• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

The GOP couldn’t organize an orgy in a whorehouse with a fist full of 50s.

Americans barely caring about Afghanistan is so last month.

Usually wrong but never in doubt

The poor and middle-class pay taxes, the rich pay accountants, the wealthy pay politicians.

When your entire life is steeped in white supremacy, equality feels like discrimination.

Schmidt just says fuck it, opens a tea shop.

Today’s GOP: why go just far enough when too far is right there?

Insiders who complain to politico: please report to the white house office of shut the fuck up.

Sadly, there is no cure for stupid.

Let me eat cake. The rest of you could stand to lose some weight, frankly.

JFC, are there no editors left at that goddamn rag?

In my day, never was longer.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

Let us savor the impending downfall of lawless scoundrels who richly deserve the trouble barreling their way.

Fuck these fucking interesting times.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

A Senator Walker would be an insult to the state and the nation.

Russian mouthpiece, go fuck yourself.

Why is it so hard for them to condemn hate?

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Republicans are radicals, not conservatives.

Whatever happens next week, the fight doesn’t end.

Putin must be throwing ketchup at the walls.

Republicans in disarray!

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Republican Stupidity / Even Newt Isn’t That Stupid

Even Newt Isn’t That Stupid

by $8 blue check mistermix|  May 16, 20118:31 am| 82 Comments

This post is in: Republican Stupidity

FacebookTweetEmail

Since his campaign is built on coded dog whistles, Newt’s targeting a older, white electorate that knows the code and hears the whistle.  So it’s no surprise that he ditched the Ryan plan almost immediately. And since he’s Newt, he has to make the Ryan plan sound like something Stalin cooked up:

Newt Gingrich slammed the House GOP budget on Meet The Press this morning, telling interviewer David Gregory that replacing Medicare with a voucher system was too “radical” an approach. His words were by far the harshest of any major presidential candidate towards Paul Ryan’s proposal on entitlements.

“I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering,” Gingrich said, calling the plan “too big a jump” for the country. “I don’t think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate.”

Now that a Sunday show favorite has dropped a turd on Ryan’s plan, expect the beltway media to pile on with a bunch of “even Newt Gingrich … ” questions. Newt’s reprising the role he played in the 90’s, when he was often one of the Democrats’ biggest assets.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Brace Yourselves
Next Post: Open Thread »

Reader Interactions

82Comments

  1. 1.

    stuckinred

    May 16, 2011 at 8:32 am

    Mornin Joe is livid about this!

  2. 2.

    Comrade Javamanphil

    May 16, 2011 at 8:38 am

    Now that a Sunday show favorite has dropped a turd on Ryan’s plan, expect the beltway media to pile on with a bunch of “even Newt Gingrich … ” questions.

    I think not. Ryan is the Heathers new crush now. Poor Newtie is going to find he just doesn’t inspire the same stirring he once did.

  3. 3.

    Valdivia

    May 16, 2011 at 8:39 am

    and just in time for RyanCare 2.0! The re-release. Sweet.

  4. 4.

    dmsilev

    May 16, 2011 at 8:40 am

    Posted this in the previous thread, but it makes a bit more sense here.
    Behold Ryan’s op-ed on the need for a serious budget debate:

    In a recent speech he gave in response to the House budget, President Barack Obama outlined his approach to addressing our fiscal imbalance. It begins with trillions of dollars in higher taxes and relies on a plan to control costs in Medicare: A board of 15 unelected bureaucrats would be given more power to deeply ration Medicare spending in ways that would disrupt the lives of those in retirement, leading to waiting lists and denied care for today’s seniors.
    __
    By contrast, the House-passed budget gets health care spending under control by empowering Americans to fight back against skyrocketing costs. Our budget makes no changes for those in or near retirement, and offers future generations a strengthened Medicare program they can count on, with guaranteed coverage options, less help for the wealthy, and more help for the poor and the sick.

    Anyone want to go through the thing and count the lies, distortions, omitted facts, etc.? I’d do it, but I need a second cup of coffee before being able to use exponential notation.

  5. 5.

    PeakVT

    May 16, 2011 at 8:40 am

    OT/Nerd Alert: Space Shuttle launch video streams.

  6. 6.

    MattMinus

    May 16, 2011 at 8:42 am

    I think people are really going to respond to the notion that Obama is the “food stamp president”.

