December 20, 2017

Trump exults.


This is less dignified:

94 comments:

Gahrie said...

They forgot the Greco-Roman columns and the halo....

Big Mike said...

Trump doesn’t do “dignified.” He does “results.”

Rt1 Rebel said...

I haven't had this much fun since my cousin got her head stuck in a gopher hole.

Fabi said...

So much winning!

buwaya said...

Dignity is overrated.
My gun stocks are going nowhere.
Ruger RGR did rather well, up 10%, AOBC (Smith&Wesson) down 7%

Fabi said...

Much less dignified was during the Senate vote when the Democrats' chanted "Kill the bill, don't kill us!". Them wascally wabbits on the left -- they'se such jokesters!

Tim at large said...

Hillary edited Teen Vogue this month.

Etienne said...

We will get the 21 trillion national debt payed off in no time now!

n said...

Lucy Van Pelt : May I help you?
Charlie Brown : I'm in bad shape.
Lucy Van Pelt : Wait a minute. Before we begin, I request that you pay in advance. Five cents, please.
[Charlie Brown drops a nickel on the can]
Lucy Van Pelt : Boy, what a sound! How I love the sound of clinking money! That beautiful sound of cold hard cash! Nickels, nickels, nickels! That beautiful sound of clinking nickels!

And all she wanted for Christmas was Real Estate.

Darrell said...

What's less dignified about the second? You got a problem with the truth?

Darkisland said...

I don't get why the second tweet was undignified

I have no problem wigh either but if I had to choose the first looks slightly less dignified.

I am sure that Pelosi is indignant about both.

John Henry

Matthew Sablan said...

This is a big fing deal. Can we borrow Pelosi's gavel?

Big Mike said...

We will get the 21 trillion national debt payed off in no time now!

Barack Obama added 9 trillion dollars to the national debt in only eight years. As Donald Trump pointed out, it nearly doubled during his tenure. After eight years of not commenting, or downright defending, Obama's profligate spending, it now crosses Democrat minds (if one can characterize what Democrats have inside their skulls as a mind) that debt spending might be bad. You have no room to complain.

Drago said...

"Jen Rubin Republican" Chuck hardest hit and back to therapy.

victoria said...

Just wait and see if anything happens. So far, all the companies he said that he saved jobs (remember that?)... Those companies have continued to lay people off and have made no moves to bring their overseas operations back to the USA.... I am skeptical. Windbag.

And its not just because California will get royally screwed.

Vicki from Pasadena

rehajm said...

it now crosses Democrat minds (if one can characterize what Democrats have inside their skulls as a mind) that debt spending might be bad

They will forget when Republicans start reducing spending and remember a dollar in spending cuts means infinite suffering.

Darkisland said...

Vicki,

Cali getting screwed is a feature that many people like

I'm not tired yet.

John Henry

Sebastian said...

"it now crosses Democrat minds (if one can characterize what Democrats have inside their skulls as a mind) that debt spending might be bad. You have no room to complain." They always have room to complain. Of course, their "arguments," like their complaints, are strictly instrumental, trotted out or discarded for convenience.

Assume progs argue in bad faith, and you are rarely wrong.

traditionalguy said...

We need to play a video of Orrin Hatch's nice words about the President. I hope its on Google. I did see it on Twitter.

bagoh20 said...

Actually, it only takes a dollar in cuts to the rate of increase to bring infinite suffering. Infinite suffering is really easy to produce in the mind of the Dem, and all suffering they find is infinite and infinitely unfair.

Birkel said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
exiledonmainstreet said...

California was screwing itself royally long before the tax bill was passed.

boohoo Vicki.I thought you liberals liked paying high taxes. It's patriotic, remember

Birkel said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
traditionalguy said...

Today showed that President Trump has gotten way inside the Dem's OODA Loop.

I actually feel sorry for the Dems desperation as Trump splashes them one after another.

Birkel said...

Test the Democrat seriousness about deficits.
Propose spending cuts, federal hiring freezes, decertification of federal workers unions, federal land sales and competitive bidding for federal projects.

Then repeal the laws that support "Too Big to Fail" businesses that have captured the regulators. And fire the workers who are no longer needed to enforce the anti-competitive rules.

And cut Great Society programs by means testing.

Leviathan either dies it kills us.

bagoh20 said...

" Those companies have continued to lay people off and have made no moves to bring their overseas operations back to the USA."

