Didn't Even Mention Abortion

After having watched 1.1 GOP debates [just. couldn't. do. it.], I have come to the conclusion that there are some issues on which all the candidates [except Ron Paul, he doesn't count] can agree. Which ever candidate gets the GOP nomination, rest assured he or [extremely unlikely to happen] she will agree with these five things:

1. The poor need to pay more taxes.
Did you know that it is a literal fact that 50% of working Americans do not pay taxes? [Here "taxes" is defined as federal income taxes. Almost all working Americans pay payroll taxes, gas taxes, sales taxes, fees, etc. but let's not let facts get in the way of a perfectly reasonable justification for raising taxes on the poor. Of course, if the National Parks Service puts out so much as a donations box at a national monument, you'll never hear the end of "Another Obama tax hike!" from the GOP.]

Right now, the poor have no "skin in the game" [so far my favorite phrase of the debating season. Nothing like watching some old men talk about getting some skin in the game], so they love them some big government - everything from missile defense shields to subsidized school lunches. If we could skin the poor, they'd realize that those programs aren't free, but are paid for by taxes. Then the poor would love them some missile defense [take that Gorby!], but realize that subsidized school lunches are stealing.

2. The wealthy pay too much in taxes.
It is a simple fact that for every tax dollar the federal government collects, that is one more dollar a man with a dream cannot use to start a new business. Or an already wealthy person cannot use to give to a man with a dream to start a new business. You want to solve the unemployment problem? Cut taxes on men with dreams the wealthy.

It's worse than that, though. Why should a man with a dream [and isn't that what America is all about?] work hard to fulfill his dream if he knows that the government is going to come along and take all his dream money? He won't. He just won't. As Shakespeare said, 'tis better to be a poor man with an unfulfilled dream than a successful man who has to pay a slightly higher tax rate.

3. Corporations should pay no taxes at all.
The fact of the matter is that the US economy loses $1.2 trillion dollars a year because our corporate tax rate is too high. Corporations are forced to move their headquarters overseas, just to avoid paying the unconscionable tax rate. [Nothing is more patriotic than avoiding taxes]. If the US tax rate was 0%, then US corporations would bring their money home boosting the economy. As Americans, US corporations have a duty to strangle our economy until we let them pay zero taxes. The shareholders demand it.

4. We need to drill for oil, harvest the clean coal, frack the shale, pipe the line and achieve energy independence.
It is the stupidest thing in the world that the US is going through a recession while we sit on the universe's richest energy reserves outside of the sun. If we could just unlock this vast potential and get the US off of the world commodities market, this recession would be over [in 7 to 10 years] and we'd never have to look at an Arab without spitting on him again.

5. Ron Paul is an idiot.
Ron Paul takes conservative positions to their logical conclusions and says idiotic things. He's not a serious candidate and should not even be on the same stage as the likes of Jon Huntsman [he was the governor of Utah!], Rick Santorum [the poor's favorite Republican!] and Herman Cain [9-9-9!].

The Problem of Covering Colorful but Doomed Campaigns - James Fallows - Politics - The Atlantic

The Problem of Covering Colorful but Doomed Campaigns - James Fallows - Politics - The Atlantic

So the press faces a chance to learn from the lessons of the Trump bubble. Each of these men, Gingrich and Trump, is a familiar national figure; neither of them will be the Republican nominee. Because of celebrity and personal pizzazz, they naturally are more tempting to cover than other longshots who are also not going to win the nomination. But if Gingrich coverage turns into Carnival Barkers Part Deux, we'll end up giving headline attention to disputes that have more to do with reality-show celebrity than with how Republicans will choose their issues and their candidate. The trick of balance, therefore, is to be fair to Gingrich and his arguments as long as he is in the race, much as should be the case with Rick Santorum, Herman Cain, and others, while not letting what happened with Trump happen again.

Keep the focus on Mitt, cuz the rest is balderdash.

Watch Out, Chasepack. Newt Approacheth.

Newt in His Own Words: 33 Years of Bomb-Throwing | Mother Jones

1994 A South Carolina woman, Susan Smith, murders her two sons. Gingrich draws the only logical conclusion: "I think that the mother killing the two children in South Carolina vividly reminds every American how sick the society is getting and how much we need to change things. The only way you get change is to vote Republican."

Haley, We Hardly Knew Ya

A plain blog about politics: Winnowing

I can only repeat what I've been saying: it's not that the field is small; it's that the winnowing has begun early.

....

But, look, we call this period the "invisible primary" for a reason: just like in the state-by-state primaries to come next year, the current contest has winners and losers, and the losers tend to drop out. Now, some potential candidates really haven't contested the invisible primary...I haven't read anything, for example, about Jeb Bush. So I'll chalk him up as a "did not run." But those who hired staff, sought endorsements, traveled to Iowa and New Hampshire and South Carolina -- they contested the invisible primary. They were candidates for 2012. Even if they didn't quite make it all the way to 2012.

Chasepack Screed of the Moment is by Joe Klein

American Embarrassment - Swampland - TIME.com

This is my 10th presidential campaign, Lord help me. I have never before seen such a bunch of vile, desperate-to-please, shameless, embarrassing losers coagulated under a single party's banner. They are the most compelling argument I've seen against American exceptionalism. Even Tim Pawlenty, a decent governor, can't let a day go by without some bilious nonsense escaping his lizard brain. And, as Greg Sargent makes clear, Mitt Romney has wandered a long way from courage. There are those who say, cynically, if this is the dim-witted freak show the Republicans want to present in 2012, so be it. I disagree. One of them could get elected. You never know. Mick Huckabee, the front-runner if you can believe it, might have to negotiate a trade agreement, or a defense treaty, with the Indonesian President some day. Newt might have to discuss very delicate matters of national security with the President of Pakistan. And so I plead, as an unflinching American patriot--please Mitch Daniels, please Jeb Bush, please run. I may not agree with you on most things, but I respect you. And you seem to respect yourselves enough not to behave like public clowns.

The Minnesota Boy Knows His Southern Strategy

TPAW is in. First, last, always - TPAW.

Pawlenty comes out strong.

Did Tim Pawlenty come from humble beginning he had to struggle to overcome, a stuggle that has infused him with a value of hard work and an unsullied optimism?

At a young age, I saw up close the face of challenge, the face of hardship and the face of job loss. Over the last year I've traveled to nearly every state in the country and I know many Americans are feeling that way today. I know that feeling. I lived it.

But there is a brighter future for America.

YES HE DID!

Does Tim Pawlenty have political heroes we can all admire?

Ronald Reagan personified [America]. And Lincoln stood courageously to protect it. That's why today, I'm announcing the formation of an exploratory committee to run for president of the United States. Join the team and together we'll restore America.

YES HE DOES!

Most importantly, can he talk about the truly important issues without sounding too, you know, racist?

We, the people of the United States, will take back our government. This is our country. Our founding fathers created it.

YES HE CAN!

Who's founding fathers? Our founding fathers!
Who's country? Our country!
Who's government? Our government!

Finally, a candidate who is willing to plainly say what we are all thinking. The "government" is currently controlled by people who are not "We, the people of the United States."

We the People, forming a more perfect union:

Men and women of good faith know what I mean.

America, prepare to be TPWND!

Holiday Cheer

I am supposing that Monday marks the beginning of the Republican race for president. As such, you probably all saw this article about the GOP frontrunners committing gaffes here or there in the last coupla months. The Pawlenty bit has been bugging me for a couple of days now. Yes, it pretty funny fucked up that he got caught citing bad data from a Big Government article and doesn't seem to realize that relying on hard data from a propaganda site is dumb. He genuinely seems to not be in on the joke, which I guess is why he's a favorite among the powers that be in the GOP. W. again.

What has been bothering me though is that, while it is fun to make fun of the dumb guy who is running for president, what is being overlooked is that Pawlenty was attacking Obama for only creating jobs in the government, not the private sector.