  7. 7.

    alwhite

    May 16, 2011 at 8:42 am

    The only bright note is this shit stew we have cooked up is that the wingnuts are finally getting around to cannibalism. Once they start eating their own the beltway bastards are going to have to pick sides and there will be questions like “even Newt says”. At some point they will cross swords with others of their slimy ilk and the editorial page may be worth reading once again.

    The last hope will be that the Depends crowd will finally realize that the masters of the universe are not their friends and we can begin to reconstruct America on a sane foundation.

  8. 8.

    Ash Can

    May 16, 2011 at 8:43 am

    So Paulie Ryan is kicking off the Medicare-privatization-resuscitation effort today here in Chicago, with a speech to a downtown business club — on the day that Rahm Emanuel is to be sworn in as mayor. I hope the Beltway is listening to Paulie, at least, because he’s sure as hell going to get buried in the news cycle here.

  9. 9.

    Valdivia

    May 16, 2011 at 8:45 am

    @Ash Can:
    ha ha ha ha. wipes tear of laughter.
    Rahm!

  10. 10.

    Omnes Omnibus

    May 16, 2011 at 8:47 am

    @Ash Can: It is almost like the right has used up all the political instincts and timing for which they were once famous. On a related note, I not sure that Paul Ryan is very bright.

  11. 11.

    dmsilev

    May 16, 2011 at 8:47 am

    @Ash Can: You and I both know that Rahm scheduled his inauguration for today *just to drown out Ryan’s speech*. Yes, I know that the inauguration date was set long before Ryan’s speech was scheduled. That just shows that Rahm is using some of Obama’s Time-Lord abilities.

  12. 12.

    Chris

    May 16, 2011 at 8:48 am

    Didn’t Gingrich try to strangle and de facto end Medicare back in 1995 by denying it the money it needed to operate? Wasn’t that what the government shutdown was about?

    How quickly he changes his tune… or maybe that experience just left a bad taste in his mouth.

  13. 13.

    Alex S.

    May 16, 2011 at 8:49 am

    Hehe, nice…

    Also, all engineers are communists. They make things. Real capitalists only shift money.

  14. 14.

    M-Pop

    May 16, 2011 at 8:51 am

    @PeakVT: Thank you for the link – I’m watching right now!

  15. 15.

    Brian S

    May 16, 2011 at 8:51 am

    THing I took away from that is Gingrich’s attempt to make himself the moderate when he’s been a bomb-thrower his whole career. What’s that about?

  16. 16.

    cat48

    May 16, 2011 at 8:54 am

    Newtser agrees with the president, who also called the plan “radical.” Maybe Newt is going to try win those “disillusioned” Obama voters I keep hearing about. He might need to drop the dog whistles though….

  17. 17.

    jonas

    May 16, 2011 at 8:55 am

    @Brian S: I don’t think he’s trying to be moderate, I think he’s betting that he can get a lot of cranky old people to come out to vote for him in the primary with a combination of racist dog-whistling, hippie bashing and promising not to take their Rascal scooters away.

  18. 18.

    Ash Can

    May 16, 2011 at 8:55 am

    @Omnes Omnibus: I’m not sure any of those guys are very bright. I can understand how Ryan’s speech could be meant primarily for Beltway media consumption, but if that’s the case why bother leaving town to do it, especially if you’re going to come to Chicago to do it?

  19. 19.

    cat48

    May 16, 2011 at 8:59 am

    @Ash Can:

    The Villagers loves them some Rahhhhm though. What will Brooks do as he has a crush on Ryan & Rahm?

  20. 20.

    Ash Can

    May 16, 2011 at 9:05 am

    @dmsilev: That’s the very definition of FUD. It galls me to no end that these assholes are given free rein to spout this shit without any real pushback. In a just world, this turd would be printed side-by-side with another piece fact-checking it. Now that would be fair and balanced.

  21. 21.

    PeakVT

    May 16, 2011 at 9:05 am

    Whew.

  22. 22.

    jrg

    May 16, 2011 at 9:06 am

    I’m convinced the Ryan plan is a big reason for the recent Tea Party polling collapse. Older Republican voters like to talk about “small government”, and “saving money”, but they are not willing to bear the burden of that.

