TPMDC Morning Roundup
Michael Steele: I Am Pro-Life
Michael Steele is sharply walking back a statement in his GQ interview that seemed to indicate he agreed abortion is an individual choice, and that it should be left to the states. "I support our platform and its call for a Human Life Amendment," said Steele. "It is important that we stand up for the defenseless and that we continue to work to change the hearts and minds of our fellow countrymen so that we can welcome all children and protect them under the law."
Obama And Biden Addressing Stimulus Implementation Today
President Obama and Vice President Biden are both speaking at the Recovery Act Implementation Conference, held at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building at 11 a.m. ET. At 1:10 p.m. ET, Obama will speak at the dedication of Abraham Lincoln Hall at the National Defense University. At 2:30 p.m. ET, Obama and Biden will be meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi. President Obama will be speaking to the Business Roundtable at 4 p.m., and then he and Biden will meet with Hillary Clinton at 5:15 p.m. ET.
Geithner To Defend Obama Budget In Senate Committee
Tim Geithner will be speaking at 10 a.m. ET before the Senate Budget Committee, promoting President Obama's plan. Geithner is expected to get tough questions on several topics, most notably Obama's proposal to restrict deductions for top-earners.
Rove Blasts White House For Attacking Limbaugh
In his latest Wall St. Journal column, Karl Rove lambastes the Obama White House for attacking Rush Limbaugh. "In the face of our enormous economic challenges, top White House aides decided to pee on Mr. Limbaugh's leg," writes Rove. "This is a political luxury the country cannot afford, and which Mr. Obama would be wise to forbid. Or did he not mean it when he ran promising to "turn the page" on the "old" politics?"
New DNC Slogan: "Americans Didn't Vote For A Rush To Failure"
The Democratic National Committee will be rolling out a new slogan today: "Americans didn't vote for a Rush to failure." The slogan was the winner of an online contest, and will be displayed on a billboard in Limbaugh's hometown of West Palm Beach, Florida.
TSA Reviewing Vitter's Alleged Airport Rage Incident
The Transportation Security Administration is reviewing the reported airport rage incident by Sen. David Vitter (R-LA). Vitter has admitted that he opened the gateway door to his plane after it had been closed, and that he had a "conversation" with an airline employee, but denies it having been the angry confrontation reported by Roll Call.
Lieberman: I'm Supporting Dodd's Re-Election
Joe Lieberman told The Hill that he is supporting Chris Dodd's re-election campaign, and has gotten over his disappointment at Dodd's active campaigning for Ned Lamont in the 2006 general election. "We have a long relationship that goes back 40 years," said Lieberman. "That's over. I'm going forward."
Poll: Corzine Trails By Nine In New Jersey
A new Quinnipiac poll shows Gov. Jon Corzine (D-NJ) trailing former U.S. Attorney Chris Christie for this November's election, the likely Republican nominee, by a margin of 46%-37%. Democrats normally have the edge in New Jersey, but Corzine's numbers are currently dragged down with an approval rating of only 40%, and disapproval of 50% -- though on the other hand, Christie has yet to face the inevitable political attacks that he was a Bush Administration appointee.
Josh
Elana
Matt
Eric
This is major news on healthcare. A study paid for buy big business points out that our healthcare system is totally f*cked up and needs to be fixed to help american businesses and the economy.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090312/ap_on_he_me/health_value_gap
Finally, they woke up. It only took 15 years.
March 12, 2009 9:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Chris Matthews-Ari Fleischer Take Over From Jon Stewart-Jim Cramer
http://satiricalpolitical.com/?p=6531
March 12, 2009 9:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
"...a wave of energy companies has in the last few months announced plans to move to Switzerland -- mainly for its appeal as a low-tax corporate domicile that looks relatively likely to stay out of reach of Barack Obama's tax-seeking administration."
That's change we can believe in!
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssEnergyNews/idUSL312427120090312?feedType=RSS&feedName=rbssEnergyNews&rpc=22
March 12, 2009 9:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, wow, these are some big name companies:
Over the past six months companies including offshore drilling contractors Noble Corp and Transocean, energy-focused engineering group Foster Wheeler and oilfield services company Weatherfield International have all announced plans to shift domicile to Switzerland.
Gee, I wonder how many people they employ in the us that will wind up getting shipped to switzerland. Two each? Alot of off-shore drilling in switzerland as well with all that coastline. Give me a break. US taxes aren't radically different from other countries for big companies with write-offs. And don't throw up the tax rate, no company pays that anyway based on the write-offs and no companies will be showing a profit this year, other than probably exxon/mobil.
