From his debate wrap-up last night:
I suppose there were some encouraging things tonight – tax reform, cutting red tape, investing in education. But I have to say the level of debate, the other-worldly discussion in which so often up is down, and white is black, and our urgent priorities today are to ensure that 40 million people lose their health insurance and that Wall Street be deregulated more thoroughly than in the 2000s … well it’s disorienting. The cure for spiraling demand is to cut more now, not later.
I really don’t know what to say to this. I find it surreal. I’d like a minimally intrusive federal government, and lower, flatter taxes, so why do I feel so detached from this debate? I think because I respect the president and have some sympathy with the appalling legacy he was bequeathed, because I still believe the GOP has responsibility for that legacy and it would behoove them to figure out where they went wrong rather than insist on doing all the same things again; and because, as I argued earlier today, 2011 is not 1979, and repeating Reaganism is simply not attuned to the times, when revenues are in the toilet, debt and the threat of deflation are omnipresent, and corporate profits are enormous.
Huntsman I can understand and appreciate. Perry is an empty bad suit. Romney lies with such facility it unnerves me. Bachmann is a fanatic, as, although I am extremely fond of him, is Ron Paul. Santorum just seems like a lost child from the 1950s, trying to have the campaign he dreamed about when he was ten. Cain is an egomaniac businessman with a talk show host patter and a mild wit. Gingrich is a giant, gaseous asshole.
Thank God for painkillers.
On his reaction today to Douthat’s latest ‘Both Sides Do It” bullshit, asserting the Democrats would have been just as bad to John McCain:
Does Ross believe McCain would have gotten zero Democratic votes for his first stimulus? And zero Democratic votes for a cap-and-trade bill? Nah. Does he think they would have defunded McCain’s closing of Gitmo, as he wanted to? Please. Ross’s excuses for his pathetic reptile of a party are getting thinner and thinner. I’m no fan of the Dems. But the GOP is just way further out there on intransigence and ideological rigidity.
Is Sullivan learning? I suppose the real test is the next time one of his political crushes like Paul Ryan comes forward with another thinly veiled plan to screw the poor and hand out trillions to the rich- will he go to the mat about how “serious” the plan is? If even Sullivan can start to use language like this to describe the comic super-villains in the GOP and their fluffers like Douthat, there is hope.
prufrock
Block quote megafail!
General Stuck
Someone tinkering with the CSS
BGinCHI
Since the “GOP” is now a dozen or so billionaires who are bankrolling every cause and thinktank, followed by the Tea Party who have no clue that they are supporting a party intent on crushing their way of life, Sully ought to be in plenty of company jumping that ship.
Cat Lady
Giant gaseous asshole. I read that too, and couldn’t have said it better myself.
ETA: Normally I wouldn’t care about Sully’s thoughts on anything since he’s such a slow learner, but he gets linked to and read by the Howard Kurtzs of the world and he may be the only blogger the Village idiots read.
jl
Newt is looking like a blimp with a slow leak that is gradually sinking somewhere beyond the warehouses by the railroad, into some deserted industrial park.
General Stuck
I see “bequeathed” followed by “behoove” and know that Sully is filtering through a martini/demorol haze, When it gets to “omnipresent” I figure we are moving close to some kind of Maggie Thatcher climax of snooty British airs.
My head hurts now
Jenny
More Sully?
What a waste of time.
I can’t believe Steve Jobs sacrificed his life so you can carry on about clowns like Sully, Bobo, and McMegan.
General Stuck
I see “bequeathed” followed by “behooved” and know that Sully is filtering through a martini/demerol haze, When it gets to “omnipresent” I figure we are moving close to some kind of Maggie Thatcher climax of snooty British airs.
My head hurts now
Turgidson
You’re on point, Cole. At some point, Paul Ryan, or the next Paul Ryan if the Kochs et al. decide the original Paul Ryan is no longer a suitable frontman, will put forth another “wasn’t the Gilded Age the BEST!?! John Galt ROOLZ!!!1” steaming pile of shit called an economic plan. Then we’ll see whether Sullivan has learned a damn thing. My bet would firmly be on “fuck no” despite the relative sanity he’s shown lately.