    This was bound to happen the moment Republicans were forced to acknowledge the fact that NPR, Planned Parenthood, and food stamps do not make up 90% of the federal budget.

  23. 23.

    artem1s

    May 16, 2011 at 9:06 am

    Philanthropy News Digest has an interesting article on donors to politically active non profits.

    http://foundationcenter.org/pnd/news/story.jhtml?id=339700037

    you can mess with the Supremes but don’t piss of the IRS

  24. 24.

    Cacti

    May 16, 2011 at 9:06 am

    Newtie’s already breaking Reagan’s 11th commandment.

  25. 25.

    Brian S

    May 16, 2011 at 9:07 am

    @PeakVT: Thanks. I managed to get past the commercial just in time to see liftoff. Loved the datastream at the bottom of the video as well.

  26. 26.

    Brian S

    May 16, 2011 at 9:09 am

    @jonas: He’s trying to have it both ways, in other words. He can get the old people to vote for him in the primaries, and then if he makes it to the general, he can pretend like he was a moderate all along and point to moments like this one as proof.

  27. 27.

    Ash Can

    May 16, 2011 at 9:09 am

    @cat48: I’m sure he’ll come up with some long-winded mountain of manure about how the two of them are actually very much alike, and destined to save the entire nation from oblivion through their sheer manly virtue. Or maybe he’ll just blow it off and write about how our civilization is going to hell because he couldn’t find a parking place this morning.

  28. 28.

    Cacti

    May 16, 2011 at 9:16 am

    @cat48:

    Maybe Newt is going to try win those “disillusioned”Obama voters I keep hearing about. He might need to drop the dog whistles though

    Not likely.

    Newt’s an anti-choice, anti-gay zealot. He’s trying to shore up support with the “get your government hands off my Medicare” crowd.

  29. 29.

    MattF

    May 16, 2011 at 9:21 am

    Figuring out what Newt is up to is easy– just bear in mind that his one true, life-long love-object is a certain person with the initials ‘NG’.

    Wrt Medicare, he’s noticed that the Dems’ anti-Ryan strategy is working, so he wants some of that goodness to be good for Newt as well. But I guarantee that it will soon be combined with screwing municipal employees.

  30. 30.

    tell your mom I said thanks

    May 16, 2011 at 9:29 am

    Newt’s harshing on Ryan’s plan because he understands, correctly, that playing to racists gets you far more Republican votes than Ayn Rand ever could. He’s simply going populist. Ryan’s plan is entirely a genuflection to the corporate elite; via those lovely town hall meetings, it turns out even many Republicans can see through Ryan’s bullshit plan.

  31. 31.

    Sly

    May 16, 2011 at 9:30 am

    @Chris:

    Didn’t Gingrich try to strangle and de facto end Medicare back in 1995 by denying it the money it needed to operate? Wasn’t that what the government shutdown was about?

    Yes.

    And then he had the balls to say that they were increasing Medicare spending, without telling anyone that the alleged increase was not adjusted for inflation (and, as a result, was a cut in spending). No man who lies that often can be trusted to answer any question honestly. Yes, even fundamental ones like “who do I want as my wife?”

    Plus he was instrumental in morphing Frank Luntz from a nobody who worked for Ross Perot’s campaign into a mainstream political operative, possibly the worst crime committed against the republic in the past twenty years. Where there’s pond scum, there’s probably more pond scum.

  32. 32.

    Villago Delenda Est

    May 16, 2011 at 9:36 am

    Newt’s trying to steal the “reasonable alternative” ground from guys like Daniels, Romney, and Pawlenty. Establish his “serious” bona fides with the vermin of the Village. The Village ignores the dog whistles, because they can’t hear them in the “three monkeys” sense of they can’t hear.

    Also…and this is part of the plan…it provides the conflict the vermin of the Village crave. They love bomb throwing…it provides excitement and a story that their lazy asses have no problem in following.

  33. 33.

    gene108

    May 16, 2011 at 9:36 am

    @jonas:

    Rascal scooters away.

    Rascal Scooter suck!!!!!!!

    Hover Rounds Rule!!!!!!!!

  34. 34.

    Yevgraf (fka Michael)

    May 16, 2011 at 9:38 am

    @Comrade Javamanphil:

    Ryan is the Heathers new crush now.

    Outstanding reference, very apropos.

  35. 35.

