Friday, October 15, 2010
VDH is awesome this morning. Teaser below, but don't be a fool; read the whole thing. There are eight more steps after these first two:
First, propose all sorts of new taxes. Float trial balloons about even more on the horizon. Subordinates should whisper about a VAT/national sales tax. Other aides should revisit campaign talk about lifting the caps on income subject to payroll taxes. A centerpiece of the effort would be to insist on bringing back the Clinton income-tax rates — but this time targeting only high earners and not putting commensurate caps on federal spending. For insurance in making things worse, raise capital-gains taxes. And why not add a new health-care tax surcharge? Let inheritance taxes kick back in. Hope that the states do their synergistic part by raising their own taxes at the same time. The trick is to dissuade businesses from taking risks, by making clear that any new profits are illegitimate and therefore will go to the government.
Second, business expansion is predicated on confidence in the future. Destroy that, and depression can become far easier to achieve. Often the decision to hire or to buy new equipment is psychological in nature — predicated on hope in the larger business climate. So to ruin that landscape, you might unleash a barrage of anti-business, anti-wealth rhetoric to remind job creators that they are already too rich from exploitative practices. The president himself might lead the attack against Wall Street, CEOs, doctors, and insurers. Now and then it would be wise to spice it up with a nice socialist quip such as “I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money” — or digs about the wealthy needlessly jetting to the Super Bowl or Las Vegas. Try out lines like “keep the boot on their necks” and “know whose ass to kick.” Turn Koch Industries in the public imagination into something akin to IG Farben. Make the Chamber of Commerce the equivalent of Enron. Create a pantheon of good capitalists like George Soros, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffett, who never speculate, hedge, or seek monopolies, and set them against bad ones like Charles and David Koch. Remember, the aim is to let businesses know on a very visceral level that you simply do not like them.
It's all quite exhausting.
He forgot the brilliant policy of reintroducing stagflation, which is what the currently underway October project of the month. Obviously inflation is beginning to rage (just look at any commodity, including foodstuffs) and yet the policy of the US is to promote more inflation. The economy isn't moving despite this reversal of a hard won victory over inflation. Watching the Democrats destroy our economy is absolutely heartbreaking.
It is outstanding, what can one say more about the brilliance of VDH.
I tuned into TigerHawk after a long break, must say I enjoyed the images from Austin.
Band Of Horses has long been a personal favorite.
However, a request from an old fan, wondering Tigerhawk's take on Sipprelle trying to defeat the dreaded Democratic Partisan named Holt for the 12th District - US Congressional Race?
I was not able to find the debate the other evening? Can TigerHawk give us a run down?
Rumor in the area, suggest Sipprelle has a real chance, is this possible? I keep looking for Powerline to reference the Race as 'strong' or 'long' and such, but never see it.
What is the chance? What is the status? What is your opinion?
Thank you - best wishes.
Here is the Sipperelle website:
Anon 3:33 -
Thanks, hope you stick around for a while.
I have had a Sipprelle yard sign since May, and they have no proliferated all over town. In *this* town, that is quite something. I did not see the debate, but will look for a link to a video and post it if I can find it. I don't know whether he has a chance -- the website 538 gives him no real chance, but I don't know if there has been any polling or that is simply on the basis of Holt's margin of victory in 2008 and 2006.
Nate Silver will no doubt soon be updating his 538 projection. The first non- partisan poll in months just came out two days ago, from Monmouth University, and it shows Scott is trailing Rush Holt by 5 points(not far from the margin of error). Like so many races this year, turnout will tell the tail. The district was gerrymandered last cycle so as to reliably reelect Democrats and if they turnout in force Holt cannot lose, lack of merit notwithstanding. Obviously, for the sake of the country, all Republicans absolutely need to vote (and make sure a friend votes too) because even if there is low turnout among Democrats Scott needs every vote possible to overcome the gerrymander.
By the way, here is the link to the Monmouth press release on that poll (instead of the news story from nj.com). I'm no expert on the statistical analysis of polls, and perhaps someone else here is, but I noticed the poll appears to significantly oversample Democrats in arriving at it's conclusion. Monmouth shows the district as D+13 in their weighting. While I can't recall how the President did in 2008 here, the compression nationally in Democrat identification has worked here too and the gap is no doubt smaller than D+13! When you look at how Scott is doing with independents (big lead) and with most demographics other than older women you realize he may well actually be leading.