Taxes, taxes, taxes. Any thing else to whine about? That's so 1970's.
March 12, 2009 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dude...again...it's simple. Raise corporate tax rate, corporations leave; lower corporate tax rate, corporations move here.
March 12, 2009 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dude, its not the rate that is the issue. I knew you'd raise it. Luckily corporations aren't that stupid and buy into the bs spewed by lush and co concerning taxes. Their stupid in other respects, but not that one. The effective corporate tax rate is virtually the same throughout the industrialized world, give or take a few points. Also, companies still pay taxes on revenues generated in the us no matter where they are located.
Now, if you really wanted to save taxes, you'd move to let's say chad, but the problem is that the country is so backwards that it wouldn't make any sense to move there and would cost them more in the long run.
March 12, 2009 9:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Of course! It's all so clear now! Its not that corporations exist in a complex financial ecosystem in which tax incentives are but one aspect, its only taxes! Why, with a fine brain like yours SFW, you could rule the business world! Clearly the puny piddlings of economists who have dedicated their lives to the study of such systems are no match for your intellectual bodacity!
March 12, 2009 10:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Next time you don't want to actually discuss an issue fell free to share your "puny piddlings" with someone else.
March 12, 2009 10:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
A Republican offering economic expertise.
Hilarious.
March 12, 2009 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
From Noble Corporation's own website. I guess W was too much of a socialist for them also as it seems they were not incorporated here in the US to begin with:
March 12, 2009 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, that's priceless.
March 12, 2009 9:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
So they are trying to run and hide from paying their taxes - the Cayman Island tax shelter is no longer safe.
March 12, 2009 9:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually they are moving to the location that makes the most business sense (which is kind of the point of running a business) Daschel, Guitner, Rangle et al were running and hiding from paying their taxes...
March 12, 2009 10:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder who's fighting so hard to keep the Swiss bank accounts secret.
March 12, 2009 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Guilty!
March 12, 2009 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
...and if the corporate tax rate in the US were 1% lower than Switzerland I wonder where they'd all be moving?
March 12, 2009 9:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Answer: Nowhere over 1%. That's silly, the costs associated with the move and the costs associated with travel to your main market, numerous hassles, and many problems associated with moving an indigenous company to a foreign land makes no sense over 1%.
March 12, 2009 10:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Poor Wally getting dumber by the day. Anything to distract from the Steele/GOP meltdown. Pass the popcorn, I love it!
March 12, 2009 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Apparently the same thing about Transocean - another company from the article. Maybe you need to start protesting on some Cayman Island message boards. I guess you can "go Galt" on them.
March 12, 2009 9:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why does everyone keep avoiding the main point? Would it be better (and in the end lead to more revenue)for corporations to locate here because of the corporate tax rates or for them to run around the world looking for a better deal?
March 12, 2009 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
As noted above, they can "run around" looking for a better deal, but they aren't going to find one worth moving for amongst the industrialized nations.
If you want to move to Somalia or Liberia, go right ahead. No corporate tax, or much of an organized government of any sort. A faux-libertarian's dream. Bye!
March 12, 2009 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let's see the corporate tax rate in the US is higher than Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France,Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland. I do believe those all qualify as "industrialized."
March 12, 2009 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Give it up. You keep ignoring the point. The rate isn't the issue. US corporations probably pay less in taxes than in the countries you listed. It's how much they pay, not the rate. See below post from SchrodingersCat.
Fox entertainment hasn't paid any us taxes for over 5 years??? Comeon, try something new. The Tax rate isn't the issue.
March 12, 2009 10:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Give it up. You keep ignoring the point."
Sarge is an intractable ideologue. He ignores your point because to acknowledge the simple truth at any level would shatter any legitimacy ascribed to that ideology. These are all-or-nothing people, who would see it all collapse if they have to share it with someone they disapprove of or disagree with.
Any concession to truth would create an identity crisis for him. So he makes his own truth(s) as if the rules can change with his opinion.
...but, it's OK if you're a Republican.
Kind of like "If the President does it, it is NOT illegal."
March 12, 2009 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here you go. Maybe us companies should move to france? Other than france, the us's effective rate is lower and the difference is really insignificant. Next time you call into lush's show, why don't you give him the facts and see what he does.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200902030003
Get on the healthcare bandwagon and tell us the gop plan for healthcare. Let's argue about that.