Although it is at least somewhat encouraging to see that he realizes that St. Ronnie’s answers in the early 80s wouldn’t work today. Maybe some day he’ll admit they were a disaster then (for the working class anyway, not that Sullivan could give two shits about them) that we’re still paying for today. But that’s probably asking too much.
jl
I am fond of Paul too, even though the majority of views are crazy, IMHO. He looks like one of Santa’s eldest and wisest elves.
Beyond hope by now for Cole or TodayscleverDougjname to quit Sullivan. So, I consider their posts on him more or less open threads.
Cole would use his time better taking pet pix. Truth is.
El Cruzado
Someone, possibly John Cole, should start the John Cole Center for Pundits Who Can’t Learn Good.
Sully would spend half his time as an instructor and the other half as an inmate.
yeahyeahwhatevs (Studly Pantload, once upon a time)
This is how Sully keeps reeling you in, Cole. He’ll throw out a bone of lucidity, then when you think that glimmer in his eye will continue to grow if you just clap louder, he reverts to the usual oafishness.
Since we’re using big words, here, I’ll say it’s utterly Sisyphean.
PeakVT
Is Sullivan learning?
No. He will never “learn” what you want him to learn. Here’s an example:
I’d like a minimally intrusive federal government, and lower, flatter taxes
We already have lower taxes than just about every other industrialized country, and one of the reasons OWS is catching fire is that the taxes we have are too damn flat.
He will never learn.
Warren Terra
Why wait for the next time when the current one is in effect:
There are nice things to be said about Huntsman, at least for a Republican – he accepts evolution and climate change are real, he doesn’t hate Teh Ghey much – but the only way in which his economic plan isn’t “another thinly veiled plan to screw the poor and hand out trillions to the rich” is that it isn’t veiled. No capital gains tax, no estate tax, low or no corporate tax (I can’t recall), huge tax cuts at all levels but mostly going to the wealthy, and no Earned Income Tax Credit. In effect, a massive tax increase for the working class, and windfalls for the wealthy.
gelfling545
@jl: My daughter just remarked that she doesn’t hate Ron Paul, although his son is about as bright as a formica table top. It’s his followers she can’t abide. Her thought was that an honest man looking out at the crowd he had attracted would have to slit his wrists. I then raised the possibility that he might already be undead, so wrist slitting would avail nought.
Lit3Bolt
Sullivan and the Daily Beast thank you for the pageviews, Cole.
Hoodie
Huntsman I can understand the least of all. This is one of those cosmic disconnects that makes Sullivan so annoying. He nails most of the field as clearly scumbag grifters and/or lunatics. But if Huntsman is such a mensch, why the hell is he hanging around with — and lending credibility to — this collection of atrocities? If Huntsman was the kind of Republican Sullivan fantasizes, he’d endorse Obama or, at least, run around wringing his hands like Frum. I guess Sully is always looking for a love object whose clothes have the right Saville Row cut, and sees everything through the lens of 1980’s Toryism, wherein Democrats equate to the monsters of Old Labor that populate his nightmares.
Kola Noscopy
Hope for what? Cole, you need to ask yourself: Why in the world do I give a flying fuck what Andrew Sullivan thinks?
It appears that Randy Andy is YOUR crush.
Even if he suddenly became sane, he would likely change back within a week…really, what difference does he make? He’s an ass.
Menzies
@yeahyeahwhatevs (Studly Pantload, once upon a time):
Speaking as a classicist: You, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.
My more relevant comment:
I’m on board with this being Sullivan’s thrown bone so people who are pissed at him will keep reading him.
Has anyone considered the possibility that he’s just trolling half his audience with any given post?
Warren Terra
@Jenny:
I don’t really get this. Is the idea to make Steve Jobs into Jesus? He’s a damn poor saint – he arrogantly committed Suicide By Quack, he stole a liver transplant from someone who didn’t have untreatable metastatic pancreatic cancer, and (pending the reading of his will) there’s no record of him ever using a penny of his vast fortune for good works. A very interesting person, with admirable traits – but hardly a good person.
Menzies
@gelfling545:
I can’t hate Ron Paul, for the simple reason that I’m pretty sure he’s suffering from a debilitating disease known as “rectal-cranial loopback.”
Menzies
@Warren Terra:
This is my view. And mind you, I’m a huge Apple fanboy – I’m typing this on a MacBook Pro, I have an iPod and I’d love nothing better than to have an iPad cart for my classroom. I just don’t see the appeal.