    JGabriel

    May 16, 2011 at 9:39 am

    Newt Gingrich:

    I don’t think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate.

    Newt Gingrich is positioning himself as the moderate?

    [Pause.]

    Bwahahaha!

    Damn, that’s richer than Goldman Sachs exec.

    .

  36. 36.

    WereBear

    May 16, 2011 at 9:43 am

    @Comrade Javamanphil: You mean the Villagers have traded in an older model for a younger one?

    Gee. You’d think Newt would have seen that coming.

  37. 37.

    Villago Delenda Est

    May 16, 2011 at 9:50 am

    @WereBear:

    Oooh, snap!

  38. 38.

    jeffreyw

    May 16, 2011 at 9:56 am

    @WereBear:
    We have a thread winner.

  39. 39.

    Cacti

    May 16, 2011 at 10:00 am

    Per TPMDC:

    Newt’s already walking back his repudiation of Ryancare.

  40. 40.

    Brian R.

    May 16, 2011 at 10:01 am

    Newt’s already walking back the attack on the Ryan plan.

    I like how his aide makes it sound like the media distorted his words. Yeah, because there are so many good ways to read “radical change from the right” and “right-wing social engineering,” right?

  41. 41.

    Chris

    May 16, 2011 at 10:01 am

    @Sly:

    Okay. I wasn’t old enough to pay attention at the time, but I do recall reading that Medicare was the heart of the 1995 shutdown. Thanks for the clarification.

    Plus he was instrumental in morphing Frank Luntz from a nobody who worked for Ross Perot’s campaign into a mainstream political operative, possibly the worst crime committed against the republic in the past twenty years. Where there’s pond scum, there’s probably more pond scum.

    OT and another nineties question – was there any difference at all between Ross Perot’s positions and those of the Republican Party proper? Most third parties split away because they have ideological differences with one of the Big Two, but from what I know of Perot, he seems like a perfectly generic post-Reagan Republican (and what you’re saying about Gingrich bringing on Perot people seems to confirm that).

    Was he just a megalomaniac who ran because he could and wanted the attention?

  42. 42.

    aimai

    May 16, 2011 at 10:03 am

    @WereBear:

    Oh yes, Snap Snap Snap Snappity Snap.

    aimai

  43. 43.

    cmorenc

    May 16, 2011 at 10:07 am

    @Sly:

    Plus he was instrumental in morphing Frank Luntz from a nobody who worked for Ross Perot’s campaign into a mainstream political operative, possibly the worst crime committed against the republic in the past twenty years. Where there’s pond scum, there’s probably more pond scum.

    Luntz is a genuinely talented evil genius precisely because he doesn’t drink any of the GOP’s delusional kool-aid, including that which he himself helps brew with recipes tailored to results of his public opinion research. He’s first a genuinely curious, meticulously objective student of what makes people’s minds tick, both individually and from demographic group influences. Although sometimes when he appears on TV with focus groups (particularly on FOX), he’s acting as a shill with groups designed to help push a certain message, there are other times when he appears on TV with focus groups to genuinely, objectively plumb the underlying opinion dynamics. When he’s doing the latter, he’s amply worth watching and listening to, because his analysis of the political lay of the land of his group is nearly always spot-on accurate, more so than anyone else. That’s one of the two fundamental keys to his devastating effectiveness; of course the other is his talent for using that objective understanding to devise deviously misleading messages to steer selected demographics in the desired direction, particularly as it will affect their voting behavior.

    You can loathe him for what he does with his talents, but it’s a huge mistake to disrespect how effectively he uses them, or to dismiss him out of hand any time he appears on tv. He’s enough of the bona fide scholar of public opinion that you’ll often learn something of genuine important value about the momentary state of the electorate.

  44. 44.

    Bulworth

    May 16, 2011 at 10:09 am

    I think not. Ryan is the Heathers new crush now. Poor Newtie is going to find he just doesn’t inspire the same stirring he once did.

    Oh I don’t know. Seems as if Mitchy Daniels is the flavor of the day. He’s Very Serious about Deficits!

  45. 45.

    MattF

    May 16, 2011 at 10:10 am

    OT: This is why we have the intertubes.

  46. 46.

    Villago Delenda Est

    May 16, 2011 at 10:11 am

    @cmorenc:

    Not to be overly critical, but this is pretty much along the lines of “Hitler was a pretty good public speaker”.

