did Paul Ryan just admit that torture doesn't work? That's gotta honk off the Republican establishment.

In Ryan's defense though. The budget is this insanely complicated thing. He's absolutely correct that you can't just give a few sound bites that adequately summarizes things up. We live in a complex world, you can't reduce lots of things into sound bites that will satisfy the armchair politicians

How much do US citizens owe in taxes every year? How much would 20% of that be? That's the saving's to the American people. Are you going to save that much by "closing loopholes"?

It's actually a dumb platform if you think about it. Is the 20% tax reduction before or after you close the loop-holes? I would presume after, meaning it's a 20% reduction in the obligation, not in what people actually pay. So first we have to know how much US citizens SHOULD be paying in taxes to know what the 20% is 20% of. In other words, first we have to know WHAT ALL the loopholes are, before we can calculate how much we can save. Do they really know? I doubt it.

The whole thing is fiscal unicorns and pixie-dust. Of course he doesn't want to talk about "specifics".

Looks like Fox is preparing for when it has to say "Look these candidates sucked, we need better ones!"

Pretty interesting how this election is going to affect the Republican party going forward.

It does feel like they are trying to distance themselves from Romney's stank, but they are also playing up Romney as an underdog victim of a liberal media. I've never known FOX to throw in the towel, so this must be part of some bigger strategy. October surprise?
>> ^Yogi:

Looks like Fox is preparing for when it has to say "Look these candidates sucked, we need better ones!"
Pretty interesting how this election is going to affect the Republican party going forward.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

It does feel like they are trying to distance themselves from Romney's stank, but they are also playing up Romney as an underdog victim of a liberal media. I've never known FOX to throw in the towel, so this must be part of some bigger strategy. October surprise?
>> ^Yogi:
Looks like Fox is preparing for when it has to say "Look these candidates sucked, we need better ones!"
Pretty interesting how this election is going to affect the Republican party going forward.



It seems to me that Fox would play the long game. They're not gonna put too many chips anywhere, they're here for keeps.

Wallace didn't ask for all the details. He just asked ballpark how much the 20% comes out to without reference to the loopholes. If Ryan can confidently say that with the loopholes closed it's revenue neutral, then he must be able to say the amounts on each side.

Also, if it's revenue neutral, that means on average, Romney/Ryan are promising precisely nothing except uncertainty about whether you'll go up or down.>> ^VoodooV:

did Paul Ryan just admit that torture doesn't work? That's gotta honk off the Republican establishment.
In Ryan's defense though. The budget is this insanely complicated thing. He's absolutely correct that you can't just give a few sound bites that adequately summarizes things up. We live in a complex world, you can't reduce lots of things into sound bites that will satisfy the armchair politicians

Shut up, Cenk.

Jeez, Cenk looks and sounds as if he's on something. He really needs to stop, because his delivery is becoming more ranty and annoying by the day

They never explain how giving the ultra rich even more tax breaks will create jobs. It hasn't yet... The rich have never been richer, corporate profits are up to record levels, still none of them are creating jobs. The income of the rich and corporate profits have outpaced inflation, middle class income has barely kept up or fallen below depending on how one defines middle income, and the poor's purchasing power has tanked. Yet somehow the right says the rich need more tax breaks and everything will turn around? Why would it? How is increasing their personal income going to create more jobs? Because they'll suddenly feel more generous than they have so far? It's like those people who say cutting minimum wage will create jobs... really? You think if you pay people $2 an hour that the local McDonald's will go from having 40 people to having 80 or a 120 people? You think think that the local Wal-mart will go from having 400 people to 800 or 1200? No, they'll say they are doing fine at 40 and 400 and just cut costs and increase profits, there will be no net gain of jobs, just more money for the rich. Same with cutting taxes, if they wanted to create jobs, they would have by now, and the fact they are not just proves that most of the rich are morally bankrupt and care only about their short term gains. Sadly too many people blame the poor and seem to think that the rich are being persecuted by the government and if we just ended that persecution and persecuted the poor instead this country would turn around, not once stopping to think that if the rich paid living wages and hired more people rather than keeping the wealth to themselves there would be very few poor...

Cenk is a guy who might be all right to hang out with, and I like and most often agree with his opinions, but I seriously wish he'd shut the fuck up almost every time I watch TYT, with some rare exceptions. His lines and delivery are so bad, the material would be better off presented in a vacuum
he adds literally nothing.

'God damn America' Jeremiah Wright

Obama didn't hear it.

He does hear dreams from his father, however, socialist dreams of bring America down. It's all in his book.

Romney has been a success at everything he's tried.

But people get their news from Jon Stewart, so we may be stuck.

@lantern53

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur

Did Chris Wallace forget he's with FOX now? He's supposed to say things like "Republicans rock! Yer AWESOME!" He might get fired if Bill hears about this.

Is Fox being fair and balanced?

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
It does feel like they are trying to distance themselves from Romney's stank, but they are also playing up Romney as an underdog victim of a liberal media. I've never known FOX to throw in the towel, so this must be part of some bigger strategy. October surprise?
>> ^Yogi:
Looks like Fox is preparing for when it has to say "Look these candidates sucked, we need better ones!"
Pretty interesting how this election is going to affect the Republican party going forward.


It seems to me that Fox would play the long game. They're not gonna put too many chips anywhere, they're here for keeps.


This would imply that truth, consistency and accuracy really mattered to FOX. Romney goes into the memory hole the day he loses. Bush was president for 8 fucking years and they've manage to wipe all records of his existence at FOX.

Wallace is one of the few people at Fox who thankfully seems to frequently forget he works at Fox. I don't watch Fox (or TV at all), but FWIW I don't remember seeing any clips of him saying anything particularly Faux/"Malinforming".>> ^fritzo9602:

Did Chris Wallace forget he's with FOX now? He's supposed to say things like "Republicans rock! Yer AWESOME!" He might get fired if Bill hears about this.

> Chris Wallace Nails Paul Ryan to the Wall
Does he dagger him?

What I got out of that is that Romney/Ryan are proposing to increase the tax burden on the rich. The math is actually simple. There will be a revenue neutral 20 % across the board tax cut with neutrality achieved thru closing loopholes and the middle class will benefit from the cuts. If the overall package is revenue neutral and the middle class benefits then someone, presumably the upper classes must be paying more under this scenario. It's simple algebra.

>> ^nanrod:

What I got out of that is that Romney/Ryan are proposing to increase the tax burden on the rich. The math is actually simple. There will be a revenue neutral 20 % across the board tax cut with neutrality achieved thru closing loopholes and the middle class will benefit from the cuts. If the overall package is revenue neutral and the middle class benefits then someone, presumably the upper classes must be paying more under this scenario. It's simple algebra.


LOL That was awesome.

You forgot your "sarcasm" tag though.