August 11, 2004

Administration Backing Off?

A day after Bush says that consideration of a national sales tax should be seriously considered, the administration is, unfortunately, backing off of that claim.

Administration officials on Wednesday denied that President Bush is considering a national sales tax, a day after the Republican incumbent created a stir by calling such a tax "an interesting idea that we ought to explore seriously."

I will try be polite here, but some Republicans need to grow a spine. You want to know what will win this election? Optimistic conservatism. It's the sure-fire way to beat pessimistic liberalism.

Go out with a smile, tell everyone that we should scrap the income tax in favor of a flat tax or a national sales tax, and then inform the liberals that they should just have a Coke and smile and get over it. Oh, and by the way, the "Assault" Weapons Ban will not be renewed either, have a nice day.

Instead, we get drivel from some political suits saying that he really didn't mean that.

Speaking of mindless suits...

Kerry makes some predictable claims (as I said would happen earlier):

"Families already squeezed by rising health care costs, gas costs and college costs would have to carry a whole new tax burden," Kerry said in a statement.

Whole new tax burden?? Note to John Kerry: This plan would be getting rid of a burdensome income tax and replacing it with a consumption tax (aka sales tax).

A former Clinton economic advisor has this to offer as well:

But, Sperling said, "Any way you cut it, a proposal like this will amount to a historic tax increase on middle-income families."

As opposed to that good old income tax that takes away 30% of their hard-earned wages? Yeah...that's a good one there, Sperling.

By the way...I'm in a sort of brazen mood today. My blogging might have reflected that, so get over it. :)

Comments:

Please Note! Failure to abide by the following may result in your comments being edited or deleted: Remain on topic. Foul language and/or personal attacks are not permitted. Excessive links (more than three per thread) must be approved first. If you do include a link in your comment, make sure it is a short link (go to tinyurl.com if it is too long). Try to keep comments to 125 words or less. Thank you.

No one can call "backing off" flip-flopping by the Flip-flopper--in--Chimp. He merely turned the corner, moved ahead and isn't going back.

Posted by: The Token Librul at August 11, 2004 07:46 PM

At least the chimp never backed off this war story of manhoodliness:

Yale Intramural Rugby Players for Truth say Bush lied about his varsity play; send in Kenneth Starr!
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/gossip/story/190209p-164529c.html
With all the controversy about John Kerry's Vietnam medals and ribbons, who'd have thought that loyal George W. Bush aide Karen Hughes would be the one to catch the President fibbing about a supposed varsity letter? In her new book, "Ten Minutes From Normal," Hughes recounts a conversation with Bush after Russian President Vladimir Putin grilled him on his Yale days.

"President Putin knew you had played rugby, but he didn't have the context. I mean, you just played for one semester in college, right?" Hughes said.

Bush corrected: "I played for a year, and it was the varsity."

A Yale spokeswoman confirmed in May that there's no such thing as varsity rugby at Yale - not when Bush was an undergrad in the 1960s and not today.

Posted by: The Token Librul at August 11, 2004 08:38 PM

I think it is a good idea. The rich who spend more would be taxed more. The liberals would love that. The middle class would have more pocket money.
I say go for it.

Posted by: gunner at August 11, 2004 08:47 PM

And the chimp still hasn't "backed off" his lies about being in the AL ANG, either.

Alabama Air National Guard Pilots for Actual Truth "never saw hide nor hair" of Bush when he was supposed to be in their unit
http://www.memphisflyer.com/content.asp?ID=2837&onthefly=1
Not only was he AWOL from the Guard, he was also AWOL from "the Pit," the local "watering hole" where all single pilots hung out in a target-rich environment.

“Maybe we’re all getting old and senile,” former pilot Bishop said with obvious sarcasm. “I don’t want to second-guess Mr. Calhoun’s memory (allegedly of watching Bush eat sandwiches and read manuals), and I WOULD HATE TO IMPUGN THE INTEGRITY OF A FELLOW OFFICER (caps mine--TTL), but I know the rest of us didn’t see Lt. Bush.”

Posted by: The Token Librul at August 11, 2004 09:13 PM

Bruce Bartlett did a great piece on why a national sales tax is a "very dumb idea" here: http://www.ncpa.org/edo/bb/2004/20040809bb.htm

Posted by: Chris Wage at August 11, 2004 10:12 PM

..and here's why it's a good idea.

http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/smart/sketch.html

Posted by: Mary at August 12, 2004 08:28 AM

speaks for itself:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040813/pl_nm/campaign_taxes_cbo_dc_4

Posted by: jakec at August 13, 2004 02:24 PM

Not really, the numbers and statistics are very deceiving.

http://www.warroom.com/taxcut/taxcutdata.htm

Posted by: Mary at August 13, 2004 03:57 PM

Lies, damn lies, and statistics...sometimes tell a true story

http://hoffmania.blogspot.com/2004_08_08_hoffmania_archive.html#109241446563619116

Posted by: The Token Librul at August 13, 2004 06:23 PM

yeah - the cbo, which is also comprised of republicans, isn't really in the business of "deceiving".

here is another "deceitful" link from the non-partisan CBPP ...

http://www.cbpp.org/4-14-04tax-sum.htm

Posted by: jakec at August 16, 2004 10:18 AM

Bush Flip-Flops On Taxes
http://americablog.blogspot.com/archives/2004_08_15_americablog_archive.html#109259766645066921
Bush was in Florida last week and told a hand-picked audience it was an interesting idea that they ought to explore. Later, his own staff said that the President had no idea what he was talking about -- okay, they just denied that Bush is considering such a tax, even though that's exactly what he said he was doing. Nice twist?

Posted by: The Token Librul at August 16, 2004 10:22 AM

GOP BACKING OFF TRUE CONSERVATISM?

The GOP Shifts Left
Michael O'Brien for Hoffmania

WASHINGTON, DC - Do you notice that the Democratic convention had speakers that represented the party's far left -- e.g. Teddy Kennedy. They let Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich, and even Al Sharpton speak in prime-time. Someone who didn't know better would think that the Democratic party was further left than it actually is. And yet, for the most part, people accepted this.

Now look at the GOP convention. Are they having Tom DeLay, Bill Frist, and Danny Hastert speak? How about Mitch Mcconnell, James (I'm outraged by the outrage over Abu Ghraib) Inhofe, Rick Santorum? Perhaps party cheerleader Rush Limbaugh? Of course not. They had to round up people like Rudy Giuliani, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg and Schwarzenegger are pro-gay rights, Bloomberg is anti-death penalty, and they are all pro-choice, pro-gun control, etc. Other than our wingnut president and VP, John McCain is the most died-in-the-wool conservative they have speaking!

If the GOP truly represents American values, then why do they refuse to put their prominent leaders at the podium? Why don't they have Rick Santorum do one of his anti-gay tirades where he claims that gay marriage will increase out-of-wedlock births? Or have Rush Limbaugh argue that Abu Ghraib was no different than fraternity hazing? Why do they have to get speakers who's stances are at odds with the GOP platform?

I know that 'liberal' is a bad word, but they sure seem to be running from 'conservative'.

Posted by: The Token Librul at August 19, 2004 08:30 PM