(I’d point to Bill Gates, but of course, he’s doing his level best to fuck up the American public school system, probably without even realizing it. Sigh.)
Emma
John, John, John. It’s sad to watch Sully former fans jump up and cheer every time he finds reality. The problem is that he’ll lose it again soon. And the cycle will repeat.
Mayur
Q:
A:
No.
scav
@Warren Terra: It has rather tipped over into the full Diana, hasn’t it? The People’s Programmer.
John O
Andrew runs a great blog.
Kudos to the GOP on the tax code issue, I say. At this point, I would take ANY tax code that is a complete do-over. Every single one of them.
It’s the only issue I agree with them on.
trollhattan
The Daily Beast Hair Beast attached to Andy’s face is perhaps performing some kind of mindmeld. Is our Sullys learning? This juror’s still leaning towards conviction.
flounder
I doubt.
And I will point to that time when a doctor was assassinated, he went on anti-abortion tirade, and a whole bunch of people who wanted children wrote to him with their stories of how they had to abort their 8 month old pregnancy because of some horrible medical issue. He actually acted like he was learning something, but I doubt it, given his loyalties didn’t undergo any discenable change..
If a doctor was assassinated tomorrow, I believe the whole story would play out from act 1 all over again.
We could have 30 years of ass-hattery out of Republican presidential candidates (we have imo), and he would be there every next day after a debate wondering when these clowns got so stupid and sociopathic)
If he hasn’t stopped being a Republican yet, it is one of those hard-wired tribalism things. He can’t learn like a John Cole. He learns like that guy in the the movie Memento.
Ruckus
@John O:
So as bad as the code we have is, it’s OK to dump it for one far worse?
JGabriel
John Cole:
Lucy is just setting you up to pull the football away again, Charlie Brown.
It’s like a Beckett play: Waiting for Sully to Change.
.
Triassic Sands
Easy answer to pointless question: NO
Sullivan realizes that the Modern GOP is a bunch of lunatics. However, what he longs for is the Modern GOP Lite. No one with a functioning brain can support a party that is out there claiming the Earth is flat and is the center of the universe. But Sullivan shows no sign of learning that the Republican Party is rotten to its core. There is no legitimate party left on which to build anything worthwhile. There are certainly reasons to not care much for the Democrats, but the fact that they won’t give Sullivan lower, flatter taxes isn’t one of them. Every “flat tax” scheme I’ve ever seen would decrease taxes on the wealthy, increase taxes on the middle class, and more than likely leave us with even bigger budget deficits.
@Jenny:
WTF? Steve Jobs didn’t “sacrifice his life;” he died.
John O
@Ruckus:
There is no way the new one can be worse as long as it is simple. We can eff it up as we go, or even make it better.
The problem with the current one is that no one can figure out what anyone else is paying.
brutishandshort (formerly known as blogbytom)
@Hoodie: No, yo. I disagree with this analysis.
Frum and Huntsman are operating in different paradigms. One criticizes the discourse from the outside, and one does it from within. I watched the debate last night (drinking throughout, of course)and it was made very clear that Huntsman was the only guy (or gal) on the stage who could actually engage with the nitty gritty of the particular issues brought up without resorting to talking points. I actually like him. I disagree with him on most everything, but he’s a relatively smart guy, and I’d be damn pleased if the rest of the Republican party followed in his footsteps, to the extent that they at least understood what the fuck they were talking about during the primary debates.
JGabriel
@Triassic Sands:
It’s called exaggeration for humorous effect. Maybe your snark-o-meter needs a touch of calibration?
.
John O
Hunstman is the only anti-moron in the bunch. He has no chance.
beltane
@PeakVT: That’s right. Sully just wants his anti-worker champions to hide their viciousness under a more genteel facade like his hero David Cameron. Cameron’s policies are every bit as cruel as the worst teabagger fantasies, but he does not appear to be a raging sociopath so it’s all OK in Sully’s book.
Hoodie
@brutishandshort (formerly known as blogbytom): That’s pretty weak sauce and is irrelevant to what I was saying about Sullivan. What hell good does “discourse from the inside” do if you’re polling in at 1%? Huntsman is a nothingburger in that environment, but Sullivan acts like he matters. His Captain Beefheart references and digs about climate change and evolution are cute, but there comes a point when you should realize that you’re at the wrong party when they’re hitting on the crack pipes all around you.
