Stop Being so ‘G–damn Dogmatic’ Over Tax Increases: This Former Reagan Official has a Message for GOP Leaders
Bruce Bartlett (L), Dr. Alan Blinder (3L) and others listen while Dr. Heather Boushey (2L) speaks during a hearing of the House Democratic Steering Hearing on Capitol Hill July 7, 2011 in Washington, DC. House Democrats called experts in the economy to testify about the state of the United State’s economy and the possible effects of the nation defaulting on its debt. (Getty)
Bruce Bartlett, deputy assistant secretary for economic policy at the Treasury Department during the Reagan administration, on Sunday derided Republican leaders for being “so g–damn dogmatic” over tax increases.
Bartlett’s remarks were made during an exchange between himself and George Mason University’s Veronique de Rugy over whether tax revenues can actually help curb future government spending.
“We need higher revenues, both to restrain spending and to change the dynamics of the fiscal process … Your idea is so g–damn dogmatic,” said Bartlett during an interview on MSNBC’s “UP With Chris.”
“You’re living in a fantasy world where we’re going to balance the budget by abolishing Medicare and other ludicrous ideas,” he added.
He continued:
One of the problems with the Norquist pledge is that, if you never raise taxes, there’s never any cost to raising spending. So Veronique is essentially incorrect. She’s assuming that taxes will rise to pay for spending, but Norquist will not allow that to happen. It used to be that the main constraint on increasing spending was the fear that it would lead to higher taxes.
But if taxes never rise then you can have your cake and eat it too. We’ve reduced the tax cost of spending. Secondly, if you look at the CBO’s long-term budget forecasts, one of the main drivers, in fact the main driver, of long-term spending is interest on the debt. So if we don’t raise taxes, we’re automatically causing an increase in spending. So we need higher revenues both to restrain spending and to change the dynamics of the fiscal process.
For her part, de Rugy countered by arguing that tax revenue on its own cannot come close to offsetting the government’s “drunken sailor” spending:
Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter
(H/T: Mediate). Featured photo courtesy Getty Images.
Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.
Popular Stories
‘Bigoted, Religious [Zealots]‘: High School Senior Allegedly Expelled, Charged With Felonies Over Gay Relationship With ‘Consenting’ Fellow Student 498 Comments
Report: Hofstra Student Was Shot, Killed by Cop Trying To Rescue Her 412 Comments
White House: ‘Irrelevant Fact’ Where Obama Was During Benghazi 336 Comments
CNN Poll: Obama’s Approval Rating Unchanged Since Scandals Hit 227 Comments
Report: Obama Administration Apologizes for Another National Security Leak 210 Comments
Faith
-
'Bigoted, Religious [Zealots]': High School Senior Allegedly Expelled, Charged With Felonies Over Gay Relationship With 'Consenting' Fellow Student
498 Comments
-
Israeli Motorists Shocked When Nazi Flag Seen Flying Near Palestinian Mosque
Read More
- Did Christian Prayers at Gov't Meetings in This NY Town Violate the Constitution? 123 Comments
-
John Kerry Reportedly Had a Breakfast Meeting With Father of Gaza Flotilla 'Martyr' Last Week -- and There's Apparently Picture Evidence
120 Comments
-
'Pedophile Protection': Rapist Takes Young Girl to Planned Parenthood for an Abortion to Hide His Crime
116 Comments
Business
-
See All the Viral Backlash Abercrombie & Fitch Has Received for Its CEO's Comments From Years Ago That Resurfaced Again
Read More
-
Is This the 'Smoking Gun' That Ties the IRS Scandal to the White House?
117 Comments
-
Monday Morning Market Roundup: Not Off to Such a Great Start
Read More
-
Yahoo Just Bought This Social Networking Site for $1.1B
Read More
- This Map Shows the 'Riskiest' Places in the World 109 Comments
Technology
-
This Teen's Invention Means You Could You Charge Your Cellphone in Less Than 30 Seconds
Read More
-
One of the Most Unlikely Animals Being Trained to Hunt Land Mines
Read More
-
One of the Most Unlikely Animals Being Trained to Hunt Land Mines
Read More
-
Woman Who Lost All Limbs to Flesh-Eating Bacteria Gets $200K Bionic Arms
Read More
-
Why Are These Zoo Keepers Baffled by This Anteater's Babies?
