Archive for the ‘politics’ Category

No winners + No Originality + No Transparency = No Credibility for No Labels

Posted: December 14, 2010 by datechguy in elections, internet/free speech, opinion/news, politics
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

On Morning Joe they are pushing the whole No Labels story but Ann Althouse was not impressed

Every couple of months we get something like this, don’t we? It’s the “Coffee Party” all over again — isn’t it? — an attempt by elite Democrats to create the impression of a grass-roots movement. It never works. [Remember “One Nation”?] And “No Labels” is such a silly… uh… label. It has a certain nostalgic 60s vibe: I ain’t lookin’ to… analyze you, categorize you, finalize you or advertise you…. But I came from the 60s, and I’m sick of that vibe when it’s used to advertise to me.

Well its a new moment I’m sure it is not unoriginal is it. Well Nice Deb says not so much:

NL: We are frustrated and concerned about the tone of politics.

CP: Critical policy discussions are subjected to a perpetual cacophony of misinformation designed to breed cultural resentment.

NL: We are passionate about addressing America’s challenges.

CP: We believe that by talking and learning together – we can take action to solve the problems facing our nation

NL: We are Democrats, Republicans and Independents.

CP: …we are non-partisan

NL: We believe hyper-partisanship is destroying our politics and paralyzing our ability to govern.

CP: The ugliness on television, on talk radio, and on blogs and conspiracy emails is alienating to the vast majority of Americans.

Hey it’s just a coincidence, I’m sure they aren’t stealing logos or anything from other organizations. Gateway Pundit:

The RINO-Leftist group “No Labels” completely stole their logo-design from a New York website “More Party Animals.”

Don’t worry Ben Smith has it covered:

No Labels designer Dave Warren, a Madison Avenue vet whose firm is FLY Communications, said the similarity is just a clip-art driven coincidence:

Well this is a new group and it is all about doing things the right way so I’m sure they are very public about their sources of funding…or maybe not Says Salon:

No Labels, the new centrist pro-“common sense” advocacy group that launched at a high-profile New York conference today, will not be revealing to the public who is putting up the money for the effort.

Salon asked No Labels spokesman Adam Segal if the nonprofit group, which has reportedly raised at least $1 million so far, would reveal the sources of its funding now or in the future. Segal declined to comment on the record. That $1 million has already paid for the big conference at Columbia today, a flashy website, a new logo, and a P.R. guy. The Wall Street Journal did report the names of three wealthy donors last month (more on this below), but it’s unknown how much they gave and who else is involved.

No Labels is organized as a 501(c)(4), which means that it is not legally required to release the identities of donors. You may remember that designation from the midterm elections, when similarly organized groups spent millions of anonymously donated dollars on campaign ads.

You mean the same folks who derided the hidden money in politics is hiding something? Amazing! Well politico mentions who is involved:

And its speakers—who ranged from Republican moderates like ex-Virginia Rep. Tom Davis to liberal Democrats like New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand—sang the praises of cooperation and compromise.

But the only Republicans present at Columbia University’s modern, square Alfred Lerner Hall seemed to be those who had recently lost primary races, such as South Carolina Rep. Bob Inglis and Delaware Rep. Mike Castle, or former Republicans like Florida Gov. Charlie Crist and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. No other senior elected Republican officials were in attendance,

All of these people are folks who lost and are part of the establishment, it’s as bi-partisan as I am (and I’m NOT), so what is it all about? Stacy McCain who writes for money and doesn’t pretend otherwise has the answer:

All of which is to say that this is an outright scam, and the only question you really need to ask about this kind of political hustle is: Cui bono?