Nellcote
The dems voted against funding the closing of Gitmo. Is he saying they wouldn’t have if McCain was prez?
Warren Terra
@Nellcote:
Some Dems voted against closing Gitmo. Every Republican voted against closing Gitmo, including Republicans who’d previously said they wanted it closed. Therein lies the difference.
JGabriel
@John O:
Huntsman rates lower than Michele Bachmann in the latest PPP poll of Republican voters.
That tells you everything you need to know about the modern GOP.
.
eemom
why do you hate me, John Cole?
arguingwithsignposts
@John O:
How? Do you know that he has interns post a lot of the stuff there? That he used to (don’t know if he still does, because I am not giving that self-satisfied Tory prick any page views whatsoever) take credit for their posts?
He doesn’t even have a fucking comment section, unlike TNC, who manages to keep the wolves at bay pretty effectively, or even Megan Fucking McArdle, who can’t be assed to use a calculator that works properly.
What does he have? Other people’s windows and what?
If you think what we have would be replaced by something better, you are deluded. As tilted as the code is now, wait until you have all of K Street crawling all over a total rewrite.
Nellcote
@Warren Terra:
These were the only 6 senators to vote to close:
Durbin (D-IL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Reed (D-RI)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Turgidson
@Nellcote:
Yep, the Gitmo bedwetting was a bipartisan embarrassment. And, considering how early in Obama’s term that was, a huge red flag that the Dems had no inclination to abandon the circular firing squad after the 06 and 08 wins.
and of course, “Obama hasn’t closed Gitmo” is consistently one of the first things listed by the poutragers for why Obama is the worst ever. durrp.
brutishandshort (formerly known as blogbytom)
@Hoodie: I mean, yeah. Sure. Huntsman isn’t a fanatic, and he isn’t batshit crazy, and he isn’t craven and blatantly hypocritical. What he is, is a pretty smart guy who happens to hold a number of positions I strongly disagree with, but who seems, on balance, to be willing to at least discuss these things in a rational manner, rather than resorting to hyperbole and/or fiction.
This is the kind of opposition party I’d like to see. It’s emphatically not the kind of belief system I’d like to see accepted into the Democratic coalition.
Arclite
Despite Sully’s often crappy political views, I do adore his blog. So much interesting stuff there.
John O
@arguingwithsignposts:
You’re not getting what I’m saying. A new tax code has to be understandable to anyone with a decent high school education. 10 pages. Revenue neutral in the first 5 years. No deductions, no tricks; only income earned and not, exemptions on certain amounts of that income (the numbers can be debated), and voila! we have something better than we have now.
We’re collecting money here, not reinventing the atom.
As for Sullivan’s blog, I find it entertaining and thought-provoking. What can I say? I find this one more fun, and more entertaining.
arguingwithsignposts
@John O:
I fully understand what you’re saying. But I live in reality. Just for starters, do you think the accounting industry is going to get behind this new plan? The banking industry? The oil industry? The second-generation wealthy? And that’s just off the top of my head.
The problem with the tax code isn’t necessarily its complexity, the problem is it is like the Military-Industrial Complex. Everyone with anything has a hand in the till.
John O
One of the reasons Cain is doing so well is he’s pushing a tax plan that people can figure out, and it’s a crying shame that the Dems aren’t outflanking the GOP from the left on trashing the tax code.
It’s a huge political winner. I have right and left-wing friends with whom it’s the only issue we all get along on.
danimal
Sully is representative of a lot of people that our side needs to win elections (he was, after all, an Obama supporter the last go-round). There are bushels of people who agree with the supposed Republican values of order, discipline, honor, etc. They really don’t like the DFHs, the college professors and the activists from the left.
For years, the Sullys tolerated the right-wing crazies because they could be used to gain access to power. But they truly are appalled at the nihilism and excesses of today’s Tea Party Republican Party. They want their Party (yesterday’s GOP) back.
It’s not vital to agree with all, or even most of what Sully writes, but it is pretty important to understand why he is such a bellweather. He has the secret handshake that all the VIP share at Georgetown cocktail parties. And, despite his obviously poor instincts, he can come around to the fact-based, empirically-driven real world after he emotes all over the place on the issue of the day.
arguingwithsignposts
Wasn’t it sullivan who called the people who protested the Iraq war “fifth-columnists”? Has he apologized for that?