Read More
The Blog
- Most people don’t think the DOJ was trying to bully the media by secretly taking reporters’ phone records
Greta Van Susteren says DOJ ‘lucky’ they didn’t hack her emails- Media Matters has no idea what to do with itself right now
Caption that photo!: the winner
‘A bushel of Pinocchios for IRS’s Lois Lerner’
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (137)
2much
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:40pmAdd your comments
Report this comment
SCREW-WINDOWS
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:12pmWhy is no one asking those in Congress to share the pain like paycuts and benefit reductions ?
Oh thats right they control their pay and benefits.
Report this comment
Lord_Frostwind
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:24pmLet me get this straight, the manchild in chief who throws and tantrum then runs off to tell his friends (aka, goes on another campaign tour), is demanding absolute control over the debt ceiling and is utterly obsessed with raising taxes on people making above 250K which will trim less than a percentage point off the yearly budget, and we’re being dogmatic?
What the crap?! Since when is everyone so willing to blindly go along with this fruitopian idea which anyone with half a brain can tell you is doomed to fail? Long John Obama and his parrots must have a lot more influence than I have ever given them credit for. This is either insanity or indoctrination, and I don’t know which answer is worse.
Report this comment
Small World
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:37pmDon’t they work for us ? I say we cut their pay. How do we go about it.
Report this comment
BlackCrow
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:54pmRINOS; endangered species. Keep it up and you will be extinct.
Report this comment
Secret Squirrel
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 9:53pm.
I contend this is not a fiscal cliff, it is a fecal cliff.
Let the poop hit the fan.
Not one penny will go to reduce debt.
There will not be any reduction in spending, actually an increase.
Higher taxes will result in less revenue.
Any money will be used to buy votes.
Congress is corrupt beyond saving. Time for a new party.
Report this comment
SendTheMeteors
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 11:18pmWalmart family assets are worth more than the combined assets of the lowest 40% of Americans. One family, one family, owns more, is worth more, than 40% of Americans. One family.
Why people that’s a good thing is beyond me. Walmart really isn’t helping the average American. These guys can pay more taxes.
Report this comment
The_Jerk
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:49amTell Bruce Bartlett, deputy assistant secretary for economic policy at the Treasury Department during the Reagan administration, to grow some balls and stop being so g–damn pussyfooted.
Report this comment
BODYBAG
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 1:46am@SMALL WORLD
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:37pm
Don’t they work for us ? I say we cut their pay. How do we go about it.
——————————–
Check out the movie “Lawless”. Thats how you go about it.
They need the fear of God re-instilled in them.
Thats going to come about when folks finally decide to start getting mean.
Downright junk-yard dog mean.
Report this comment
SquidVetOhio
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 8:33amAnyone that willfully uses God’s name in vain is trash and not worth listening to.
” The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding have all they that do his commandments: his praise endureth for ever.”
- Psalm 111:10
Report this comment
Xiccarph
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 8:38amYour secret’s out, Squirrel. pretty much right on.
Its spending that is raising the debt, plain and simple. A 100% tax on everyone wouldn’t cover it.
Cut spending, have term limits, delete all aspects of the Fed Gov’t bureaucracy not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution. Everything will balance out in the end, and how each Sovereign State reacts will determine where various types of people will live.
Report this comment
GETLIFE
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 8:52am” One of the problems with the Norquist pledge is that, if you never raise taxes, there’s never any cost to raising spending.”
I guess the word “inflation” doesn’t exist in this guy’s world.
How about “quantitative easing?”
How about “default?”
Report this comment
Deuteronomy22
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 1:39pmFirst get ALL of the freeloaders off of Social Security Disability. It was never intended as welfare for the lazy or those slobs whe never took care of themselves so that in there 50s they are falling apart or for kids with ADD. Return it to just over 65 and the blind. Next end Medicare entirely. If you spent everything you earned before age 65 don’t ask me to pay your medical bills. Ask your church and family or die gracefully. Life is not eternal and only the strong (those who are smart enough to have created wealth) survive. I’d rather leave my wealth to my kids than have the government hand it out to lazy takers.