The tax cut was just passed today and Trump has been in office for only 11 months. Suddenly we expect real results and real fast. This is a good sign.

David Begley said...

Animal spirits will be unleashed. Expect 4% economic growth. Higher wages. Seven fat years.

Who you going to believe? Crying Chuck Schumer or your own lyin’ eyes?

buwaya said...

CA has spent two decades screwing its own people, and the taxation is the least of it.

But the biggest losers in CA are people the media really doesnt care about - Chicanos and blacks. These people, collectively, are not better off. All anyone wants is their votes. Their welfare is irrelevant.

CA is extreme.

320Busdriver said...

Tire from all the winning, you shall not!

Francisco D said...

I live in Iowa, for now.

Why should I and the humble citizens of this frugal and unassuming state subsidize the free spending leftists in California and NYC?

Michael K said...

And its not just because California will get royally screwed.

Vicki from Pasadena


Vicki, you deserve it. You are a prog cheerleader who comes here to whine and bitch.

I love the winning. Plus, I left California a year ago. We'll be back for Christmas with the kids but some of them are already talking about where they will retire.

whitney said...

I think you're being too hard on him. I love the exploding present

Mark said...

A lot of those TRILLIONS were spent by Republican Congresses. After the "stimulus," year after year the Republicans promised to go back to pre-stimulus spending, to 2009 levels. Instead, they baked the stimulus into the budget as an annual expenditure, a new baseline.

Achilles said...

I have been told for years that the rich blue states are subsidizing the poor red states.

I thought people in California and NY liked paying higher taxes. Now they can.

The wave of corporate employee bonuses and raises today is putting the lie that this tax cut was only for the wealthy to rest. A tight job market and lower taxes is the best way to help the working class. Of course that means a reasonable immigration system.

But we know why democrats want to push down wages and keep people poor.

buwaya said...

Los Angeles for instance was once the machining center of the US. When I worked in a related field I used to go down annually to the Westec machine tool show. A lot of the people there were Chicano machine shop owners, subcontractors, etxpc., prospering and getting ahead.

And then LA in the 90s decided to drive them away. Later CA made it difficult to survive anywhere in the state.

Khesanh 0802 said...

From CNBC: "AT&T, Comcast giving $1,000 bonuses to hundreds of thousands of workers after tax bill"
From Geekwire:" Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg unveils $300M in initiatives in response to tax bill"
From CNBC: "Wells Fargo, Fifth Third Bancorp unveil minimum wage hikes after tax bill passage"

Links are all at Instapundit

Khesanh 0802 said...

I think the second gif is great. Where'd your sense of humor go today, Ann?

Michael K said...

"Los Angeles for instance was once the machining center of the US. "

The entire boat building industry was driven out. Most workers were Hispanic and a friend of mine was the kine supervisor partly because of his Spanish skills,

Bay Area Guy said...

I live in NorCal. Which means, I will no doubt get screwed by the tax bill. And I am loving it! Because it means that all my rich Leftwing neighbors and friends who are already suffering from Trump-induced psychosis, are also getting screwed - bigly!

Let the massive blue state screwing continue!

Birkel said...

Mark lied, of course. The Stimulus was made a year over year expense due to the failure of the House under Nancy Pelosi and the Senate under Harry Reid who refused to pass a budget under normal order. This allowed the 1974 Budget Reconciliation Act to roll the stimulus into each new continuing resolution. This process could not be stopped due to the Democrat Senate majority through 2014 and the ability of a minority to filibuster any spending bills, since 2015.

Mark is a liar and he knows it.

If Mark had intended to tell the truth, he could have accurately said it is unlikely Republicans would actually cut spending after Democrats stopped consideration of any real cuts for six years.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

And its not just because California will get royally screwed.

And New York, Illinois, New Jersey, Connecticut and Massachusetts!

I'm still not tired of all the winning.

MaxedOutMama said...

I'm going to end up getting fond of the old man. Eek.

No one but G_d and Trump could get a bunch of Republican senators to work.

Seeing Red said...

Not tired of WINNING!

exiledonmainstreet said...

since I am only middle-class, not rich, I am looking forward to my February paychecks. Gee, if middle class people take a look at their paychecks and realize they're benefiting not getting screwed,do you think they'll finally figure out that the media and the Democrats are lying their asses off about this? the media and the Democrats must be absolutely terrified that that will be the case. theyre praying for the economy to crash. better than that then that Trump be right about something.

