Scarborough Fumes Over Tax Cut Deal, Repubs Not Interested In Cutting The Deficit!

Run time: 01:32 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRJPnlvele8   Posted on YouTube: December 07, 2010 By YouTube Member: ThinkProgress2 Views on YouTube: 499   Posted on DU: December 08, 2010 By DU Member: democracy1st Views on DU: 1507

 
Scarborough Fumes Over Tax Deal: GOP Not ‘Interested In Cutting The Deficit,’ Obama Blew ‘An Easy Battle’

While many progressives have been disappointed by the White House’s deal to extend the Bush tax cuts for the rich in exchange for extending unemployment benefits and some of President Obama’s middle class tax cuts, Republicans have been generally pleased. But some conservatives, unencumbered by political pressure from GOP leaders, have already spoken out publicly against the GOP’s irresponsible and unaffordable tax policy, which will balloon the deficit by $120 billion. Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH), who is retiring, called extending the tax cuts “completely irresponsible” and said he will vote against the deal. “I believe that if this thing goes through and we extend it, we will kick this thing down the road,” he said yesterday, referring to the debt.

And on his MSNBC show this morning, former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough fumed at both sides, attacking Obama from the left for giving in to GOP demands, and hitting Republicans from the right for their empty, hypocritical rhetoric on the need for deficit reduction:

SCARBOROUGH: It is stunning to me that this president has extended Bush tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires. This progressive president has tripled the number of troops in Afghanistan. This progressive president, that you say worries about deficit reduction — just like Republicans say they worry about deficit reduction — on the week the debt commission gets skewered for finding $4 trillion dollars the cut over a generation, Barack Obama and the Republicans added a trillion more dollars to that debt in one weekend. <...>

The Republicans aren’t interested in cutting the deficit. <...>

I would love my political opponent to take the position we’re going to extend tax cuts for millionaires that even the CBO says is not going to create new jobs. And yet they’re going to cut off unemployment benefits for families at Christmastime. Please! Please. Seriously?! That’s like Mohamed Ali fighting against Princeton’s boxing champ Alan Merryweather– it’s an easy battle!

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/12/07/scarborough-tax-deal/

they haven't been interested in cutting the deficit since they voted in the tax cuts 10 years ago. Where the fuck have you been? Oh, right--you head's been up karl rove's doughy behind.

Seriously, how do you lose this argument? Take it to the people. Do we give tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires that we clearly can't afford or cut off unemployment benefits, thereby hurting the economy even more?

...........what this guy has said on different issues in the past, and on his daily show? This guy is a shitbag opportunist.

He is trying to pretend that he is the reasonable guy in the middle. He has been promoting all republiCon policies now he is suppose to be involved in some new group that supposedly in the middle
http://www.salon.com/news/joe_scarborough/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2010/11/30/scarborough_group

Joe Scarborough and Michael Bloomberg

Sanctimonious self-appointed "centrists" with no constituency outside of their social circles to launch meaningless-but-well-funded campaign in support of their admiration for themselves, Howard Fineman reports.

WASHINGTON -- TV's Joe Scarborough, who today dismissed Sarah Palin as a symbol of "anti-intellectualism" with a "dopey dream" of being president, will help headline the launch next month of a new national group dedicated to restoring civility in politics.
<...>
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is also expected to take part, along with an array of other self-described centrists, including retiring Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), Sen. Joe Lieberman, (I-Conn.), former Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.), Rep. Chris Shays (R-Conn), Los Angeles's Democratic Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Sen. Deb Stabenow (D-Mich.), former Gov. Christie Todd Whitman (R-N.J.) and former Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (R-N.Y.)

What can you even say about that lineup besides "where's Harold Ford"?

It gets even more ridiculous: The "No Labels" organization (I'm not sure whether to blame Naomi Klein or feel bad for her) was founded, of course, by longtime Democratic fundraiser Nancy Jacobson -- the wife of pollster grifter Mark Penn -- and Bush and McCain media guru Mark McKinnon. The grou

The repubs will use this deal to wipe out the democrats in 2012. The good of the country and the American people do not matter in this. The rich are already taken care of. In fact, the worse unemployment there is, the better. Just as long as there aren't families with cardboard signs at freeway exits. That's what the UI extension is for.

a town has already taken care of this. No signs soliciting money or food are allowed.
Now we have homeless holding up "code" signs.
"hire me" or "traveling", etc....

