming UT can be considered "school") and she knows that traditionally, the stock market goes way up in the days after an election. My chubby lil cubby gets a bit excited defending her paahtay of choice.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

WPE: please dont hold your breath or hedge your future on these promises. Hell who cares about your future, think of your kids.......... Campaign's over, let's sit back and watch, react as needed.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"He's going to take it from 15% to 25%. You know what I pay in salary taxes right now? 25%. I will suffer greatly knowing that my investment returns are taxed at the same rate as my salary returns."

Sorry, WPE, but your buddy IslamoLlama said it's going to 25%, and that Barack Obama is perfectly OK with that.

Just like, as we saw, he promised his supporter Peggy that he would pay her gasoline and mortgage.

Now, you say that Democrats are more informed and that Barack Obama would never lie to Democrats. Hence, we can only believe that what these Democrats like Peggy and Islamollama are saying is true and that that's what Obama told them.

[Worst President Ever]

Wahoo - Exactly. Obama should be given the opportunity to succeed. If he screws up, then he deserves to be criticized. But I have a problem with hacks that make stuff up to attack him before he's even done anything.

[mark l.]

the idea is pretty simple...

I invest 1000 dollars, and gain 12% over three years(3.78% yearly growth).
120 dollars profit, 25% tax, the govt gets 30 bucks.

I invest 1000 dollars and gain 21% over three years(6.35% yearly growth),
210 dollars profit, 15% tax, the govt gets 31.5 bucks.

democrats seem to obsess about the rate of taxation, without the realization that sometimes a smaller slice of a larger 'pie' can feed more people than a larger slice of a smaller 'pie'. the former case is 'fairer' becuase evryone is closer together in the amount of pie they are sharing-redistribution, but the latter case is far more practical considering we are in competition with the world.

[mark l.]

"the [latter] case is 'fairer' becuase evryone is closer together in the amount of pie they are sharing-redistribution, but the [former] case is far more practical considering we are in competition with the world."

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"But I have a problem with hacks that make stuff up to attack him before he's even done anything."

OH! my friend, would that I felt like scrolling these pages as I do believe we could find yourself in the hack camp on more than one occasion...yes? We do agree though that we should set aside the campaign trail horse apples and give the man a chance. At this early point, I'm thinking the far left will be more disappointed in him that will the more centrist among us......I advise this though...Dont expect much from him the first two years. There is another election in 2010 and aunt Nancy wants an even more solid power base. Years 3 & 4? Well going to the extremes that Hannity threatens would ensure a single term in office.

[mark l.]

I would withhold from being certain that the market is done falling...

housing collapse lead to financial company collapse to stock market collapse...

but oil collapse combined with market collapse is going to lead to hedge fund collapse.

there is a well respected economist, roubini(?) who is predicting that we still are waiting on the larger collapse of hedge funds.

It doesn't matter what the capital gains tax rate will be, if there are no capital gains to tax.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- the idea is pretty simple...

I invest 1000 dollars, and gain 12% over three years(3.78% yearly growth).
120 dollars profit, 25% tax, the govt gets 30 bucks.

I invest 1000 dollars and gain 21% over three years(6.35% yearly growth),
210 dollars profit, 15% tax, the govt gets 31.5 bucks. --"

So let's compare that to the Clinton / Bush years.

I invest 1000 in the DOW at the start of the Clinton administration and gain roughly 212% That's $2120 profit with 25% tax so the govt nets about $530.

I invest 1000 in the DOW at the start of the Bush administration and gain roughly -8.55% That's -$85.50 profit with 15% tax so I write the loss off on my taxes and save $22.12 on my taxes (write-offs working against my 25% salaried tax rate).

From where I'm sitting, the Bush Administration tax plan just soaked the US Treasury for $552.12, but you can check my math and tell me if I'm mistaken.

That said, I'll give you a hint where you went wrong. See, the problem with your calculations run on the assumption that the market ONLY cares about tax rates. If you lower taxes, you might spur some growth, but if you're walking into a recession - like Bush was in 2001 - it won't matter because tax cuts alone do not a strong economy make. On the flip side, if you're Bill Clinton and you inherent the craptastic economy of the Reagen/Bush I years, you discover that lowering taxes isn't necessary at all. Jobs programs, higher minimum wages, a sound Social Security system, boosts to Medicare and Medicaid and other middle class benefits spur a bull market farther forward and maximize our returns. But even then there's a limit presented by technology, available investment capital, population, and infrastructure.