Report this comment
NukeHaze
Posted on December 5, 2012 at 5:28amWhat an idiot. If we are taxed 5% of what a dollar is worth now for every dollar we spend now, when the dollar goes down in value, and we have to spend more to pay for more government stuff, these morons will say they must increas the percentage to 6 or 7% in order to offset the cost of living and entitlements for everyone. If the cost of gas goes from $1 to $4 per gallon, the government gets four times as much money from eac gallonmg of gas and the consumption of gas is so essential that the money increase is almost guaranteed. These bureaucrats already get far more than they should have ever dreamed and are sking downhill in an avalanche with us watching from the bottom of the chute. The question is not about revenue (which is really a tax and seems to be another word people have changed the definition of to suit their need) but about cutting the spending. Obamacare needs to be defunded especially since it is already in the red for the first decade and the first 4 years of the decade it will not have even been implemented. The whole system was set up on Keynsian and Marxist mathematics which rely on eugenics to reduce its cost by reducing population. The only cuts these elitists are interested in are lifelines and the only cuts we should be interested in is their terms destroying our country.
Report this comment
paperpushermj
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:38pm“We need higher revenues, both to restrain spending and to change the dynamics of the fiscal process”.
________________________________________________ .
.
I’d like to explore how sending more money to Government any Government Federal,State,County,City or even special tax district restrains spending…. because that doesn’t sound right to me. In fact it sounds like newspeak to me.
Report this comment
pissantno.10
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:49pmrestrains us slaves from spending. more party money for our lords and ladies. our gods and goddes. i bet he thinks our right to vote should be gone to. because if we vote some in to repersent us and our desires they should tell us to buzz of slave
Report this comment
Cavallo
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:11pmJust imagine all the waste of time in campaigning and money spent on ads. Wouldn’t it be simpler if we just had lords for life? Appointed titles handed out rather than elections? Wouldn’t that be so much better?
Thats likely next.
Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:35pmI wonder which special interest group the buffoon Bartlett represents? It sure as hell isn’t the Amerikan taxpayer.
Report this comment
encinom
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:42pmThose that sign Norquist pledge don’t represent the tax payer either and the Tea PArty are acting like the serfs for the Koch Brothers.
Report this comment
pissantno.10
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:42pmobama and his crew got to give them credit they can buy who ever they want .
Report this comment
Stelex
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:52pmEncinom, seriously, I’m just curious ….. are you man or woman? I’d just like to know how to address you properly. Currently I’m leading towards “Mam” let me know …..thanks in advance.
Report this comment
paperpushermj
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:02pmNo encinom those Republicans told their electorate they where running on not raising taxes just like your demigod obama ran on telling you he was going to raise taxes on someone else. Which was just peachy with you.
Report this comment
Torimom
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 9:34pmEncinom, the next time you go back to the psych ward, perhaps they should increase the voltage on the ECT. Maybe you’ll be able to stay out longer.
Report this comment
RLTW
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 10:07pmWow Encinom
You got Norquist and the Koch brother’s into one post without finding a way to blame Bush?
Good job simpleton
Report this comment
savagenatn
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 11:21pmencino idiot your comments aren’t even worth responding to.
somebody should tell this bartlett clown to stop being such a horses a$$ over trying to spend our money. Moron!
Report this comment
Stelex
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:34pm“We need higher revenues, both to restrain spending and to change the dynamics of the fiscal process … Your idea is so g–damn dogmatic,” said Bartlett during an interview on MSNBC’s “UP With Chris.”
Yes I can see how higher revenues will restrain spending. WTF. Change the dynamics of the fiscal process…….what the he!! does that mean.
Cut taxes, cut spending, cut government, cut the BS. You don’t need more money. You piss it away like its nothing you fool. Good God, wake up America…..they are bleeding us dry.
Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:40pmBarry’s doin the Cloward & Piven anarchist thing to a T and it won’t be long,we’ll have real obamazombies in the streets demanding their entitlements.
Report this comment
Stelex
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:48pmI’ve been telling people since 2008, Cloward and Piven. Textbook no less, spend us into oblivion, get as many on the gov teat as possible. F’n idiot gave him 4 more years to milk us dry. I’m getting pissed……yes Janet, Eric……I’m pissed. You Jagovs. I suspect it will not end as you progressives would like.