    It’s absolutely objectively true. The problem of course is that Luntz operates in the service of evil, as you indicated up front.

  47. 47.

    geg6

    May 16, 2011 at 10:13 am

    @Cacti:
    @Brian R.:

    Heh, you guys beat me to it.

  48. 48.

    Villago Delenda Est

    May 16, 2011 at 10:13 am

    @Bulworth:

    Given that he had a central role in creating the ones we’ve got now, I’d say that’s the catbird’s seat!

  49. 49.

    Frankensteinbeck (The ex-Uloborus)

    May 16, 2011 at 10:15 am

    Hmmm. IF The Newticle keeps slamming Ryan’s insane Medicare killing plan that might just get him the nomination. If exactly one candidate gets up and says ‘I’m the guy who won’t kill Medicare’ the GOP’s main primary voting block may flock to him.

    Two obstacles: The walkback, which may or may not be relevant because it’s so much less high profile, and Newt’s massive personal charm. He’s climbin’ a mountain here.

  50. 50.

    ChrisS

    May 16, 2011 at 10:15 am

    @Chris:
    Perot was the beginning of the Ron Paul wing. Perot was most vehemently against globalization and free trade without environmental* and labor restrictions (not that he was a big fan of regulation) . He was against government spending increases and the welfare state, and he was critical of defense spending despite his billions of dollars of wealth being the result of massive government contracts for data management.

    He wanted to use means testing for medicare and social security and increases taxes on the wealthy to pay down the budget deficit. Basically approaching it from both sides. He was concerned with keeping jobs in America and the budget deficit. I don’t know … sometimes, I think America would not have been a bad place had he been elected, but then again, he was kind of nuts.

  51. 51.

    Hewer of Wood, Drawer of Water

    May 16, 2011 at 10:18 am

    @cmorenc: So Luntz is essentially Count Rugen from the Princess Bride

    “Beautiful isn’t it? It took me half a lifetime to invent it. I’m sure you’ve discovered my deep and abiding interest in pain. Presently I’m writing the definitive work on the subject, so I want you to be totally honest with me on how the machine makes you feel. This being our first try, I’ll use the lowest setting. As you know, the concept of the suction pump is centuries old. Really that’s all this is except that instead of sucking water, I’m sucking life. I’ve just sucked one year of your life away. I might one day go as high as five, but I really don’t know what that would do to you. So, let’s just start with what we have. What did this do to you? Tell me. And remember, this is for posterity so be honest. How do you feel?”

  52. 52.

    Brian R.

    May 16, 2011 at 10:27 am

    @Bulworth:

    Seems as if Mitchy Daniels is the flavor of the day. He’s Very Serious about Deficits!

    He sure is. His biggest claim to fame so far is that he was responsible for creating the biggest one in American history.

    Supporting Daniels for president because you’re worried about the deficit is like hiring Charlie Manson as a babysitter because you want your kids to be protected from all the weirdos out there.

  53. 53.

    Bulworth

    May 16, 2011 at 10:30 am

    I’m sure Newty will come around to Ryan’s plan sooner or later. The math demands it!

  54. 54.

    Joey Maloney

    May 16, 2011 at 10:31 am

    @Omnes Omnibus: I not sure that Paul Ryan is very bright.

    I’m sure. But he has a purty mouth.

  55. 55.

    Barb (formerly Gex)

    May 16, 2011 at 10:32 am

    @artem1s: I’d be concerned who they are going after. If they are going after standard non-profits, but aren’t going after the religious institutions that have been pouring money into political activities, this would become an IRS war on center or left-leaning non-profits.

  56. 56.

    Chris

    May 16, 2011 at 10:33 am

    @Frankensteinbeck (The ex-Uloborus):

    Two obstacles: The walkback, which may or may not be relevant because it’s so much less high profile, and Newt’s massive personal charm. He’s climbin’ a mountain here.

    That, and whoever stands up and says “I’m the guy who won’t kill Medicare” is marking himself for immediate cutoff from the elites (economic, political, and probably media) that run the GOP. Can’t win without them, especially on his side of the aisle.

    And he’d lose hard right voters, too, the kind who believe everything the ideologues say so hard that they actually think privatizing Medicare will make everything better. Americans do support Medicare by a very wide margin, too wide for Republicans to ignore… but all of the minority that opposes it is in the GOP voter base, and they can’t ignore that either. It’s a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don’t third rail for them.