Drago said...

Ryan and McConnell should walk thru a crowd of lefty protestors with big smiles on their faces.

How much you want to bet they get punched and spit on....for real. Unlike that lie about Pelosi and gang getting spit on by protesters after obamacare passage.

Drago said...

Mark doubles down on the lying: " Instead, they baked the stimulus into the budget as an annual expenditure, a new baseline."

He can't help himself.

MaxedOutMama said...

I like the second GIF. I don't think it's less dignified. There's such a fine line between dignity and pomposity, and that line is so routinely obliterated in DC!

The less DCish it gets the more dignity it gains.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Bernie Sanders, the progressive communist - is filled with rage. How dare you take away big gubbermint money. It's HIS!

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Yes please leftists, regurgitate your stale economically illiterate hivemind talking points.

Thanks.

MathMom said...

The second one is simple to understand, and takes only a few seconds to watch. For people pressed for time, it is the winner.

Humperdink said...

Just did a rough calculation of my income tax with the new brackets, elimination of the personal exemption etc. I itemize. Will save about $2500/year.

That is amount I was supposed to save under Affordable (gag me) Care Act. My health insurance went up $6000/year. And they call Trump a prevaricator.

Guildofcannonballs said...

https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2017/12/20/the-conceit-and-insecurity-of-the-never-trumpers/

steve uhr said...

Thank goodness we are allowed to say Merry Christmas again ...

Merry Christmas everyone .. And a happy 2018!

Comanche Voter said...

Trump exults. Schumer whines. Pelosi screams. None of them are dignified.

Anonymous said...

I am surprised you have not commented on Rosie O'Donnell's attempted bribery. Why not?

cubanbob said...

The Democrats never care enough about the debt that they would actually cut non-defense spending when they are in power. The Republicans never care about actually cutting spending.
Either way we are going off a cliff. The difference is 70 mph versus 80 mph. So the question for the sane taxpayer is what difference does it make? Might as well keep more of my money.

narciso said...


Where did this grishenko gambit come from:

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/251897/obama-steele-dossier-russiagate

wildswan said...

Trump became President and the Republican half of Congress finally remembered how to legislate to achieve the Republican agenda. Is there anything The Donald can't do?

narciso said...

This seems to be what tripped up mccabe:


http://amp.dailycaller.com/2017/12/19/house-panel-interviews-mccain-associate-who-handled-the-trump-dossier/

Trumpit said...

I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of tax cuts I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["hard-core tax-rape pornography"], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. BUT I KNOW IT WHEN I SEE IT, and the Trump-Ryan-McConnell tax cuts involved in this case are PURE EVIL, and will inevitably lead to many, many instances of deprivation, sickness, and death. All to pay for bigger mansions, and bigger yachts for the super rich. The malnourished, and hungry kids are the ones I worry about the most. Christmas time is supposed to be a joyous season of giving, NOT a time of stealing from the poor by the rich. As a Supreme Court Justice of United States I express my utter contempt and outrage. May the House and Senate Republicans all rot in hell. As Ivanka Trump has stated, and I concur: "There’s a special place in hell for people (like her father) who prey on children."

Signed, Potty-mouth Stewart

anti-de Sitter space said...

Does this sorta event make it more or less likely that Melania's PP needs to holster DJT's PP?

Or is this an oral thing-y, re Melania holstering?

Maybe she's off the hook cause the geezer is biz-y tracking twitter reactions.



I dunno.

anti-de Sitter space said...

Anywho,




Carry on.

Gahrie said...

All to pay for bigger mansions, and bigger yachts for the super rich.

Somebody has to build those mansions and yachts, and it isn't the "super rich". Those are pretty good working class jobs.

Unknown said...

Blogger Guildofcannonballs said...
https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2017/12/20/the-conceit-and-insecurity-of-the-never-trumpers/


Wow, that's really good.

Drago said...

Trumpit: "...Trump-Ryan-McConnell tax cuts involved in this case are PURE EVIL,..."

LOL

anti-de Sitter space said...

BTW,

I could be wrong, but I just did some back of the envelop math, and I think that if the fed gov borrowed 100% of the annual federal budget, the tax rate for all American individuals and businesses would be zero.



Any, figurative, lightbulbs goin' off in any, figurative, attics?


Ha Ha. Y'all are too funny.

Bruce Hayden said...