Would the 90s boom under Clinton have been better if he'd cut the capital gains rate back in '92? Do you really think the DOW market would have grown an additional 40% to recover the lost tax revenue when it already saw 212% growth? That extra skilled laborers, new raw materials, and revolutionary technologies would just leap out of the ether to meet the additional investment capital? I somehow doubt it. Spending US Tax dollars on Pell Grants gave us a better educated work force. Spending US Tax dollars on foreign relations and diplomacy efforts opened up new markets in foreign countries. Spending US Tax dollars on government research and development at places like Xerox Park or in the ARPNET project gave us the revolutionary new technologies. Tax Cuts offered us none of those things.

[seekeronos]

"--- ....I advise this though...Dont expect much from him the first two years. There is another election in 2010 and aunt Nancy wants an even more solid power base. Years 3 & 4? Well going to the extremes that Hannity threatens would ensure a single term in office. ---"

That is what is called "incrementalism", or how to keep a frog in the pot until its cooked.

[Todd]

"The market is reacting to the election.

Posted by: mary | Thursday, November 06, 2008 at 09:32 AM"

Not really, Mary. The stock market was up 20.4% from the lows of Oct 27th through Nov 4th, so there was a big rally off the panic lows. This is just typical normal volatility in a market which moves 3-5% per day as a normal occurence.

The real proof that the market isn't reacting to the election is that the gap down in price from Tuesday's closing price to Wednesday's opening price in the SP500 was just 1% down. If the election had been perceived as a major negative and a major reason to sell, you would have seen a gap down of 5-10% on Wednesday morning and not just 1%.

Fact: the US is in a very deep recession and the global economy is slowing dramatically and may be in a recession, too. Recessions are bad for corporate earnings which means that stock prices should still move lower. This is part of the business cycle and it's out of the hands of politicians to severel alter the trajctory of the global economy. It has to run it's course.

[North Dallas Thirty]

I invest 1000 in the DOW at the start of the Clinton administration and gain roughly 212% That's $2120 profit with 25% tax so the govt nets about $530.

I invest 1000 in the DOW at the start of the Bush administration and gain roughly -8.55% That's -$85.50 profit with 15% tax so I write the loss off on my taxes and save $22.12 on my taxes (write-offs working against my 25% salaried tax rate).

From where I'm sitting, the Bush Administration tax plan just soaked the US Treasury for $552.12, but you can check my math and tell me if I'm mistaken.

LOL...of course, if that were the case, as IslamoLlama screams, Federal tax revenues per year during the Bush administration would have been lower at every time than during the Clinton administration.

Oops.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18595849/

The problem is that IslamoLlama is trying to manipulate numbers by ignoring the market highs of the Bush administration, the market lows produced by the tech bubble collapse, and using the assumption that taxes are paid over its specific eight year gain period and not on an annual basis.

This is typical of Obama supporters. As we saw above, Obama supporters like jharp and IslamoLlama tried to claim that Clinton raised the capital-gains tax to support the fact that Obama, as IslamoLlama states, will raise it from the current 15% to 25%. Then, when that was proven wrong, they attempt these fictitious numbers and manipulations that ignore the fact that, under the Bush tax cut period, Treasury revenues hit all-time records -- which is exactly OPPOSITE to their claim that tax revenues would be uniformly lower under Bush than under Clinton.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

NDT: Pookie Da LLama is the smartest little girl in the world. Leave her alone.

[templar knight]

NDT, I'll let you argue the specifics on tax law with the morons, but I have already started to shift some of my cash to a Swiss bank, where I have been assured by people I know and respect that my money will be safe and secure.

I'm in the oil business, and I see the handwriting on the wall. I'm selling my working interest, but retaining my mineral rights, and I'm selling my small stake in the company I work for, and am getting a quite reasonable sum of money. I plan to buy as much land as possible, but I am looking for a legal tax shelter that is likely to be immune to Democratic meddling.

[templar knight]

Hey, Willie, where have you been? Glad you're back, as the barbarians are now at the gate!

[Worst President Ever]

http://www.heritage.org/Research/features/budgetchartbook/fed-rev-spend-2008-boc-C2-Government-Spending-Grew-Faster.html

[North Dallas Thirty]

LOL....don't you love it when libs like WPE are against government spending, but then favor increases in their welfare checks, free healthcare, paying their mortgages, paying for their gasoline....

[WAHOO WILLIE]

TK: dont fear librarians at the gate, it's the mongrels on the wall we should be prepared to fight. I've been busy remodeling the hacienda, no time for this foolishness. Figured it's a good time to take advantage of the real estate down turn for some cheap labor and materials. Man, Home Depot has become Home Desperate. A bad thing is the camposenos aren't around, not enough work, so I had to hire yankees. The aren't as good and there's that language barrier, but they're cheap.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

WPE: Since I've always liked you, I've an offer for you. I'm thinking of changing names but you need it more than I.....See, you dont want people thinking WPE has anything to do with "That One" so I offer you, a true supporter of Da Ombamarama the name BOHICA. Want it or shall I wait for fears to materialize and use it myself?