  57. 57.

    geg6

    May 16, 2011 at 10:34 am

    @Chris:

    Was he just a megalomaniac who ran because he could and wanted the attention?

    Yes. Yes, he was.

    The main thing he had going for him was that the Wingnut contingent was pissed as hell at HW Bush for (sensibly, IMHO) raising taxes and were looking for someone, anyone who would categorically state he/she would not for any reason. That person was Perot, and he had the added bonus of being the outsidery white knight that the assholes loved. I think he also got a lot of what would today be the Paulite vote, mainly because he vaguely talked about high tech voting. He got the racists and gay haters because he talked a lot about going back to the time when you didn’t have to lock the door to your house and would never, ever, ever, ever appoint a homosexual for anything whatsoever.

    Cut spending, ignore the benefits of revenue enhancement, hate on “others” and gays…typical Republican. But remember that HW was NOT EVER a culture warrior and, actually, was pretty open-minded about abortion (though Perot was pro-choice) and gays and such. And he was a realist when it came to economic matters. Enough there to have the Great EDS Elf come to the rescue of the poor “”well dressed, middle aged”[51] individuals” who sent him their no-larger-than-$5 donations.

    Read the Wiki on his campaign and tell me it was anything other than an ego trip:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Perot_presidential_campaign,_1992

  58. 58.

    Chris

    May 16, 2011 at 10:35 am

    @ChrisS:

    Thanks. I see.

    Sort of the high-water mark of the Ron Paul wing, with his near-20% of the vote. It’s for damn sure Ron Paul isn’t getting that much.

  59. 59.

    cmorenc

    May 16, 2011 at 10:36 am

    @Hewer of Wood, Drawer of Water:

    @cmorenc: So Luntz is essentially Count Rugen from the Princess Bride

    BINGO! That’s exactly the Luntz analogy that leaped to my mind, though I refrained from mentioning it in my original post in the interest of making a serious point about Luntz’s talents rather than coming across as satirical.

    Sometimes, however, life imitates art, doesn’t it?

  60. 60.

    Tom Q

    May 16, 2011 at 10:36 am

    @ChrisS: I don’t know about that. I think Perot as president would have been essentially Simpson/Bowles as president. Yeah, he had some Paul-ites (and Buchanan-ites), but reducing the deficit was alot of his appeal with the middle-of-the-road voters who voted for him on Election Day. (And this was his main deviation from the GOP in ’92, who had already staked out their “deficits don’t matter if they’re caused by tax cuts” position)

    He wasn’t insane like the current crop of GOP, but he would have continued the march away from the New Deal that Clinton & Obama, however imperfectly, have begun to reverse.

  61. 61.

    burnspbesq

    May 16, 2011 at 10:39 am

    @dmsilev:

    Anyone want to go through the thing and count the lies, distortions, omitted facts, etc.?

    I would, but I used up all my Post-It flags marking all the lies and distortions in Taibbi’s latest attack on Goldman.

  62. 62.

    geg6

    May 16, 2011 at 10:41 am

    @ChrisS:

    He wanted to use means testing for medicare and social security and increases taxes on the wealthy to pay down the budget deficit.

    Actually, he talked a lot about the wealthy spending more than average people to help out the economy, not taxing them more. I don’t recall him ever saying that taxes should be raised on anyone at all. If he had, all the people I knew then who were Libertarians would most certainly NOT have been such big fans of his. And they were, every single of them. Loved them some Ross, just like they love them some Paul family values today.

  63. 63.

    p.a.

    May 16, 2011 at 10:42 am

    When was Sully’s link moved to the Monitor/Mock column? Did 1 recent post push it over the line? Or was it the long drawn-out history of cluelessness?

  64. 64.

    burnspbesq

    May 16, 2011 at 10:43 am

    @artem1s:

    The only problem here is that some right-wing “public interest law firm” is going to try to sue the IRS, giving the courts another shot at further messing up the case law on standing.

  65. 65.

    ChrisS

    May 16, 2011 at 10:46 am

    @geg6:
    were looking for someone, anyone who would categorically state he/she would not for any reason.

    Perot was planning on raising income taxes on the wealthy, but cut the capital gains tax (but in a way to promote long term growth), raise gas taxes, in addition to eliminating fraud waste and abuse (shocked, I know), in order to close the budget deficit.