“All to pay for bigger mansions, and bigger yachts for the super rich.”

All the Dems have here is the obligatory class warfare. No alternatives whatsoever. They can’t even propose increasing (instead of decreasing) the progressivity of our tax system because they are the party of the very rich and the poor, and the rich have always provided much more of their party income than the Republicans, who tend to collect much more of the moderate contributions from far more people. So, they talk class warfare, but ultimately protect the rich at the expense of the middle class.

The big falsehood here though is that they aren’t usually actually talking socking the rich and super rich, because that would irequireva wealth tax, and we are talking an income tax. The super rich tend to pay minimal taxes in our country because their nominal incomes tend to be tiny in comparison with their wealth. Warren Buffett famously complained that his secretary was paying taxes at a higher marginal rate than he faced. That was true, but only because his growth in wealth was mostly in the value of his Berkshire Hathaway stock, which he had acquired decades earlier, and our income tax system doesn’t capture that sort of capital gains until the asset is sold (if then). His taxable cash income is trivial, de minimis, in comparison. He could, of course, solve the moral issue by dedicating his stock to the govt upon his death. But won’t, of course. They never do.

The people paying most of the income taxes aren’t the rich then, but high earners. And for them, Tax Reform has little allure - a 1% decrease in the top marginal rate to the positive, but a loss of deductibility of much of their excess Blue State state and local taxes. And that is what they are talking about - that 1% of $1 million is $10k, which is a bigger tax reduction, in dollar terms, than if someone making $50k seeing their taxes go from, say, $2,500 to $0. Pure slight of hand, because the change in marginal rates is minimal for the high earners, but significant for the middle class. The other part of their argument though is that the other part of their constituency, the poor, are also not seeing any real tax cuts, because they don’t pay income taxes in the first place. What they get when the rest of us are paying income taxes is welfare through refundable tax credits. And that isn’t a tax cut - you can’t cut the income taxes for those who don’t pay them already. Just doesn’t work.

Bruce Hayden said...

“All to pay for bigger mansions, and bigger yachts for the super rich.”

The absurdity there is that that is rarely where the super rich spend their money. That is because satiation sets in fairly quickly. So, say with your first $billion, you build your first mansion, costing maybe $20 million. What do you do with your 2nd $billion? You already have a bigger house than you will ever need. Is it worth the hassle of moving to upgrade to a $40 million house? Probably not. Maybe a $5 million vacation house or two. But, there again, satiation sets in quickly. One in Aspen, one on the ocean, one in the French countryside, and what is next? A private jet? Ok, Trump could afford his own 767 or such. Unless you are the head of state, up you don’t need two jumbo jets. Maybe a top end Gulfstream for speed. But surely not two. Maybe a yacht, but for most, that is just plain silly. And then there are the Warren Buffets, who are super rich, but never bothered to buy the mansion or even luxury cars. Still apparently living in the same somewhat modest house that he has lived in for decades.

Where does their money really go? The bulk of it tends to go into investments. They fund startups. They build factories. Etc. and that creates jobs more directly than anything else. Funny thing though is that the younger tech super rich tend to invest it in improving our lot as humans. Competing with each other, private space travel is very rapidly approaching feasiblity. It is so bad that NASA is contracting with these new space companies to provide what it can’t any more - shipping stuff the the ISS, and putting satellites in orbit. They said that cheap space flight couldn’t be done. It could - it is just that governments can’t provide it. At the rate we are going, we may even be self supporting in space within most of our lifetimes, something that we could just dream about a decade or two ago. All for bragging rights and posterity. We are seingtheir money flowing into medical research, genetic engineering, public health, electric vehicles, batteries, electronic schools, etc. Essentially creating new industries.

The poor don’t create jobs, because they don’t have money to invest. They merely can create demand for goods and services. Someone has to invest the money to setup that small convenience store, or that Walmart Superstore. Someone has to rent or buy the store, pay wages and benefits for the employees. Pay to keep the lights on. That takes money. That is where much of the investment money ultimately goes, and the more money that the govt takes from the investment class, and gives to everyone else, the less there is to invest.

Molly said...