AA+ Bonds
It would absolutely kill Sullivan to admit that Reagan was a deficit spender, a Keynesian loophole-closer whose policies would be considered offensive at their core to the Tea Party.
In that sense, we need Reagan times ten or twelve right now.
John O
@arguingwithsignposts:
I didn’t say it was realistic. :-)
None of those industries will get behind it, unless you offer a carrot, say, top income brackets get first dibs on future tax cuts.
Here. It’s poorly written, but it’s a place to start.
Percysowner
NO! Look I read Sullivan for years. Every time I thought he was learning, he would suddenly defend The Bell Curve, or go an a Trig rant or go back to how hard it is to live on $75,000 plus benefits so taxes were bad. I spent three years thinking Sullivan would learn. He never did, he never will. OTOH, since you keep quoting him I can keep up on his thoughts and never give him a page hit again.
AA+ Bonds
@danimal:
As this whole concept is a right-wing strawman I’m not 100% we should be going after Sully instead of, you know, the left wing of the country with our left-wing party
AA+ Bonds
@John O:
That’s myopic in the extreme, Mr. Individualist Libertarian. Tax policy, as you might learn from a few books, is extremely important to fostering national growth; similarly, a one-size-fits-all model is extremely destructive to national interests.
There is a reason the tax code is so complicated and it’s not the worldwide conspiracy against libertarians. Some of it represents capture by the wealthy, but a lot of it reflects our national priorities.
lol
@Turgidson:
With the best part being Feingold and Sanders being among those that voted to keep Gitmo open.
Also, this vote demonstrates that if you want a solid, pragmatic lefty to idolize, Whitehouse is your man.
AA+ Bonds
@John O:
I really enjoy how you get pissy mad about how those abortionists have stolen “pro-choice” from the people it truly belongs to, libertarians:
http://jonorato42.wordpress.com/the-problem-with-pro-choice/
Let me taste your tears Scott, mmmm they’re so de li i i i icious
John O
@AA+ Bonds:
Someone here go out and read, “Perfectly Legal,” by David Kay Johnston, and get back to me.
For those too lazy, I give you Warren Buffet. The tax code is an abortion.
Bruce S
Is Sullivan learning?
What difference does it make? To paraphrase Stalin, how many GOP precincts does Sullivan have?
John O
Guilty as charged. I’m pro-choice pretty much across the reasonable board, but I defy you to challenge the examples. Give me 15 minutes and I’ll find something you’re pro-choice about, or buy you dinner. :-)
arguingwithsignposts
@AA+ Bonds: reality is a worldwide conspiracy against libertarians.
John O
@AA+ Bonds:
That’s a tough thing to say to someone who’s as “pro-choice” in the standard sense of the term as I am.
Tough crowd.
AA+ Bonds
@John O:
No, it’s pretty easy.
Libertarians are down with abortion and weed and are also fucking wrong about life and America. I know a lot of people like that.
I’d hop in the clown car and catch a ride home, were I you.
Short Bus Bully
Great post, and awfully brave considering the audience of wicked fuckers around here. I too loved to read Sully once upon a time but as soon as he went whole hog into the “why doesn’t Obama just SHOW the birth certificate?” shit I stopped reading him. I also agree that he runs a good blog, but for as smart and eloquent as he is he is agonizingly slow to come to the realization that he was dead wrong before.
But here’s the question for all you Sully haters: Who else do you know on the intertrons besides our bloglord and Sully who ever publiclly walk back and admit how stupid and wrong they were in the past?
That honesty is worth something to me. I might have to start reading Sully again.
Le sigh…
John O
@AA+ Bonds:
Pure libertarianism is rubbish. But America was born with a libertarian streak, so forgive me that I take a little offense. Again, there’s not one goddamn issue in our times that you don’t feel a little libertarian about, so stop judging, Jeebus.
arguingwithsignposts
@Short Bus Bully:
{raises hands}
True, nobody reads my fucking blog, but I’ve walked back a ton of shit, just like our host. And when has Sully ever admitted he was wrong? The most I’ve ever seen from him was “maybe things are a bit more nuanced.”
He’s never been as public nor as frequent about being wrong as JC has, .
AA+ Bonds
@John O:
You’re actually arguing that libertarianism is rad because contemporary politics descend from 18th century liberal thought?
Try harder. I could be a Maoist and an observation that banal that would roll off my back like water off a duck.
But no, please tell us how, unlike every other libertarian, your claims to your brand of libertarianism make it relevant and not at all a fringe philosophy of nihilism.
arguingwithsignposts
@John O:
No, I don’t. I have similar views on some issues with libertarians, but that doesn’t make me a libertarian, or mean that libertarians “own” the issue. It means that our views are similar on those issues.
But as a cohesive unit, libertarianism is a unicorn pony in a land of rainbow skies and rock candy mountains.
Short Bus Bully
@arguingwithsignposts:
You’ve never actually read Sully then, not that I really hold that against you. However, he literally spent years writing about how wrong he was regarding Iraq amongst other things.
I’ll give credit where credit is due. If you don’t feel that way, no sweat off my nuts.
John O
No, I’m arguing that in general, people want to be left the fuck alone, and that includes the tax code. It shouldn’t be an annual nightmare.
That’s all.
AA+ Bonds
The best part about libertarians is how easily you can wrap them up in their tricorn fantasies where they’re all ruddy merchants with interests in the South Sea Company
John O
@arguingwithsignposts:
Right. You’re just barely with the libs on police brutality, torture, and the 4th Amendment; how you choose to discipline and educate your children, etc, etc, blah blah blah.
Whatever, as the kids say.
AA+ Bonds
@John O:
Dude, people will never fucking like taxes. The problems with the tax code are the parts where rich fuckers paid other rich fuckers to change it so rich people can rich rich rich.
Taxes need not be pleasant, especially for those who benefit the most financially from society’s infrastructure, i.e., the wealthy. Taxes are the gross vegetables you eat instead of fried ice cream so you don’t get sick and die.
Nor need they be simple, any more than monetary policy should be ‘simple’. What’s important is that these policies are effective.
What America needs is to foster this philosophy among the wealthy. Buffett is helping, although he’s still a little goofy on taxing income from investments (I figure he’ll come around on this once he’s closer to death).
Adrian Haiwei
So Douthat does have a reader!
Who’d have guessed?
We should all still weep for the wasted trees, though…
AA+ Bonds
One of my friends said “Slick Romney” by accident today and that sounds about right so I’m about to sound like an idiot using that all the time
Ash Can
Meh, that’s OK. In a few days Sully will be putting up a post on how he’s seen the light on (fill in the GOP candidate of your choice), and that the incivility of (fill in the Dem of your choice) just proves that both sides do it, and that we should all vote Republican just to be on the safe side. (And no, I haven’t read the thread, so if 17 people have already said this, sorry.)
SensesFail
@jl:
Win x 1,000.
I can’t decide which this is more of: funny or accurate.
rikyrah
he tried giving O’Donnell ‘ the Moore Award’ for his interview with Cain. and I didn’t even think he had it in him to publish a reader’s email stating why they had no problem with O’Donnell’s questioning of Cain.
wrb
@lol:
yep
Katharsis
@Menzies:
That was so funny I nearly snorted my drink. No… I’m being sincere. I wish I was alone now so I could LMAO.
kindness
I still read Sully. The thing that unnerves me the most about him is he can produce columns with great vision & understanding. And then a day later act like the Republican apologist & aparichnik he can be.
I don’t know…maybe it’s the meds he’s taking. I could take the swings but at least remember the other side too. Don’t act like there isn’t valid reasons we progressives are trying to make this country, this world a better place. And God Damned aparichnik Republican assholes are fighting us tooth and nail the whole way. They lie and the apologists like Douthout et al spring into action.
Lemme tell ya, it isn’t easy being a liberal in this country right now.
John O
@AA+ Bonds:
The point is that taxes need not be UNPLEASANT, for anyone, and if I know what Bill Gates’ tax nut is I can decide for myself what a reasonable rate is for him over time.
I would gladly pay higher taxes for a modicum of safety net.
jake the snake
Has there ever been any serious discussion of an intervention with Cole over his Sully infatuation.
Triassic Sands
@JGabriel:
Thanks, I tweaked it. I’m so sick of the deification of Jobs, I can’t let an opportunity pass to try to deflate the bubble.
@arguingwithsignposts:
Triassic Sands
The Dishman:
Wow, that’s some insightful and important commentary from Sullivan. Love your hair, Michelle! And the pearls are just dreamy.
The only good thing I can say about Sullivan is that he seems convinced (finally) that the Republican candidates are, with the exception of Huntsman, completely insane. But people are kidding themselves if they think President Huntsman could control modern congressional Republican majorities. He’d either have to veto one bill after another (how likely is that?) or go along with the destruction of the country.
Ozymandias, King of Ants
@Bruce S: I’m sure his beard has at least a few.
gaz
@trollhattan: thank you for the lol. =) his beard *is* pretty scary…
gaz
@John O:
1. A complete overhaul of federal tax collection in this country would cause a large amount of economic uncertainty.
2. Even *if* a complete overhaul occurred, do you plan on making a constitutional amendment or something to eliminate state taxes such as income tax, property tax, sales tax? Or to ask another way, which taxes are subject to overhaul, and how do you enforce it without impugning on the rights of individual states to levy an income tax, for example.
3. Currently, part of the way that the United States government uses the tax code is to incentivize desirable behavior and discourage undesirable behavior – as an alternative to legislative mandate. Arguably, if your idea is to move to a flat tax, with maybe a sales-tax (regressive as hell, but that’s beside the point for my sake here), then this would no longer be a “value add” of the tax code. how do you propose we replace this feature of our tax code – what legislative or other vehicle(s) do you propose we use?
All questions/concerns I’ve not heard anybody answer to my satisfaction. That’s why I call bullshite on this tired flat tax garbage.
TenguPhule
Anyone that applauds the GOP on tax policy is obviously too stupid to be allowed to hold any kind of money whatsoever.
Ian
Cole you need to go start taking methadone. You won’t ever have a Sully craving again.
Or have at least 15 drinks before you go to his website
Halcyan
@Emma:
Thus proving the old adage, “even a broken clock is right twice a day”.
I think the allure of Sullivan is that he was one of the first of the public “Conservatives” to recognize the insanity that the Republican party was becoming. Those of us who saw it also recognized ourselves in his writing, in his visceral reaction to “all things Bush”.
This, though, is one of the real problems with the purist wing of the left – what they want us all to promote is something that nobody leaving the right wing could tolerate. The vast majority of this country is socially liberal and fiscally conservative. I don’t think that means that they all think taxes (ala Bachmann) ought to be zero, but they do want those charged with spending our tax dollars to be prudent. Bush’s Excellent Iraq Adventure and his “we’ll spend whatever it takes” was not prudent.
The left wing does a very poor job on agreeing to a message. The 99% thing of late is likely entirely accidental. Or this country is reaching critical mass and it’s simply a message whose time has come.
Halcyan
@John O:
I read Sully daily, multiple times, when he was at The Atlantic. I read him before he was at The Atlantic. But I tried to follow his latest move, and could not. The technology was terrible, “expand post” just sat there and stared at me, and frankly, I missed the quite witty comments from his cohorts at The Atlantic who did not go with him (did any?)
Andrew has sparks of brilliance and then follows it up with OCD like responses to some things that have driven me away. Read: Palin Pregnancy
I no longer find him interesting.
Halcyan
Adding: I replaced my daily read of Sullivan with multiple daily checks of this site. I find that I resented more than I realized that Sullivan did not have comments.
I do realize that having comments presents problems. Flame wars erupt from time to time that require dousing, and anyone who posts prominently needs to have a pretty thick skin. Sully did post dissents from time to time, but they were hand picked. That’s pretty much NOT reality, you know?
Also, too.
Paul in KY
@jl: I would go with hobbit, IMO. He’s nowhere near good looking enough to be an elf.
(This comment brought to you by an pendantic Tolkienite)
Paul in KY
@AA+ Bonds: As you well know, ‘libertarians’ are Republicans who are too chickenshit to self-identify as Republicans.
Paul in KY
@Paul in KY: Due to an ad obscuring a crucial part of jl’s comment, I didn’t see the ‘Santa’ part. I guess he would look like an old Santa-style elf.
Paul in KY
@John O: If taxes are ‘pleasant’ for a real wealthy person, then they are not being taxed enough.
Judas Escargot
@TenguPhule:
FTFY.
Howlin Wolfe
@flounder: ++