March 12, 2009 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
You know it's just not that simple. Unless you're talking about effective tax rates it doesn't mean crap.
From a 2005 CBO report:
March 12, 2009 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
"...high statutory tax rates encourage U.S. corporations to structure their investments with an eye to tax efficiency. For example, high corporate tax rates encourage increased usage of debt finance and discourage sale of appreciated corporate assets and repatriation of foreign subsidiary profits. As a result of these types of behavioral responses, the experience in OECD countries is that corporate income tax revenue does not rise in proportion to increases in the statutory tax rate."
http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/features.nsf/Articles/FE9DCA58402875D7852573680064DA50?OpenDocument
March 12, 2009 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Huh? Comeon, you are completely ignoring all the posts and issues and keep saying the same thing that has been debunked.
March 12, 2009 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Uh, just because you say "no it's not" doesn't "debunk" a claim. "...the experience in OECD countries is that corporate income tax revenue does not rise in proportion to increases in the statutory tax rate..." I don't see anything "debunking" that.
March 12, 2009 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Did you read the media matters link on effective rates? Or are you just ignoring it. This has been completely debunked and is a bullshit republican talking point.
Incidentally, I am in total favor of reducing the rate and getting rid of the write-offs. If a corporation can't pay 20% of gross, or even 10% of gross in taxes, then it shouldn't be in business anyway.
March 12, 2009 11:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I treat Media Matters like you treat FoxNews.
March 12, 2009 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, how about this link then:
http://doingbusiness.org/documents/Paying_Taxes_2009.pdf#page=23
Facts are facts.
March 12, 2009 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, using your figures the list is reduced by 4,
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Great Britain, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland are still lower.
March 12, 2009 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
No they aren't. You must have looked at the wrong chart. I just started to check and alot of those countries are higher than the us. The point is that the differences aren't that material anyway and all the industrialized countries are right in the same ballpark.
Not alot of space in luxembourg and monaco by the way to have all us corporations move there to save on taxes. Real estate prices would go through the roof.
March 12, 2009 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
The only chart that shows any of those countries coming close to the US are the ones including labor taxes. If you are headquarted in those countries, the only labor taxes you pay is on the emplyees in that country.
March 12, 2009 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know what you are reading, but that isn't accurate. I'm not going to go through each of the countries, but portugal pays more for example and their infrastructure is not great by any means.
Isreal? You can't be serious with that one. The tiny principalities would never fly for major corporations obviously.
You still keep ignoring the fact that the difference is not material among major industrialized countries, where you would want to headquarter a major corporation. Throw in transportation, moving and local costs and there is no savings. That's the point.
March 12, 2009 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why? Does Media Matters have a bunch of stories on their web page about strippers and/or sex?
March 12, 2009 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not sure what you're refering to, here are the 3 headlines on FNC.com:
Bernie Behind Bars
URGENT: Judge revokes Madoff bail, sending him to jail; disgraced financier's sentencing set for
Survey: Obama Failing on Economy
Majority of economists recently polled are dissatisfied with Obama's economic policies
Ayers Accused in 1970 Bombing
March 12, 2009 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I just looked, because I couldn't believe it. Here are some of the gems on the front page:
Sexy in any language.
Two idol finalists get offed.
Phoenix attacks concertgoer.
This year's idol ringer.
Jess' daisy dukes diet.
Katie's Unbe-weave-able.
Heartbreak in anchorage.
French fashion freaks.
Be a bombshell brunette.
Etc., etc., etc.
Fox entertainment at its finest.
March 12, 2009 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dude, that's the "Features & Faces" section below the Market report, that is below the headlines section. It is just above the "Lose you belly fat" ad though. Try not to be too disingenuous.
March 12, 2009 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's on the front page isn't it? How is that disingenuous? Look at CNN's, which I can't stand, and they don't have that crap taking up 1/2 the home page.
March 12, 2009 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Puhleeze.....this is typical:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/03/the-porn-of-fox.html
March 12, 2009 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
We are not. There are many issues that come into play other than taxes. Businesses are usually concerned about the money going out the door as opposed to what alleged rate they are supposed to pay in taxes. If your transportation and other costs go through the roof and are 3 times a 1% savings in taxes, why on earth would you move?
Taxes at this stage really are a non-issue. Healthcare is ten times more of a problem, that's why detroit moved plants to canada, because of healthcare costs. That's why american companies move over seas. That's why american products aren't competitive. See above link. Healthcare costs are a major fundamental problem that needs to be addressed. What's the gop plan on healthcare? Taxes are a bunch of hot air.