.......ATTACKING THE PRESIDENT FOR "GIVING IN"? Could Joe being looking at running as the "new (young) maverick" of the Republican party?



Another bad thing about "partisan" people having their own TV or even radio shows is they use them as HUGE, actually not a "no cost" advertising, but they are actually getting paid to run for office. Some examples: Franken (one of the first) Huckabee, Palin, Gingrich, Scarborough and others mostly Republicans.

There's already been rumbles about Bloomberg thinking of throwing his hat in the ring as an Independent. His candidacy would siphon votes from Obama or any Democratic candidate. Palin would win and give her victory speech: "Now it's our turn for hopey and changey." God, moving to another country wouldn't be enough for me. Alien Overlords, beam me aboard!

.........primary, not as an independent. Bloomberg won't run, unless MAYBE if the economy goes completely down the toilet. I at this stage don't believe there will be an independent candidate for President. As far as giving the Presidency to Palin or any other Republican, it would depend on the politics of the "independent". In 92 Ross Perot siphoned enough Republicans away from Bush sr, it allowed Clinton the win.

The Rethugs have gone too far to the right that if Joe got in, he'd immediately be tarred as having advocated "raising taxes" for his criticism of extending the Bush tax cuts. Any perceived moderate would be a wash out, no matter whether he was a moderate in sheep's clothing. I honestly don't think McCain would have stood a chance of getting the nomination if he'd run in todays toxic right-wing atmosphere. Remember the crazy woman lampooned by SNL for calling Obama a Muslim and how McCain jumped grudgingly to his defense? Today, any perceived advocacy for Obama would be seen by Teabaggers as a betrayal and they're the ones that form the base that Primary candidates have to win over. And all of them believe Obama is a Muslim Kenyan. No, Scarborough wouldn't stand a chance in a Rethug primary.

But, here's a humorous thought exercise. What if Scarborough or Bloomberg's monumental egos made them decide to run as third party "moderate" Independent candidates? What if Teabaggers were disenchanted if someone like Romney won the primaries and not St. Sarah, and with her own monumental ego, she decided to run in a break away ultra conservative political tea party? A four way race would be something to behold. But, of course, it would never happen.

Then, again, political circus seems to be the order of the day in these times.

is to take down as much of the government as possible, all except the military and whatever mechanisms help them transfer wealth from the masses to the few.

When this happens it is most likely that the party that cares the most, gives in first. It takes good insight and wisely timed courage to win in a game of political chicken.

If the Left hadn't foolishly thought Barack Obama was some ultra-left progressive from the start this "compromise" might not have seemed so astounding. He was a politician from the start; groomed by the Democratic establishment. His presidential campaign was flooded with corporate donors, just like every other politician who had a fighting chance in the primaries. Sadly, WE are the ones who were bamboozled by this. And the GOP brilliantly fed into this with their socialist, progressive nonsense. They never believed their own lies. Healthcare was the perfect example; starting the debate with a token "public option" that was dangled as the sacrificial lamb from the start instead of beginning the bill as single-payer and working in from there; which a TRUE progressive would have done.

I may have voted for Obama, but it was mainly out of a mortal fear of McCain/Palin. I never bought into the rhetoric that Barack Obama was some transformative ideologue. He's just the most recent poster boy for Washington establishement.

so at least in 2 years I would have someone to vote for.

Is there any truth to a Bloomberg/Scarborough ticket in 2012?

but when Rush Dimbaulb mocks the Left for having an Obama-Messiah complex he's not totally out of line. The Left has always been long on bluster...short on action. Just look at the millions of Obama "fans" who decided they were too busy to get to the polls last month. They could have completely changed the outcome of the mid-terms. Well, they better not be bitching now.