It's been a little hard for me to keep up with the arguments against the tax bill. It's a long list, and when a supporter of the tax bill attempts to address one of those arguments, the opponents slip seamlessly into another one of the arguments. Here's what I have so far:

1. Any tax cut is bad because it will reduce government revenue, and that will create additional political pressure to cut government spending.
2. This tax bill is bad because it cuts the corporate tax rate, and that is bad because (a) corporations are rich; (b) corporations are evil (selfish, not working in the public interest); (c) corporations are owned by rich people. (This is an argument I haven't really seen fleshed out, so I've filled in my guess of the reasoning.)
3. This tax bill is bad because it won't really cut (personal income) taxes for anyone except the rich.
4. This tax bill is bad because it will raise (personal income) taxes for many who are not rich.
5. This tax bill is bad because it will create additional political pressure to cut state and local taxes, and that will in turn create additional political pressure to reduce government spending at the state and local level.
6. This tax bill is bad because the income tax provisions are not permanent.
7. This tax bill is bad because it will be so beneficial that it will increase popularity of Trump and Republicans.

I am most interested in criticisms 3 and 4, and the Washington Post has a calculator with maps that provides some specific answers. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/business/tax-bill-calculator/?hpid=hp_rhp-top-table-main_gfx-taxcalculator-822am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.e525a53f5667

It bases its calculations on (a) what state you file in (b) what your income is (c) what your itemized deductions were last year.

In my state (Maryland) almost everyone gets a tax cut. There are two groups who will see tax increases: some of the rich with incomes above $225,000; and some of the poor with incomes less that $50,000, but who take more than one-third of their income as itemized deductions (presumably including large local property taxes -- so they are income poor, but property rich -- but also poor households with large deductible medical expenses).

Michael K said...

trumpit should charge for those hilarious posts.

Nobody is that stupid.

It has to be parody.

Tim at large said...

I could be wrong, but I just did some back of the envelop math, and I think that if the fed gov borrowed 100% of the annual federal budget, the tax rate for all American individuals and businesses would be zero.

Who knew that ADS was Paul Krugman! Oh wait, that was when the Democrats were in power. The reason the stimulus failed is that it wasn’t big enough! If we can just take the money out of the people’s hands and spend it as it ought to be spent, well then utopia will arrive for certain!

JAORE said...

Interesting I hear both:
Tax cuts are only for the rich!

and

Oh horror,they capped the mortgage deduction at $750,000.

Am I the only one sensing a conflict?

FWIW the calculators out there show I shall be [gleefully] robbing the national treasury to the tune of some $2,200.

Tim at large said...

Just wait and see if anything happens. So far, all the companies he said that he saved jobs (remember that?)... Those companies have continued to lay people off - Vickie from Pasadena


Weird with all of that happening, that unemployment is as low as it’s been in decades, but I appreciate the “wait and see” attitude to see if things ever do eventually improve.

Tim at large said...

Keep that mind open, Vickie!

Tim at large said...

Ultimately, Democrats don’t care about low unemployment, because jobs don’t create dependency on their party, and the kind of loyalty they need for voters to overlook their vast corruption.

Tim at large said...

While Americans are anxiously awaiting full details of the tax bill now being finalized in Congress, German economists are warning that the changes sought by President Donald Trump mean that significant amounts of new investment and jobs will shift from Europe to the United States.
“The tax competition will have a new dimension,” said Christoph Spengel, chairman of the corporate tax department at the University of Mannheim. Mr. Spengel, who is also a research associate at the Center for European Economic Research, and a group of tax experts at the university have done a detailed comparison of the two countries’ tax systems and published a report under the heading, “Germany loses out in US tax reform.”
. - Handlesblatt Global

https://global.handelsblatt.com/politics/germans-fear-huge-loss-of-jobs-from-us-tax-reform-865577

You have to go to the link just for the picture.

Tim at large said...

It would seem that our exceptionally high corporate tax rate has been a gift to our international competitors all of these years.

Tim at large said...

It’s almost as if Democrats would rather force jobs overseas than give up a talking point on “evil corporations.”

Tim at large said...

You know, if unemployment drops enough, maybe it would be desirable to increase immigration, controlled by democratically established laws, of course.

Michael K said...

It’s almost as if Democrats would rather force jobs overseas than give up a talking point on “evil corporations.”

Tim, it is interesting to see the discipline by the Democrats who won't even talk to Trump lest their plan of impeaching him someday, somehow should be weakened.

The lies about the tax plan are dangerous for them because the people actually working will see the effects and drop out of the Democrats' coalition.

I think they rely on those who don't pay income tax and those whose incomes are not an issue and who are all about social issues like abortion and gay rights.