Who benefits here? What’s the bottom line? Where’s the payoff, who’s paying and who’s getting paid? Before we identify the sow, let’s see which piglets are sucking the teats:

It’s something of an odd conceit, given the decentralized way powerful grass-roots movements generally come together these days. After all, MoveOn.org and the Tea Party groups sprang up organically and in a decentralized way, embraced by angry citizens circulating online petitions and holding rallies.
By contrast, No Labels was created by two Washington consultants, the Democratic fund-raiser Nancy Jacobson and the Republican image-shaper Mark McKinnon, and its slick opening event featured throngs of journalists, free boxed lunches and a song written for the occasion by the pop sensation Akon.

Ding! Ding! Ding! This scam is funded by Democratic money and scripted by the man whose name is a synonym for everything that’s wrong with the Republican Party.

So this No Labels operation is a stealth-Democrat ripoff perpetrated with the help of two-faced RINO backstabbers.

Or to put it another way, it is an attempt by consultants to stay relevant and keep making money and stay relevant because if the actual grass-roots are put in play, then their ability to suck money off of taxpayer dime is kaput!

I make my living selling myself and my radio show. When people buy from me they meet me and know exactly what they are getting. These people are selling a wisp of smoke that doesn’t really exist.

Will they be able to fool enough people to change elections? Likely not, but they might manage to keep themselves in other people’s money for a while, and that’s what it really is all about. It’s the time share media all over again.

Memeorandum thread here.

Update: Doug Powers at Michelle’s has a new logo for them. Somehow it looks familiar

Mitt Romney bravely follows behind Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin!

Posted: December 14, 2010 by datechguy in elections, politics
Tags: , , , , ,

Last week I had a meeting with a pol who will remain nameless. We talked for a while on a lot of subjects and election 2012 came up.

He is an unabashed backer of Mitt Romney, called him one of the smartest guys he ever met, said he understood economics like few others, and said that during a crisis or an emergency he is at his best. Fantastic at solving problems.

I’ve talked about my meeting with Romney and how unimpressed I was, but this is a fellow whose opinion I respect so I resolved to give Mitt a second look.

My primary objection to Mitt is that he is not a leader and this simply reinforces that impression:

Thus did Mitt cover his ass ahead of the 2011 primaries, where support for the new porkier tax cuts compromise will no doubt be a litmus test for grassroots righties.

and of Course Allahpundit ever ready to hit Palin is forced to make this concession:

I know our resident Palinistas can’t wait to point out that she was leading on this issue while Mitt was holding back until the very day of the Senate vote, so go on. Gloat. You know you wanna.

It’s not a question of “wanna” its a question of fact.

As far as his actual piece it’s here and he does make some good points:

In many cases, lowering taxes can actually increase government revenues. If new businesses, new investments and new hiring are spurred by the prospects of better after-tax returns, the taxes paid by these new or growing businesses and employees can more than make up for the lower rates of taxation. But once again, because the tax deal is temporary, a large portion of this beneficent effect is missing. What some are calling a grand compromise is not grand at all, except in its price tag. The total package will cost nearly $1 trillion, resulting in substantial new borrowing at a time when we are already drowning in red ink.

Part of the tax deal is a temporary reduction in payroll taxes. The president was insistent, however, that only the employee’s payroll taxes be reduced — the portion paid by the employer is to remain the same. Again, the president is looking to get more money into the hands of the consumer to boost near-term spending. But by refusing to lower the cost of hiring a new employee, he fails to encourage what the American people want even more than lower taxes — more good jobs. Like the income tax deal, the payroll tax deal will add to the deficit.

It’s a fair point but with the new congress this can be addressed, I suggest reading it. His points are certainly legit and one can come to that conclusion without being phony but again it is very interesting that he makes his point at the moment when it involves the least risk for him, Palin and Limbaugh have come out against, and there are already senate republicans against but not enough to stop the bill.

Assuming the gentlemen I talked to is correct I suspect Mitt is being over managed. If that is the case I have this advice for the Governor. BE YOURSELF Lead! Get away from your handlers and make your case. You are a man of faith, trust your faith and your God and don’t worry about the occasional mistake, everyone makes them.

There is every possibility that Governor Romney will be the next president, (I’d prefer comer’s or treasury sec) if that is the case then learn to be the best leader you can be.