March 12, 2009 10:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
You are correct on that part, tax rates are only part of the costs of doing business in the US. Y'all's goal of unionizing the countries workforce would be the final nail in the coffin.
March 12, 2009 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
You know, most manufacturing is overseas already now and the us is a "service economy" right? So how could unionization cause service industries to go overseas? They need to provide the services here, so they can't move overseas.
I don't think unionization is the problem. Other costs, including healthcare, are the problem.
Another red herring.
March 12, 2009 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
From a survey of the 275 Fortune 500 companies that made profits from 2001-2003:
Wow. Companies that paid no taxes got a rebate. That kind of sounds like wealth re-distribution to me. Guess that made the Republican administration socialists?
March 12, 2009 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
I know y'all consider it semantics but a "rebate" is a return of over paid taxes (not redistribution) a "tax credit" is money given that was never yours to begin with (redistribution).
March 12, 2009 10:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think you need to read that again. Their tax rate was not "zero", it was "negative":
March 12, 2009 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
A return of overpaid taxes would be a "refund." A "rebate" means a retroactive temporary reduction in your taxes paid back in a lump sum.
Okay, that's not really true. Actually "rebate" means a check from the government that doesn't have a damn thing to with your particular taxes that they keep sending out hoping you'll spend it even though you always just use it to pay down old credit card bills.
"Rebate" also means "marketing gimmick used by car companies to make what amounts to a reduction in the sticker price seem like a bigger deal than it really is."
March 12, 2009 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
"A rebate is an amount paid by way of reduction, return, or refund on what has already been paid or contributed."
That's why when you do your taxes in years that a "rebate" check was sent out, it has you deduct it from your next "refund."
March 12, 2009 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
You can call it "a gift from the tooth-fairy" AFAIC....it doesn't change the fact that they had a negative tax-rate.
March 12, 2009 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's you who isn't getting the point.
What's the point of boosting your revenue 1% if your costs go up 300%? 500%? 2000%?
As numerous writers have explained to you, go ahead and move your company to Chad and pay 0% corporate taxes. And enjoy spending the hundreds of millions of dollar you'll drop annually on employing a private army to protect your assets. Never mind the relocation costs, finding an appropriately skilled labor force, relearning the political system, rebuilding your entire supply chain, doling out bribes.. The list goes on and on...
There are myriad reasons corporations want to work in this country, and reasonable corporate taxes are only one part of it.
That's the point YOU keep avoiding.
I disagree with some of the other posters though -- given that you want to assume away all of the real world complications that get in the way of a simplistic and ideologically-driven theory you want to push, you'd make an excellent economist.
March 12, 2009 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
And what you keep avoiding is that you don't need to move to Chad or Sudan to get a better deal.
March 12, 2009 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah you do:
http://doingbusiness.org/documents/Paying_Taxes_2009.pdf#page=23
Chinese businesses even pay more in taxes than us companies. Where you going to go?
March 12, 2009 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Great Britain, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland
March 12, 2009 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Or physicist. "Assume the cow is a sphere...."
March 12, 2009 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
SFCWallace, does the 'F' stand for 'Fail?'
March 12, 2009 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sarge is so anti-American, suggesting that a few dollars in tax savings would be enough to make him leave the country.
Pretty shallow patriotism, like all the off-shore book-cookers who claim to be solid patriots but abandon their country for a few dollars more.
Just what is money worth, that supposed "patriots" hold it in such a higher esteem than their own national loyalty.
Here's a former GI who would apparently fight and die for his country as a soldier, but would gladly abandon it for a little more corporate profit.
These Republicans are very selective with their patriotism. When it involves money, forget that loyalty oaths and patriotic music, it's every corporation for themselves.
March 12, 2009 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're close...well except for everything you wroet between "Sagre" and "themselves." If you read any of the posts you'd realize we were talking about the benefits of raising or lowering the corporate tax rates and whether that would bring corporations here or chase them away...but hey, go ahead and spark up another one and rail against the machine.
March 12, 2009 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think dodd just got the kiss of death from traitor joe. Now that is one person I wouldn't want supporting me if I was running for reelection for a state-wide office in connecticut.
March 12, 2009 9:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think alot of incumbents are going to have some uncomfortable moments next year. Dodd in particular has reached the lowpoint of his popularity in CT, and a primary challenge could be possible. Such an idea would have been unthinkable as recently as 6 months ago.