Report this comment
paperpushermj
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:55pmWhere awake just not enough…yet!
Report this comment
Lamarr01
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 3:07amThe economy has not been growing for five years. Raising taxes will cause a more severe economic contraction. The expense of Obamacare will cause a strain on the economy. Blaming Bush is getting a little old. Now Obama will be able to blame the Republicans.
Clower and Piven want to overwhelm the system and cause an economic collapse. They think a Socialist Utopia will emerge from the ashes. We have already gone over the financial cliff. What will be left after the crash?
Report this comment
louie louie
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:33pmI understand what he’s saying. Whenever I got a raise at work and put more money in the bank, it always restrained my wife’s spending. So giving more money to the government will also make them spend less. Is this guy an idiot or what?
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:29pmBartlett is a G-damn fool!
Report this comment
freeberty
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:27pmLooks like the republicans in Congress took his advice and started the sell out today. I’m sure there will be more to come.
Report this comment
Walkabout
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:24pmThe GOP needs to give Obama what he wants. Say that they are doing it because of the media &let him run for 6 months or a year & let him take the blame.
Like the editor of Newsweek said during the 20054 presidential race, the press is worth 15 points. Which means that the press & Democrats can easily sway the low information voters like “Moderation is Best”.
Report this comment
For my Liberty!
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:00pmNOT if the press is in Ovomit’s pocket. They cover for him and he will take no blame. LOOK at Fast & Furious…LOOK at Benghazi. …LOOK at the TREASON he committed by giving America’s enemies money and arms….
Report this comment
republic2011
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:22pmFolks, while we have spent quite a bit on the wars since 9-11, they are not the biggest contributor to our debts. Get the numbers right. The entitlements are the biggest contributors. They dwarf what we have spent on all wars since 9-11 combined. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t agree with our foreign entanglements, but to blame our current problems on lowering taxes and additional wars, alone, is purely misguided. Our problems started many years ago. The welfare state, social security, Medicare, multiple unnecessary government beaurocracies, etc. I think it was LBJ that made social security a piggy bank that any politician could raid for their own purposes. Before then, it was fully funded and locked up. The truth of the matter is that that piggy bank was robbed years ago and never replenished. That’s why you can’t trust government to do the right thing with your money. Even today, our state and local taxes are diverted to organizations that work to implement Agenda 21 in our communities. Who reading this ever agreed to that? No, our biggest problem is the misguided use of our tax dollars and tyranical levels of tax.
Report this comment
The_Pointy_End
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:21pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayad5mbSSrU&feature=youtu.be
Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:20pmYou get higher revenues when you lower the rates you idiot.How about getting rid of ALL yes ALL regulations so business can thrive and new businesses can be created,more businesses mean more taxpayers to feed the hogs in DC. See they work for the money and the hogs collect it to waste on several unconstitutional programs.Anything that reduces the governments power and control over us is a good thing so we won’t have to worry about the government doing neither because once they have all that power and control they tend to die of old age in congress,weird how that happens huh?
We have courts to deal with businesses that pollute the environment so the unconstitutional EPA isn’t needed,same for the SEC they aren’t needed either because they handled the Madoff ponzi scheme so well, No,this is class warfare plain and simple because no level of taxation will get us out of this mess,the hogs in DC know it hell even the Marxist POS knows it he’s still running for office and can’t be bothered with governing because the bastard’s too busy ruling,if I have to explain the difference you’re a lost cause.
This is just the Marxist POS’s war on capitalism and he’s determined to demonstrate that government knows best. He’s never worked a day in his life in the private sector so of course he thinks government is the answer to all our problems.The taxes it’s going to take to fund Obama care will bankrupt us alone.
Report this comment
Stelex
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:44pmSlayer…you know they want to take us down. We should not be paying more than 15% in taxes…..Giving them more money just means more spending. The republic is crashing because of this POS and his mafia. The goal is one united world under the UN. This would end very badly for those not in the chosen class. I suspect the time for revolution is near. I see no other way. Elections mean nothing, our sovereinty means nothing, your hard work means nothing. Bleeding us dry to enhance the NWO. I’m starting to feel the pain, can’t wait for the rest to so they wake up.
Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:51pmYes indeed Barry is part of the NWO crowd and he’s going to kill the goose that laid the golden egg,not only to appease his brain dead base but to reset the U.S.
I responded to you on the chick that robbed the bank story,check it out.
Report this comment
Stelex
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:03pmAhhh Slayer, I question your standards. Not really. Be a fun afternoon till the feds caved in the door. ;-)
Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:08pmlol Just trying to lighten up the atmosphere. ;)
Report this comment
Pantloadian
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:15pmPRONGTEASER . . . Congratulations, you just set a world record – a 249-word cliche. Expect a call from Guiness.
Report this comment
Stelex
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:53pmPantload, do they really pay you for your wit? Obviously they don’t review your stuff, lucky for you shtpants.
Report this comment
Stelex
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:57pmBy the way shtload, wouldn’t surprise me if you were Obama himself, same mentality. VAPID….yeah, look it up.
Report this comment
DoseofReality
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 8:18amSp progressiveslayer….you expect courts to deal with corporations that pollute so the EPA isnt needed? If ALL regulations are removed as you want, what laws are the courts to enforce? Your argument lacks any sense…..
Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 8:43am@DOSEOFREALITY The EPA was created by Nixon with an EO in 1970,I’m pretty sure this country somehow survived prior to creating that unconstitutional agency. We had laws on the books prior to 1970 to deal with polluters and that’s where it should’ve stayed,within the courts. The EPA is an agency that doesn’t care about the environment one bit,they do however have thousands of regulations that make it almost impossible to do business here and impossible to start up a business.Try to make an improvement on your ‘private’ property and see how many hoops you have to jump through and permits you have to pay for to use your ‘private’ property. You no longer have private property rights in Amerika,it’s one of the ten planks of the communist manifesto and we’ve attained all ten,look it up.
Report this comment
DoseofReality
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 9:19amProgressive – I own two rental properties plus what i live in…its not that difficult. The start of your cliched argument was to remove ALL regulations on business…..then in the next paragraph state that the courts can deal with polluters. What regulations would the courts uphold if your argument is to remove all regulations? It makes no sense…..
Report this comment
DoseofReality
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 9:22amAnd you really think that the EPA doesnt care about the environment? And of course we dealt with it prior to the EPA…we just had lakes that caught fire, mass pollution in rivers and streams. I dont understand how Conservatives can rail against big government but at the same time look up to big business as if they are gods…..big business can be just as corrupt as big government if allowed. We NEED some regulations on how businesses operate or else we are back with sweatshops, not pulltion regs….do you want to be China and India?
Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 10:11amDOSE The laws were on the books prior to creating the redundant EPA so polluters could be dealt with in a court of law as opposed to some corrupt unconstitutional governmental agency. You think my argument is cliched huh? To want liberty and freedom from government is cliched? Great then I’m guilty as charged and if you think we need big government to dictate every minute detail of our lives then we can be like N.Korea,don’t worry we’re almost there so you big government lovers will be as happy as a bug in a rug.
Report this comment
DoseofReality
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 10:45amWhat aspect of your life does the government dictate?
Report this comment
Walkabout
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:20pmHow does my revenue restrain spending. I think based on emperical evidence you can draw a regression line proving the opposite.
If you consider Washington & its actors as part of a chiefdom, I think sociologists & psychologists would say that increased revenue means increased power, whetting the appetite for more power, spending & raising more revenue.
I use to think we were sophisticated And oh so much better than the dark ages & before. I was wrong.
Ancient chiefs use to give out many gifts to their warriors & other retainers to spread their fame & ensure loyalty (Anglo-Saxons would call them givers of gold & other names). No matter how much they gave out they always seemed to have more than the people they gave to.
How is this any different than what politicians do today?
The language of justification is different, but in the end how is it different?
Report this comment
lifeisgreat
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:19pmControl spending first.
Set up a budget, and then you can increase taxes.
With no budget, how do you now how much money you need.
How about, no budget –no paycheck for congress, senate and Pres.
Report this comment
SamTheNantiSARRMM
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:13pmI am confused. How does raising taxes restrain spending when spending is already out of control?
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:38pmThe man’s a total liar. Higher taxes will keep the credit rating propped up, which will encourage the thieves in DC to borrow even more money.
Report this comment
blanco5
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:13pmWHO in washington is on OUR side????
Report this comment
blanco5
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:16pmBesides Rand Paul.
Report this comment
encinom
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:27pmIf you are in the 2%, the GOP is on your side. The GOP has expressed its all to willing to ignore the needs of the rest of the country to make sure the likes of Beck, Springsteen, and Gates don’t pay another cent in taxes.
Report this comment
TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:38pm“Besides Rand Paul.”
He was at least smart enough to know the difference between Romney and Obama. The kid has a clue…
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:41pmThere’s only about 2% paying taxes, anymore. The rest are G-damn leeches.
Report this comment
louie louie
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:55pm@encinom – The GOP wants to retain the Bush tax cuts for everyone. So they are on the side of all Americans. It is you and your ilk who want to divide America, engage in class warfare, and gang up on a small 2% minority because you feel you have the right enslave their labors. If it’s OK to do that to one minority group simply because you covet their success, what’s to stop you from doing it to any other group you don’t like? Democrats were the original party of slavery. When will you guys stop feeling entitled to benefit from the labors of others?
Report this comment
Strasser
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:06pmAnother progressive idiot “Republican” showing his true colors. Another statist moron who needs to be shouted down and kicked out of any position of power or responsibility.
I’ve been hearing that Speaker Boehner, in addition to caving in on tax increases and giving Obama half of everything he wants, has also quietly purged all real conservatives from House committees–anyone have a link to a story on that?
Boehner has declared war on conservatives, and it’s time for us to take the fight right to his face. Time to make good on Brent Bozell’s threat. Time to let Boehner know that he’s just committed political suicide on behalf of all the progressives in the Republican party!
Here’s the contact form for Boehner in case you’d like to voice your opinion: http://www.speaker.gov/contact
Report this comment
encinom
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:41pmWhy does the tea party willing act as the attack dogs for the rich? Instead of asking for afair tax code, the Tea PArty is more determined to protect their master’s gold. The tea party is nothing more than a collection of willing serfs of the Koch Brothers.
Report this comment
Lord_Frostwind
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:35pmEnny, when you learn that “fairness” as currently defined is a lie, you’ll understand. All men deserve protection, rich or poor, and looting their bank accounts to pay for programs which are black holes of money on good days with no discernible proof to their effectiveness, is the same as stealing. You can say there is a difference, but laws deal in absolutes, and if they can take property from the rich, they can take it from anyone else.
The hunger of the government will grow and grow until it devours the entire economy. Stopping it here is the best chance we have to stop the US from becoming the next Greece. If we don’t, this country will die. Whether it is slowly or rapidly the dream will end in failure.
Report this comment
SPOT_OF_TEA
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:05pmAll I know is in the past 2 years,everytime Boehner opens his mouth Obama’s approval rating goes up…….Is it possible he’s working for the other side?
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:43pmYes, just like McCain. The other side being DC.
Report this comment
republic2011
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:03pmMoron. The left has adopted an approach to making their points in public forums: Just say whatever you want, no matter how ridiculous or stupid; and keep repeating it until the opposition gives up. What he is saying makes absolutely no sense at all. But, if he keeps uttering it with full conviction, the average American will think, “well, it must be so complicated I can’t understand it.”. and they give up. It is pretty simple. Even if you taxed the wealthy at 100%, it would not bring in enough revenue to run the government for more than two weeks. Tax increases won’t make a dent. We need to cut spending and spur the economy (with lower taxes). Even our comrades in Russia get this with a 13% flat tax. They wised up and we got stupid.. go figure.
Report this comment
Marine25
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:02pmI certainly hope everyone tea-partier reads Mr. Bartlett’s commentary. He’s right, the pledge has hurt the country and the party, it has enabled the debt to be increased under two presidents without those ‘you raised my taxes’ re-election problems that USED to reign in spending. Maybe since he served at the pleasure of President Reagan, he will be taken seriously and ‘conservatives’ will realize the tea-party is full of .22 caliber minds in a .44 magnum world. But I doubt it. I expect he will be called RINO, communist, socialist, traitor and a host of other words whose proper definitions elude those who use them. Reagan’s own policies are far more moderate, even liberal than the reactionary rants celebrated by our new ‘conservatives. Wonder what they’d call Ronald Reagan if he were running today?
Report this comment
MDECKER
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:19pmand you are shooting blanks my friend. Liberals could not stand Ronald Reagan when he was alive. Do you notice how the Left is quick to point out what Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan would do if they were alive today? They are quite comfortable in that the two, Great Leaders, are not around to call them out on their folly.
Report this comment
Walkabout
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:21pmSamTheNantiSARRMM
I am confused. How does raising taxes restrain spending when spending is already out of control?
***
I ask the same thing. How does raising revenue restrain some one form spending it & the borrowing & spending more?
Report this comment
Fubared
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:21pmWhy did you type all that self absorbed bs? Blah blah blah nonsensical blather I love to see my crap in text. Save all those useless characters and be like the rest of the left and don’t expend the energy.
Report this comment
Marine25
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:14pm@mdecker
Elected Governor of California in 1966, Reagan immediately approved tax hikes to balance the budget.
While he did cut taxes as POTUS in 1981 and again in 1988, he raised taxes every year from 1981 to 1987 including The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, the largest peacetime tax increase in U.S. history. Reagan was wise enough to know that tax increases are necessary if you want to balance the budget. He never would have cut taxes the way Republicans have done over the last decade. Reagan’s tax increases brought in more revenue and shrank the unemployment rate.
As Governor of California, he made abortion legal there in 1967. He supported the Brady Bill.
In 1986, Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act. The act made it illegal to knowingly hire or recruit illegal immigrants, required employers to attest to their employees’ immigration status, and granted amnesty to approximately 3 million illegal immigrants who entered the United States prior to January 1, 1982.
What would Limbaugh and Beck say about those policies?
Report this comment
SimpleTruths
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 11:00pmNice job Marine,and from MDECKER to your retort we hear…
crickets
Report this comment
thibx
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:02pmboehanner speaker of the house does not need the job they are there to get this spending under control and this dumbass will give in. let it go over the ciff who cares. to take all the money in the country and spend it and the democrats would still have to print more because they overspent. i would vote against a republican because he gave in not because he could not make a deal. does any one including the president ever do anything for the country and not for a damn party.
Report this comment
jackact
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 6:59pmBruce Bartlett, ‘cool guy’…..
Oh, he’ll fit right in!
:(
Report this comment
DZ-015
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 6:58pmIs this guy taking as a given that Congress is incapable of cutting spending? Why not cut their pay until they do?
Report this comment
Marine25
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:09pmMaybe he is taking it as a given that 9-11, two wars and a great recession required Americans to maintain or increase their tax contributions as increased spending was necessary. Maybe they should have seen it as a ‘given’ than slashing revenue and approving two wars was economic suicide.
Report this comment
Fubared
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:23pmThat and we need to keep 60 million 25 types on the sofa and breeding.
Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:30pmMARINE Who gave you the idea that congress approved two wars?
Report this comment
Marine25
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:25pm@progslayer
On September 15, 2001 Congress overwhelmingly passed a resolution authorizing President Bush to use force against those responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
On October 11, 2002 the Senate voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refused to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions. The House approved an identical resolution, 296-133.
Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:37pmMARINE Congress passed some resolutions they didn’t declare war on anybody and we haven’t had a declared war since WW II. I have no problem if we go to war just do it like it’s supposed to be done as written in the constitution.
Report this comment
bonesiii
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 6:57pmWe need to NUKE the myth that “we need revenue” is solved by raising rates no matter what. Raise the rates to 100% of everybody’s income and you will soon get zero revenue. It’s a complex relationship that’s not simple “arithmetic” as Clinton called it in his stupid DNC speech.
On the other hand, lowering the rates to zero obviously gives zero revenue as well (unless we’re talking about just eliminating one type of tax while others are in effect as many places do).
It should be obvious that the ideal rate to get the highest revenue has to be somewhere in between. And history proves that lower rates generally produce bigger revenue in the long term (and “temporary taxes” ruin economies so in the long term reduce revenues, thus never being temporary unless people finally figure this out).
Report this comment
Mutiny
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 6:55pmIdiot.
Report this comment
Stoneez
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 6:54pmWhat a dumb-azz
Report this comment
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:00pmThat sums it up perfectly.
Report this comment