Why DaTechguy says DaTaxDeal is an excellent political move for the GOP

Posted: December 14, 2010 by datechguy in business, economy, opinion/news, politics
Tags: , , , ,

It’s not often that I disagree with Rush Limbaugh AND Sarah Palin but it is my opinion that the Obama Tax deal is an excellent deal for the GOP and the right, particularly on the political side.

1. The two-year tax cut deal as I’ve already said gives us the ability to constantly bring up a vote to make the tax cuts permanent and put Senate Democrats and the president on the spot again and again and again. (If it passes we get credit, if it fails it becomes a political issue for 2012)

2. Democrats, by extending unemployment save the republicans the tough issue of refusing to extend them. As for paying for it, there is nothing to stop congressional republicans from allocating tarp funds etc to pay for said benefits AFTER Jan 3rd. Also by not including or demanding additional benefits for the 99 week guys it takes it off the table (even liberal democrats didn’t want this extra spending).

3. The individual pork pieces in the bill can be attacked by individual bills during the next session, forcing the left to defending them. Each time the left defends said pork, it becomes an issue for 2012.

4. Thanks to Bernie Sanders filibuster an actual unapologetic socialist is now the iconic image of the left…

4a. …And of course it shows the intransigence of the whole bunch of them in attempting to block this, making the lie over the “compromise” issue. This firmly establishes the idea of democrats unwilling to compromise, (particularly to those who have voted for them in the past whose unemployment benefits are on the line) that we can play up over and over again in the next session. It will be an excellent counter to the media goes that will try to make GOP intransigence an issue. We will answer: “Oh it’s the democrats being just as uncompromising as there were with the president in December.” It shatters the media’s template built carefully over decades.

5. And finally I’d rather have the actual tax rate in place than to simply have a football to kick democrats with. Why give the economy a hit when we don’t have to.

Ted Kennedy was always smart enough to take a piece of what he wanted and then amend it over time. We may have disagreed with Sen Kennedy over issues but tactically we should be just as smart.

Dan Riehl notes the GOP is doing its best to shoot itself in the foot

Posted: December 13, 2010 by datechguy in politics
Tags: , ,

The GOP’s chairman Michael Steele has been hit or miss since being in office but in the end he was the boss when the GOP managed to win a historic number of seats:

(Granted he had little to do with it but he didn’t mess it up either)

According to the latest report Steele is going to give it another go:

Controversial Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele, who last month presided over the GOP’s biggest electoral gains since 1938, will announce tonight that he is running for re-election, Fox News has learned from two RNC members.

One earlier report suggested he was not running and apparently the establishment GOP has a real winner on deck as my scheduled guest for Saturday Dan Riehl explains:

Unfortunately, the establishment-backed candidate to presumably replace current RNC Chair Michael Steele, Maria Cino, opted out of a recent grassroots-focused political event for the candidates. The FreedomWorks and conservative caucus sponsored event was reported on at Big Government on November 2nd. Chris Stirewalt pointed out her absence as well, via FoxNews.

Worse, Stirewalt’s item is primarily focused on how establishment money is driving the race behind the scenes and Cino’s Mary Matalin-hosted fund raiser tonight is only one of Cino’s links to it. Her lobbying for Obamacare on behalf of Pfizer and a $1,000 donation to Mike Castle during Delaware’s contentious GOP primary may prove to be deal breakers for members of the GOP grassroots hoping that the GOP might turn the page on the same old, same old way of doing business in Washington that brought us Obamacare and has left America with staggering debt.

Just what the GOP needs a person who ignores the Tea party grassroots and lobbied for Obamacare.

This is exactly what Scarborough was talking about today. I have a nasty feeling that the GOP establishment will attempt to play the race card to advance a candidate that simply doesn’t go for conservatism.

They won’t like the pro-abortion connection either, that’s a deal-breaker with me.

Older Entries
Newer Entries