In a Wall Street Journal column, he said most labor union members now work for governments, which Obama has rendered "the only booming industry left in our economy." Since January 2008, he wrote, "the private sector has lost nearly 8 million jobs while local, state and federal governments added 590,000."

Politfact proved that the stats were bogus and that the 590,000 only included part-time census workers. The problem I have is that if the private economy did lose 8 million jobs, shouldn't the government have created a fuckload more than 590,000 jobs? Wouldn't we want the government to create something on the order of, oh I don't know, 8 million jobs? Of course it can't, but shouldn't that be the goal here?

I feel like this is a very minor replay of the tax deal. We are so far from anything that looks like the New Deal, the only conclusion we can possibly reach is that we lost the political debate to the extent that our talking points aren't heard. Where do we go from here?

Fortunately, we'll have a good two years of horse race to talk about and the Palin-Pawlenty ticket will remind us that the lesser of two evils really is the lesser of two evils.

Chasepack Where Are They Now: Crying for Rudy edition

Report: Rudy out

The Daily News, which recently suggested Rudy Giuliani was on the verge of a Senate bid, reports that he'll declare tomorrow he's not running.

The lede: "So long, Rudy."

via Ben Smith 07:02 PM

Rocks Off! Chasepack GOP PACs

Do I have reason to believe I might get a chance to dig Eric Cantor [R-VA] vibes in a few early primary debates circa 2012? Might I glom some Huckabee-on-Santorum values-athons?

from Marc Ambinder

Here's a list of other possible 2012 hopefuls, their PACs, listed by the amount of money raised + given so far this year. (Bobby Jindal is not included in the list; I couldn't get an official answer on whether he has a PAC, but signs of one are non-existent, and a Louisiana political operative I talked to hadn't heard of one.)

Mitt Romney, Free and Strong America PAC:
$2,318,789 raised, $1,845,423 given

Eric Cantor:
$1,004,593 raised, $983,451 given

Rick Santorum, America's Foundation:
$494,547 raised, $556,905 given

Sarah Palin, SarahPAC:
$732,867 raised, $276,200 given

Mike Huckabee, Huck PAC:
$304,673 raised, $336,589 given

Mike Pence, Pen PAC:
$115,588 raised, $111,593 given

Haley Barbour, Haley's PAC:
$14,050 raised, $14,560 given

Ron Paul, Liberty PAC:
$1,221 raised, $24,871 given

Horn of Chasepack(s) -- Then and Now

Romney Praises Tea Partiers At Values Voter Summit - Hotline On Call
Huck's win - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com
Ah, these two little-bitty anecdotes are nice gestures in the direction of the inevitable. Be it sooner, later, or whenever: the blithely anti-government, anti-politics, anti-politician Tea Party movement is going to be pressured back into a) electoral politics, b) candidate-based activism and, c) the (impossible) necessity of sullying themselves with the businesses of governing and government.

The WWE wing of the GOP? - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com
Linda McMahon Has Some Talent Working For Her - The Atlantic Politics Channel
No, seriously, Linda McMahon -- WWE co-founder, spouse of the ever-annoying Vince McMahon -- is entering the Republican primary to dance with (ultimate chasepack legend) Chris Dodd. See below for a true, true, too-true summation of McMahon's prospects that amounts ever-so-pleasantly to a textbook example of damning-with-faint-praise:

"At some level it's not a surprise that someone with a lot of money who is bored in her job would run," said Roy Occhiogrosso, a veteran Democratic strategist and Dodd supporter. "It certainly lends itself to all kinds of interesting metaphors."

Trots for Sanford?

(h/t: le Ben Smith)

Wait, a Republican governor is refusing stimulus for his state, likening said stimulus to Weimar/Stalin, and stirring up a stim-based bash with Dem. Whip James Clyburn?

What could this possibly portend, a 'Trots for Sanford' faction? Or maybe something a little more 2012-ish?