    @Tom Q:
    He wasn’t insane like the current crop of GOP
    It really is amazing how far down the rabbit hole these people really have fallen in just shy of two decades, isn’t? Other than tax cuts, shit that the GOP did, or proposed, 20 years ago is socialist now.

  66. 66.

    Linda Featheringill

    May 16, 2011 at 10:48 am

    Newt’s make-a-quotable-statement-then-have-an-aid-walk-it-back might not be a mistake. It might be a strategy.

    [or bug and feature thing you nerds are always saying? :-)]

  67. 67.

    ChrisS

    May 16, 2011 at 10:56 am

    @geg6:

    We should raise the marginal tax rate on the wealthy from 31% to 33%. In 1993, this change would affect individuals who make over $55,550 and joint filers who make over a total of $89,250. Therefore, less than 4% of the taxpayers in America will be affected, but we will raise $33 billion in five years. If other reductions I propose do not provide sufficient revenue, we should be prepared to raise the marginal rate to 35%.
    Source: United We Stand, by Ross Perot, p. 43 Jul 2, 1992

    I’m not saying he was going to be all redistributionist and shit, but he was looking at options.

    Interestingly enough:
    He even wanted to expand medicare for all Americans, enact strict gun control, was pro-choice, pro-ish environment, and wanted less taxes but more government oversight of industry (not sure how that was going to work out, but ….)

    He had a serious authoritarian bent, but he was light years from the GOP of today.

  68. 68.

    Yutsano

    May 16, 2011 at 10:58 am

    @burnspbesq: I am suddenly glad I don’t work TE/GE.

  69. 69.

    gene108

    May 16, 2011 at 11:01 am

    @Bulworth:

    Oh I don’t know. Seems as if Mitchy Daniels is the flavor of the day. He’s Very Serious about Deficits!

    Also, too he’s a former OMB head, so he knows how the White House budget stuff operates (those big numbers probably intimidate a lot journalists) making him a Super Very Serious Person About Deficits.

  70. 70.

    geg6

    May 16, 2011 at 11:01 am

    @ChrisS:

    A tax increase on the very wealthy may have been in the budget stuff he released, but that’s not how he talked about it. He always talked about it as the rich needing to spend more. And the only reason I know so well how he talked about it was that the guy I lived with at the time actually voted for Perot and hung on his every word. He did not highlight the idea of higher taxes on the wealthy. His biggest message was always the “giant sucking sound” of jobs going to Mexico and the deficit, deficit, deficit, deficit. In fact, he probably started the whole deficit garbage we’re still stuck with today. And, again just like his Mini-Mes today, Perot had no fucking clue what he was talking about when it came to the budget.

  71. 71.

    Fred

    May 16, 2011 at 11:08 am

    Newt just loves that “radical” word.

  72. 72.

    gene108

    May 16, 2011 at 11:11 am

    @ChrisS:

    Perot was planning on raising income taxes on the wealthy, but cut the capital gains tax (but in a way to promote long term growth), raise gas taxes, in addition to eliminating fraud waste and abuse (shocked, I know), in order to close the budget deficit.

    Sounds a lot like President Clinton’s strategy, but I don’t think Perot “felt your pain”.

    It really is amazing how far down the rabbit hole these people really have fallen in just shy of two decades, isn’t? Other than tax cuts, shit that the GOP did, or proposed, 20 years ago is socialist now.

    Cap and Trade pops to mind as a Republican, free market alternative to top down regulations, which is now socialist and evil.

    20 years ago Republicans agreed Acid Rain in the Midwest was a problem.

    Now Republicans refuse to agree environmental damage can be man made.

  73. 73.

    Comrade Javamanphil

    May 16, 2011 at 11:19 am

    @Yevgraf (fka Michael): Not mine but I am not enough aware of all internet traditions to remember the originator of said reference.

    @WereBear: FTW!

  74. 74.

    IM

    May 16, 2011 at 11:31 am

    @cmorenc:

    A twisted mentat, then.

  75. 75.