The "Top and Bottom' coalition.

"Conflicting Edits" is back

Chuck said...

Molly, I'm no Democrat but just off the top of my head, your self-imagined list of bad things about the tax bill is just your own made-up garbage. Without even really researching it, I can tick off a better list:

1. The tax bill is bad because it is yet another (like Obamacare) one-party legislative act outside of regular order in the Congress. Guaranteed to alienate half the country, or more.

2. The tax bill is wildly unpopular, according to most polling.

3. The tax bill blows a huge hole in federal budgeting and grows the federal debt.

4. The Trump Administration claims that the national economy is booming; by all accounts, we are looking at low unemployment and much-improved GDP growth. So is this a good time for tax cut? Why?

5. Trump repeatedly promised during the campaign that he would not cut Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security. Again, and again, he made those promises. Under this tax bill, will Trump keep those promises? The tax bill has already triggered Pay-Go concerns that might require reductions in funding to Medicare right away:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/12/why-trump-wont-be-signing-his-tax-cuts-right-away/548906/

Whe the hell is Trump really going to sign the bill?

Molly, those are just off the top of my head. There are surely many more good and hard questions about the bill. The bill doesn't do a lot for tax simplification, apart from making the personal exemption bigger. Many more people will now not itemize; so perhaps that is simplification. But there is little time to make sure that the bill doesn't have a lot of mistakes, and the IRS will be scrambling to write the new rules.

Aren't those better, harder questions about the tax bill?

donald said...

The peasants are the bottoms, right?

donald said...

Gee Chuck.

We’ll see how it works out pretty quick huh?

Your democrat talking points are noted. Guess for the sake of your all encompassing party you better damned well be right.

True conservatives and Libertarians will be mildly appreciative to Ecstatic, and have faith that lower taxes (And the hope of reduced spending) will improve the economy and by extension the lives of the American people, not to mention all the hangers on throughout the world with no skin in the game aka your people sucking at the public tear.

I sure do hope you have insanely inflated local, state and
property taxes. You deserve it.

Molly said...

Chuck: I was not endorsing these arguments I was cataloging them. Your points 1 and 5 are in my point 1. Your other three are good additions to my list, if I add them continuing my numbering:

8. The process for adopting the bill was flawed.
9. The bill is unpopular (therefore not reflecting the will of the people).
10. In addition to the other flaws in the bill, it is adopted at a bad time, and it would be better to wait for the economy to fall into a recession before acting.

Rusty said...

I think yhis explaines Chuck.
Sorry if it was posted earlier.
“For some of us, it’s not that we changed our position, it’s that we don’t want this administration trying to do important and complicated things it doesn’t understand.”

If he only cut the corpraste tax rate it still would be a great piece of legislation.
And Chuck. FWI The democrats were invited over and over again to provide input to the bill. In the case of Obamacare Pelosi deliberately kept the details secret even from members of her own party not to mention the repubs.
Do you honestly believe the shit you spout or do you honestly believe we're that stupid to believe the shit you spout.

Bruce Hayden said...


1. The tax bill is bad because it is yet another (like Obamacare) one-party legislative act outside of regular order in the Congress. Guaranteed to alienate half the country, or more.

In other words, you want to give the Dems in Congress a heckler's veto, because they were the ones who walked away from the table this time, refusing to participate in the negotiations, as contrasted to Ovamacare, where the Republicans weren't invited. The Democrats repeatedly were this time.

2. The tax bill is wildly unpopular, according to most polling.

No doubt because the pants on fire MSM has been lying through their teeth to the public about what is in the legislation. Wait and see how the polling no goes after the legislation fully kicks in, when most taxpayers will have more take home pay, pay lower taxes, and have an easier time filing their taxes, actually have a job now, etc.

Besides, how the heck does anyone do a decent poll on this anyway, any more? Much of the country doesn't answer the phone any more unless they recognize the incoming number. I know I sure don't. And, no doubt, there is some weak correlation between answering the phone for pollsters and not benefiting from the tax cuts.

3. The tax bill blows a huge hole in federal budgeting and grows the federal debt.

Well, yes, using long discredited static analysis. Which, of course, ignores the stimulative effects of tax cuts. Besides, the huge hole was blown there 8 years ago by the Democrats.

4. The Trump Administration claims that the national economy is booming; by all accounts, we are looking at low unemployment and much-improved GDP growth. So is this a good time for tax cut? Why?