March 12, 2009 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
In other news Jim Cramer is scheduled for the Daily Show today.
Hey Jim - ever hear of Tucker Carlson?
March 12, 2009 10:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
If I were both of them I'd get that strange awkward feeling as soon as I step onto that stage. Although, I'm sure they'll speak in the back a bit ahead of time to break the ice unless Kramer gets there late or something.
March 12, 2009 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Cramer is actually a pretty funny good natured guy. I bet for all the fury it's going to be a pretty good discussion. Stewart generally asks damn good questions and I doubt Cramer is the type to duck them.
Must see TV indeed
March 12, 2009 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. I actually think cramer feels bad about the bear stearns stuff. He has an easy out on it. How could he know what they were hiding? I actually think it will be very interesting.
March 12, 2009 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Stewart's point wasn't so much about Cramer, but more the fawning, non-objectivity that passes for business journalism.
It would be great if they would discuss that tonight.
March 12, 2009 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Beg to disagree, guys. Beneath the buffoonery, there is a lot of information out there from which one could conclude that Cramer is not a good guy. There Among other things, there are rather substantive looking allegations that Cramer profitted by of using naked short sells and insider trading on knowledge of upcoming negative analyst ratings or news items--many of which he or his pals helped to create by feeding false rumors to the analysts and reporters--to beat down a company's stock price.
March 12, 2009 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Could we give Steele a rest for awhile? Especially while Burris is still in the Dem caucus? All the Steele reporting is starting to feel like piling-on to me, the guy's foibles are sad, not that interesting nor relevant to the larger issues at hand... plus we are going to have our own crow to eat when the Illinois AG finishes his investigation of Burris. There's plenty of meatier stuff more worthy of TPM's commentary talents.
March 12, 2009 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Poor little Republicans... boo hoo hoo.
Wasn't it George Allen who wanted to "kick their soft teeth down their whiney throats?"
So we have an ongoing discussions and lots of comments about one of their own spotlighted clowns, and it is piling on?
Give me a break. This is not piling on, it is public discourse of the highest order.
And no one here is anywhere near to threatening kicking teeth down throats. We may be snarky and sometimes callous, but we aren't cruel.
So please, don't try to turn our discourse into something it isn't. You want "piling on" go to one of those wingnut sites these days, and you will see what the term really means.
It is hard to find even one of them that does not already put the words "failure" and "Obama" close together on the same page at every opportunity.
And it hasn't even been 100 days.
Obstructionism for it's own sake will do nothing to bring the Republicans back from the Bush country where they are being driven. Until they decide to share their nation with their fellow citizens they will continue to marginalize themselves.
March 12, 2009 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Or did he not mean it when he ran promising to "turn the page" on the "old" politics?"
NO ONE more than Rove is hoping against hope that Obama will ignore the past.
To suggest that responding to The Lump's public criticism is a task of such immense proportions that it stifles the more important projects of governance, is another Rove-Red Herring, and there is no doubt Rove wants to start a public argument about leaving the past behind and moving on.
Wouldn't that be progressive?
So, to save his own mangy hide, Rove becomes a closet Progressive? Sounds about right.
March 12, 2009 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Funny how Rove found time to do the same things he now accuses Obama of doing and Rove did it during a time of war. I seem to recall Limbaugh starting this by saying he wanted to Obama to fail
March 12, 2009 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mr. Kurtz understands that Steele being a "people pleaser" not only indicates someone who is phony but is also a huge manipulator telling people what he thinks they want to hear in order to get them to follow him. It may be unintentional to a degree but it is dishonest and indicates one that cannot be trusted. Character???...What character?
March 12, 2009 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rush and Rove...the cheerleader and the operative.
Rove's secrets are murderous and until recently he felt he was untouchable. But understand there is nothing this man would "not" do. What he deserves is far beyond criticism.
March 12, 2009 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Blackwell...Fuck your bible. It has nothing to do with reality. It is fantasy and make believe that someone sucked you into buying when you were so desperate for safety and security. Values and morality are not dependent on anything other than human nature and understanding. Once upon a time...eh Blackwell and you said yes...yes...yes.
"Needs to read his Bible" is the stupidest thing to say...It takes a brave person to stand up and refuse the big lie. Most are too afraid of the boogie man.
March 12, 2009 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
In other news [above]
Who on earth thought up this stupid scheme? A total waste of Democratic money.
March 12, 2009 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree, but I didn't want to get in the way of Dems doing something stupid...
March 12, 2009 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink