Posts archived in Election 2012

I know I shouldn’t take it seriously. My Mom taught me to never, ever take anything seriously when it is said by a person who voluntarily goes by the name “Vikingstar.” But here it is.

Vikingstar ponders when the hordes of liberal posters will begin showering AMG with their heresy because it is an election year. He surmises that they aren’t here yet because the Democratic machine isn’t yet paying them money to “astroturf” AMG.

If Democrats are paying anyone to post anything on AMG, we are screwed. There could not be a more stupid way to spend kindly donated money.

Does Vikingstar think the great masses of Maine come to AMG for unbiased, open discussion, and might be swayed by some planted users saying things like, “Gee, I don’t know. I kind of like Angus King,” or, “Actually I sometimes listen to MPBN and like it?”

No. No one is coming to AMG with an open mind. They come either to laugh or, thank goodness for my blog, kindly provide fodder for the people who came to laugh. There is only a slight space in between those two options, and his name is Dan Billings and he is on AMG sabbatical right now.

Seriously, how paranoid do you have to be to think Democrats want to pay people to write stuff on AMG. My goodness. But I guess compared to the recent “Democrats want to use  secret sterility pills to control the world” thread, Vikingstar is being pretty tame.

These people are fricking nuts.

LD 849 is a genius piece of political posturing.

The news reports on this bill, which passed the Senate yesterday, simply say that Republicans voted to “reduce the income tax rate to 4%.” Looks great! They got the headline they wanted. No further explanation given or required.

But what the bill actually does is only slightly better than nothing. It does nothing in terms of taxes people actually pay, but creates a nice baseline for future Republicans to compare all budgets to.

The bill, technically, creates a new “fund,” into which goes any extra, leftover money the state has after all it’s general commitments are paid. Some of that is then doled out into the budget to reduce tax rates until the top rate is 4%.

The original bill only lowered the top rate to 6.5%, but that lacked the panache necessary to really excite the unsophisticated Republican voters whose buttons are meant to be pressed by this headline, so they lowered it to 4%. That is apparently the poll tested number that LePage voters find most exciting but still believable.

How does this help future Republicans? Consider that state revenues are unusually low, given the recession. Understand that these revenues will go up substantially in the next few years, even if the actual tax rates do not. Also understand that there are a lot of costs the state is deferring at the moment, costs that are being pushed ahead into future budget years in order to stop an immediate tax rate increase to make up for the current, temporary revenue decrease.

So if 2013 rolls around and Democrats are in charge of writing the budget again, the Republicans know the new legislature will do what Democratic-controlled bodies always seem to do in the current millennium: craft a moderate budget that keeps the lights on and even fixes a few potholes, literally and metaphorically.

And Republicans will jump out from behind a tree screaming, “Democrats are increasing taxes 200%! They want to double your taxes!”

How? Because the current tax rate is 8.5%, heading down to just under 8% in a year or two. And Republicans will look at the next budget and calculate the relative tax rates compared to their mythical 4% they passed but never implemented. And eight is twice as high as four!

The 4% rate is mythical because the tax rate would only reach that low if spending did not increase at all from these historical lows, and revenues skyrocket in a good economy. But of course spending will increase because the government has been putting off lots of general housekeeping and upkeep- the sort of stuff that can be let go for a few years unnoticed before people start complaining.

Oh, and spending will go up modestly even without paying all those deferred costs, as always, because of inflation.

Yet Republicans will calculate a tax increase as what Democrats propose in their responsible budget versus their hypothetical baseline that could never, ever, actually happen. They will determine that we would all have been paying 4% by 2020 if we had just held the line on spending, and therefore that Democrats want to double your taxes.

This is the beauty of the Republican party- moderation and reality mean nothing. They will make this claim of a potential doubling of taxes even though the top rate in effect is, will be, and always was somewhere over 7.9 percent at all relevant times. And they can’t actually propose a budget with a 4% tax rate, because that would lead to all kinds of nasty news stories about what they cut to make the numbers work. That is the beautiful thing about this bill: you don’t have to cut any spending if your tax cuts are imaginary!

So when the Democrats propose a budget generally like the last one, but with a modest spending increase over historic lows, Tea Party types will jump and scream because they won’t realize that the 4% rate was impossible all along.

The tax cut in this bill is completely useless as a piece of responsible, honest governing. It is fiction.

This bill’s only use is as a talking point in 2014. And it is only a useful talking point if Republicans aren’t actually in charge of the budget- because otherwise they would be the ones raising taxes when they continue to fund everything at or about historical levels, with inflation added in, thus continuing the endless cycle of small, continuous budget increases. Their decision to pass this bill shows that they are already hedging against losing the legislature.

They know they probably won’t be in charge, so they can put these little talking-point bombs into the system.

And if they somehow maintain control of the legislature, we will not hear of this 4% number ever again. They will lower the 7.9% rate to 7.6%, or something like that, and talk about how historic that is. The 4% baseline is only meant for attacking others. No Republican will ever be held to it.

Cynical? Yep. Politically smart? Sure, if you plan on losing the legislature sometime soon.

I wouldn’t be surprised if this tactic is happening in other states controlled by radical Republican majorities in usually un-radical states. It makes a lot of sense, tactically.

Did you know you can comment on the Maine GOP website?

It is moderated, unfortunately, so no one is ever likely to see what you write, but if you wish to vent your anger at the absurdity of the modern Republican party you could, say, go to the list of State Committee members and write a comment like this:

It may be of interest to some readers that Committee member Roger Ek, Penobscot County, opposes the President’s compromise on ensuring access to birth control because, Roger notes, woman have had access to fish bladder condoms for thousands of years and can have an abortion anytime they want by jamming a stick into their uterus.

I’m not making this up.

http://www.asmainegoes.com/content/contraceptives-issue#comment-626457

Will it ever see the light? Who knows. But I found it a useful release in a moment of Roger Ek inspired annoyance.

5 comments

AMG hates sluts.

On birth control, “johnw” is somehow the voice of reason.

I haven’t written about johnw before, because he is so incredibly dull. He posts long Ron Paul-enque rants that even people like me can’t go through without our eyes rolling into the back of our heads. But somehow, on birth control, he is concise and logical.

Here is what he says:

I work in an office where there are 30+ women….. some of them pretty darn conservative.
The prevailing attitude is why shouldn’t insurance pay for birth control if they choose to use it whether you agree with it or not.
These women vote , they pay for insurance and they believe that they should receive services they deem necessary……I had one standing in front of my desk yesterday telling me if our insurance policy pays for Viagra….. a drug that helps get women pregnant it sure as hell should pay for things that prevent it…… .

Other AMGers, however, they’ve still got the crazy flowing uninterrupted. Here are some of my favorites:

Maine State Republican Party Committee member Roger Ek:

Contraception has been around for thousands of years. Air bladders from fish were used back then as condoms and an old lady with a stick was used to perform abortions. The issue today is whether citizens’ tax dollars should be used to pay for these products and services.

Let me say that I am wholeheartedly in agreement with Roger in standing against taxpayer subsidies for fish bladders. And ‘old lady with a stick’ abortions. One-hundred percent with you there, Roger.

And then there is the resident conspiracy theorist, Mackenzie Andersen:

Extrapolating into the future as we continue down the course we are headed:

Phase One: in order to advance its population control agenda, the authoritarian totalitarian government issues free contraceptives.

Phase Two: The contraceptives that the government is issuing are revealed to be sterility pills. If one wants to conceive, one must get the antidote pill but to get that one must apply to the government for permission
.
Phase Three: New “advances’ in genetic engineering are made.

Phase Four: Genetic engineering mandates.

Wow. Phase Two is a plot twist I’d expect on the sci-fi channel at 2 a.m. I like where you’re going with this, Mackenzie. Put it in 45 pages of script form and I’ll see what the network brass thinks.

And finally, more Mackenzie. Doubling down.

I know the opening scenario sounds like it couldn’t happen here but as the second post in this discussion brought up- it is consistent with the views oi some of Obama czars, who ill continue to hold power if Obama is re-elected. These czars have already expressed a belief in public sterilization as a solution to the population problem. Science is always discovering unknown side affects of new drugs. Sterilization could be marketed as an either unknown side effect or an accidental contamination of the drugs- at least in the first phase of phase two, The antidote could be said to be in short supply and so must be regulated by the government.

Yes I know it sounds unlikely but so did everything that is happening today seem unlikely a short four years ago,

First of all, birth control is not a new drug. Well, unless you are on the Roger Ek geologic timescale, comparing hormonal pills to fish bladders, but you get my point. Five decades is not a short time.

Second, what a complete moron. The woman, Sandra Fluke, who testified and set off the whole Rush Limbaugh “slut” debacle was not talking about sex. She told the story of a woman who needed hormonal birth control pills not for birth control, but to prevent a progressive loss of fertility and the eventual disabling of one of her ovaries. She wanted to prevent sterility. She wanted what civilized people might call medicine. But she couldn’t get it, because the Affordable Care Act didn’t exist. Soon, people with her problem will not have to lose their fertility because of idiots like you, Mackenzie.

Sorry, I just felt compelled to say that. Won’t somebody please order some of her child-like ceramic crap from her child-like website (http://www.andersenstudio.com/store/), so she has something to do besides ramble on and on and on about her love for Andrew Ian Dodge? (http://www.asmainegoes.com/content/andrew-ian-dodge-loser-he-starts?) Christ, it’s embarrassing, even for AMG.

AMGer “taxfoe” admits to voter fraud.

Is he joking? Maybe, but sketchy half-truths and innuendo never stopped a Republican “investigation” of voter fraud before.

Someone call Secretary of State Charlie Summers, stat!

I’d also say someone should call Charlie Webster, but I worry he wouldn’t understand. Because he’s a little slow.

Here is what taxfoe said:

Washington has some pretty restrictive rules about party affiliation/registration and voting. I don’t recall the specifics but it does take some advance planning to vote. After voting in WA in the morning, business took me to the substantially less restrictive Nevada where I ran into a get-out-the-vote brigade near the hotel I was staying. I took one look at the angel on my left shoulder and one look at the angel on my right shoulder. Only the angels know for sure.

For one of my last elections in Maine, I went in to vote (Portland) and, as my name was being checked off the list, I noticed my dead brother’s name was still on it as was that of a brother currently residing in Oklahoma. I didn’t want to push my luck so only two of us voted that day. I used a laundry receipt to establish my ID as the other. I checked in with the clerk A, voted, walked out, came back in, checked in with the other clerk B who, in keeping with her alphabetic duties, told A which name to cross off and I voted again. I didn’t know her personally but she knew my family and did what, I’m sure she fealt, was the best thing, given our recent tragedy.

7 comments

Newt Gingrich = Batman

AMGer “Ayn Now” delivers a great piece of analogy in this thread.

He compares being a Republican in America to being in a foxhole, Mitt Romney to Charlie Brown, and Newt Gingrich to Batman.

I am way past tired of being on the reception end of abuse, and I have no way to strike back…and Newt has done so. frankly, I’d rather lose with someone who will draw blood, than lose with someone with good hair and money (who just will NOT punch back no matter what).
This is a war-and a very important war- and I don’t want Charlie Brown in my foxhole- I want Batman-even if he is flawed.

4 comments

My favorite Romney joke so far.

Seen, of all places, in the comments section of a YouTube video:

“Willard Romney even flip-flopped on his own name!”