DOWNLOAD (45)

PLAY (94)

Joan Walsh and Peter Beinart do a pretty good job here of tag teaming Nancy Pfotenhauer on her punishing the rich talking point. It was nice to watch a panel where they didn't let her talk over everyone the entire time as she likes to do if they let her.

HUGHLEY: Nancy, what do you think? Is he a communist?

PFOTENHAUER: I heard communist and socialist thrown around, and they are two different things. If you want to talk about communism, that's more "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." So it would be more the redistribution of wealth aspect.

I do think his tax the rich thing is punishing prosperity, which is an antithetical to the American dream, and completely ignores the fact that the top five percent of the earners in this country, they do earn about 36 percent of the income. They pay about 60 percent of the income tax, and the bottom 40 percent pay zero. So I'm not sure that's the way he should be going. So that would speak to the redistribution act.

WALSH: But why is it --

PFOTENHAUER: Excuse me?

BEINART: Sorry, go ahead.

HUGHLEY: We just turned into Jerry Springer. Who is going to say -- Joan, what were you saying? You were about to say something.

WALSH: I think that we have had a situation. We are not punishing the rich. Let's be honest. In this country, we have a game that is rigged. If you're born wealthy, you stay wealthy. It's very hard to climb out of the middle class into wealth.

It's still possible. It's a great country. We provide a lot of opportunity. But the rich are finally about to pay their fair share, and Obama, finally a president did what he promised to do. He gave a tax cut to 95 percent of the country. And if you're lucky enough to be in the top five percent who will pay a little bit more, well, you're a lucky person to start with and you should be paying more.

(CROSSTALK)

BEINART: What happens is Republicans always play this game, Republicans always play this game when they start talking about taxes. They start talking about taxes, and then they add the word "income taxes."

PFOTENHAUER: I will talk about payroll.

BEINART: Payroll taxes are much more regressive. They fall much more aggressively on poor people. So do sales tax. So Republicans always talk about income taxes are so weighted against the rich. That is actually the most progressive part of our taxes.

PFOTENHAUER: Let me talk then, particularly, to payroll taxes. When you include payroll taxes with income taxes, the numbers do drop, but not demonstrably.

So you can look at it. You still see the top earners paying the lion's share of both the income and the payroll taxes, and you see the prime earners -- I'm not arguing for anybody to pay more taxes. In a recession, no one's taxes should be raised.

Since President Obama is not talking about raising anyone's taxes other than the upper earners I don't think Nancy is really too worried about everyone's taxes. Just the types she used to lobby for. Just a hunch.

Full transcript to follow.

Continue reading »

D.L. Hughley talks to Peter Beinart and Bay Buchanan about Bush's exit speech, the future of the Republican party and the spinelessness of Harry Reid. Bay Buchanan as usual has about as little introspection as George Bush. I commend Hughley for managing to get through a segment with her and not allowing her to talk over everyone the entire time. Hughley is spot on with what's wrong with Harry Reid and the Democratic establishment. I think Hughley is also right about Obama in the sense that he's already showing himself to be more of a leader than Bush ever was, but that's a pretty low bar to hurdle. It goes without saying that the higher bar will be whether he can clean up the mess he's inherited.

Empirically speaking, Barack Obama possesses a special kind of charisma that inspires and uplifts people, as evidenced by the talk of an Obama baby boom due to the euphoria surrounding his election. What I don't get is the diametrically opposite reaction that the Clintons, both separately and together, seem to evoke in The Villagers. Chris Matthews' obsession is long documented, and there's no one better to get your unhinged, irrational Clinton hatred on with than the drink-soaked popinjay Christopher Hitchens.

Let's keep score, shall we? Hitch is the guy that has been cheerleading the Iraq invasion and occupation (still does, as you can see from the video). Cheering arguably the biggest blunder of foreign policy we've ever committed and one that most people understand to be an epic fail. And he's on to criticize Bill Clinton--who will NOT be a member of Obama's cabinet--and while highly imperfect, did manage to lead the country to a prosperity and global status that we can only distantly and fondly remember. Why? Doesn't his continued support of our actions in Iraq speak for his judgment and grasp on reality?

And can I just object right here and now to the misogynistic and patronizing framing? Apparently the meme is that Hillary is too ambitious and self-serving to actually serve Obama's agenda. Based on what? Running a bare knuckle campaign? I don't think that if his primary rival had been a man that this would come up at all. The media was falling all over itself to talk about how cordial the meeting between Obama and McCain was yesterday. And what does it imply about Obama's strength that the assumption is that Hillary would railroad him (presumably with Bill, because to hear the media talk, you'd assume they were some sort of Machiavellian conjoined twins)? It's completely insulting on many levels.

The back-stabbing Bill and Hillary meme (one entirely conceived by GOP strategists, dutifully regurgitated in the media and swallowed sadly all-too-often by otherwise smart liberals) has gotten so out of hand that as Eric Boehlert reports for Media Matters, Fox News is already openly contemplating how Obama needs to fire her. For a job that (as of this writing) she has not been announced for and that does not take effect for another two months. Strike anyone else as premature?