    Bulworth

    May 16, 2011 at 11:41 am

    We should raise the marginal tax rate on the wealthy from 31% to 33%. In 1993, this change would affect individuals who make over $55,550 and joint filers who make over a total of $89,250. Therefore, less than 4% of the taxpayers in America will be affected, but we will raise $33 billion in five years. If other reductions I propose do not provide sufficient revenue, we should be prepared to raise the marginal rate to 35%.
    Source: United We Stand, by Ross Perot, p. 43 Jul 2, 1992

    Today, proposals like this will get you branded “soshulist” and “radical”.

  76. 76.

    Cuppa Cabana

    May 16, 2011 at 11:48 am

    Since his campaign is built on coded dog whistles, Newt’s targeting a older, white electorate that knows the code and hears the whistle. So it’s no surprise that he ditched the Ryan plan almost immediately.

    What does one thing have to do with the other? Why is racist dog-whistling associated with shitting on Ryan’s plan?

  77. 77.

    burnspbesq

    May 16, 2011 at 11:48 am

    It could actually be worse.

    For example, T. Boone Pickens could have decided to enter politics, rather than spending his time and money ($160 million to date, IIRC) on the Oklahoma State athletic program.

  78. 78.

    Mike

    May 16, 2011 at 11:58 am

    According to TPM, Newt’s already walking it back… not a surprise. He’s claiming that he never said such a thing. I called it yesterday. Newt is just diarrhea of the mouth and he can’t help gaffeing all the time. It’s been his MO for decades.

    Anyways, nothing much will come of this. Newt and Ryan will kiss and make up, but it’s still nice to have a TV clip of the whole thing.

  79. 79.

    Jay in Oregon

    May 16, 2011 at 12:28 pm

    @ChrisS:

    It really is amazing how far down the rabbit hole these people really have fallen in just shy of two decades, isn’t? Other than tax cuts, shit that the GOP did, or proposed, 20 years ago is socialist now.

    I’d love to see someone do an analysis of the political shift in the GOP for people who haven’t been paying attention and think that the current crop of raving lunatics is the same as the those lovable scamps in the 80’s…

  80. 80.

    Brachiator

    May 16, 2011 at 12:32 pm

    Now that a Sunday show favorite has dropped a turd on Ryan’s plan, expect the beltway media to pile on with a bunch of “even Newt Gingrich … ” questions.

    Wow. I spent a few days relaxing, away from all media, and didn’t realize that Ryan had gone from being a brave, bold thinker to a bomb throwing radical in just a few short weeks.

    “I don’t think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate.”

    Newt is such a tool, a stoopid, stoopid tool. Old Newt paints himself to be a historian, and yet constantly ignores the obvious, that the US has at times worked best as a nation built on experimentation and radical change. Dumbass.

    But at least we see his opening gambit, attempting to paint Obama as too radical to be president.

  81. 81.

    TooManyJens

    May 16, 2011 at 1:15 pm

    @dmsilev:

    You and I both know that Rahm scheduled his inauguration for today just to drown out Ryan’s speech. Yes, I know that the inauguration date was set long before Ryan’s speech was scheduled. That just shows that Rahm is using some of Obama’s Time-Lord abilities.

    Or maybe the Rahm who went into the time vortex is back.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. I agree with Newt about “Right-wing social engineering” dangers | NewsMobius says:
    May 20, 2011 at 3:11 am

    […] https://balloon-juice.com/2011/05…t-that-stupid/ […]

Primary Sidebar

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

2023 Pet Calendars

Pet Calendar Preview: A
Pet Calendar Preview: B

*Calendars can not be ordered until Cafe Press gets their calendar paper in.

Recent Comments

  • Chacal Charles Calthrop on Open Thread: Al Capone Investigates Eliot Ness (Feb 8, 2023 @ 10:07pm)
  • J R in WV on Our President Joe Open Thead: The Man LOVES His Job (Feb 8, 2023 @ 10:02pm)
  • Mallard Filmore on Our President Joe Open Thead: The Man LOVES His Job (Feb 8, 2023 @ 9:54pm)
  • Jim, Foolish Literalist on Our President Joe Open Thead: The Man LOVES His Job (Feb 8, 2023 @ 9:53pm)
  • Captain C on Our President Joe Open Thead: The Man LOVES His Job (Feb 8, 2023 @ 9:53pm)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Favorite Dogs & Cats
Classified Documents: A Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Front-pager Twitter

John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
ActualCitizensUnited

Shop Amazon via this link to support Balloon Juice   

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!