Agreed. Best time would have been when the Democrats enacted their Porkulous spending bill, etc. Massively increasing federal spending at the bottom of the recession, just turned a minor recession into the longest recession since the Great Depression. Much better to have cut taxes then instead. But the Democrats had constituencies to pay off, and control for two years of Congress and the Presidency, so used that to enrich their friends, families, and constituencies. If they had done the responsible thing, and cut taxes instead, the recession would likely have ended within a year or two.

5. Trump repeatedly promised during the campaign that he would not cut Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security. Again, and again, he made those promises. Under this tax bill, will Trump keep those promises? The tax bill has already triggered Pay-Go concerns that might require reductions in funding to Medicare right away

Which, as you note, is why Trump is delaying signing the legislation into law.

Chuck said...

Huh. I guess I didn't realize that saying "Obamacare was a lousy scheme in part because it was a one-party deal" was a Democrat talking point.

And I remember when, "Blowing a huge hole in the budget" was a Republican talking point.

I do remember one good Democrat talking point: "We invited the Republicans to join in work on health care reform, but they refused, in a party-line block."

Chuck said...

I never realized that "Obamacare was deeply flawed because it was a one-party job" was a Democrat talking point.

And I thought, "Blowing a hole in the federal budget and adding to the deficit" was a Republican talking point.

And finally, I do remember at the time of the Obamacare passage, that Dems were saying, "But we invited Republicans! We wanted them to be part of the process! Their party leadership instructed them all to stay away!"

Drago said...

"Jen Rubin Republican" Chuck has found his voice on the tax plan, and it just happens to line up nicely with the left talking points today!

How does that keep hapoening to our lifelong republican?

Darn it! Its so unfortunate!

It's inexplicable!

Drago said...

The mask is really off our "Accidental Leftist" Chuckie today.

And if the Republicans had failed to pass this Tax Bill for which our dem operational ally Chuck has so many criticisms, thw caterwauling from his quarter about Trumps failure to gain consensus would have been deafening.

LLR Chuck: in complete operational alignment with the left.

But only completely.

Drago said...

David Begley
Animal spirits will be unleashed. Expect 4% economic growth. Higher wages. Seven fat years.

Who you going to believe? Crying Chuck Schumer or your own lyin’ eyes?"

And "Cryin' LLR Chuck as well.

This is indeed a dark day for republicans, eh Chuck?

Ill bet you heard that from the "brilliant" Rachel Maddow or the "professional" John Harwood or the "magnificent" obambi.....(anybody discerning a pattern here?.....LOL)

FullMoon said...

Rush addresses LLR and neverTrumpers: (earlier linked by Guild ans unknown)

You sit there from the sidelines and you judge who’s fit and who’s unfit and then if you decide somebody’s unfit, and not because of policy, he’s unfit because of his hair, he’s unfit because of his tweets, he’s unfit because he insults women, he’s unfit because he does personal attacks on Twitter, he’s unfit because he brags, he’s unfit because he hosted Celebrity Apprentice, he’s unfit because of Omarosa, he’s unfit because we don’t like Ivanka, he’s unfit ’cause he shouldn’t a won. It never ends.

Rusty said...

Blogger Chuck said...
I never realized that "Obamacare was deeply flawed because it was a one-party job" was a Democrat talking point.

And I thought, "Blowing a hole in the federal budget and adding to the deficit" was a Republican talking point.

And finally, I do remember at the time of the Obamacare passage, that Dems were saying, "But we invited Republicans! We wanted them to be part of the process! Their party leadership instructed them all to stay away!"


Then you'll also remember that the repubs complained that they weren't being showed the whole plan. Do you even know the difference between piss and rain?

Jim at said...

So far, all the companies he said that he saved jobs (remember that?)... Those companies have continued to lay people off and have made no moves to bring their overseas operations back to the USA. - Vicki

Why must you lie?

Just yesterday, AT&T announced $1,000 bonuses to 200k employees.
Comcast doing the same for 100k employees.
Wells Fargo raising their hourly wages to 15 bucks.
Boeing 300 million in employee bennies, charities and the like.

Those are just the ones off the top of my head. There will be more.

The problem with people like you is you're scared to death this will work. And we'll see growth like we haven't seen in a generation. Jobs WILL come back. People will keep more of their money.

It scares you. And it should.
Because you root for failure.