1. Paul Raises $2.75M in Five Days
I read these articles and, while $3 million is only a fraction of the $15 million a complete chucklehead like Perry has on hand, am amazed at the fact that this figure is composed almost entirely of small donations from individuals rather than major corporations, special interests, etc. It makes one wonder what Paul would be capable of if he were to take on serious financial backers. But then I suppose he wouldn’t be Ron Paul. Unless of course those backers understood and agreed that their support would not equate to political favors in a Paul administration. But then why would they back him…
2. Steve Forbes… I Mean Rick Perry… Unveils New Tax Plan
Perry hits all the high notes of GOP fiscal rhetoric with his new plan. He’s recycling Forbes’flat federal income tax plan with some changes from the 1996 2000 GOP primaries (small wonder, considering Forbes is both advising and now officially backing Perry) and throwing in a Balanced Budget Amendment, entitlement reform, and a limitation on taxation to in-country income only. He also says the corporate income tax would first be lowered to 20%, then temporarily lowered to 5.25% as a short term measure to lure offshore investments back to the US. While I think Perry’s a dead end, this is a smart campaign move. People liked “9-9-9” because it was a slogan that kept things simple. Well, Perry’s making things even simpler with just “20”. That’s one number less than Cain! The one to cinch the nomination will be the first to reach a single digit slogan for their tax reform plan. There isn’t too much about Perry’s plan I hate, and considering it came from Forbes that makes sense. I wish it were an abolition of the current income tax and a replacement with a federal consumption tax but if I have to pick between a plan that has a flat consumption tax coupled with a personal income tax and a corporate income tax and a plan that just has a flat personal income tax and corporate income tax then I think I’ll go with the latter. The fewer and lower the taxes Americans pay the better off we are.
3. Present-Day David Brooks Continues To Wish He Could Go Back In Time and B*tch-Slap 2008 David Brooks
Brooks sees Obama’s obvious play to his base as a losing strategy for re-election, and he’s absolutely right. Even if Obama clings tenaciously to his base, he’s going to alienate independents and conservatives even further (if that’s possible) and wind up with such a narrow share of the general election vote that he’ll make Jimmy Carter look like a rock star.
1) Paul raises crazy money, but fails to articulate his message beyond a few hundred thousand ardent supporters, it seems. Pity, that.
ReplyDelete2) Perry needs to get out so his money can go somewhere else. This idea that the new tax plan would be "optional" and would keep popular deductions makes it a non-starter in my book. What a toolbag. Way to add more complexity to an already messed-up system, jerk.
3) Brooks' main problem is that he still believes Obama is actually a Grand Uniter. Obama, is, in fact, a left-wing nutjob who was mercifully too slow on the gas to get all of his social engineering done before the country woke up and flipped out. At least Brooks is realizing, albeit slowly, that the Obamessiah is on the downslope.
3)
1) I think his base is much broader than cynics give him credit for, but still far too small to materialize in primaries. His problem is that he himself is not terribly articulate or charismatic apart from his no-nonsense style. His message has resonated but he isn't really the vessel to carry it to the next level. It's going to be up to the folks in our generation to step up and grab the torch from him and put a libertarian in the White House.
ReplyDelete2) Yes, I'm getting pretty damn frustrated myself with the amount of political capital being squandered on more half-measures. I'd like Perry's plan a lot better if it did, as you and I both said, scrap the existing tax code in its entirety. The leftists are far too effective, however, in the class warfare aspersions. It's going to take the candidates looking the pundits in the face and saying in no uncertain terms about radical tax reform (particularly a regressive reform like the flat tax) "Do you think Americans would rather have jobs and financial security or just punish rich people?" It seems to me the leftists would rather do the latter and gin up the middle and lower class to do the same as a convenient distraction. OWS is a prime example of that. Wow, digression.....