Support NeoGAF

[Black Republican]

The 8-minute Forward ad was good. The huge list of accomplishments should become a staple of Obama's campaign ads; group them into themes for each spot, and roll through a few at the end of each ad. And remind people that the GOP was not only opposed to it all, they'd like to reverse it all.

that 1st latina supreme court judge bit was interesting, but then again not being able to pass the dream act in 2010 i guess it was this next best thing for hispanics?

 

[AniHawk]

In 2008, the slogan was "Change;" in 2012, it's "Forward." Here's a nice video that hits on pretty much everything he plans to run on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WbQe-wVK9E&feature=g-all-u

man, the health care stuff is sneaky:

1. your kids can't be denied coverage
2. hey old people- cheaper prescription drugs!
3. contraceptives. people like those. except those who don't, which is why we brought it up

 

[Oblivion]

In 2008, the slogan was "Change;" in 2012, it's "Forward." Here's a nice video that hits on pretty much everything he plans to run on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WbQe-wVK9E&feature=g-all-u

Wow! Finally saw it. Amazing video. Campaign Obama is definitely best Obama.

 

[Oblivion]

:drudge siren: LIBRUL HYPOCRISY ALERT + Job opportunity :drudge siren:

The Washington Monthly is seeking applications for an editor/reporter position that will be available soon. Strong writing and thinking skills, a sense of humor, and a willingness to work long hours at low pay are required. A year or more experience in long-form journalism—either as a writer or editor—highly preferred. Knowledge of politics, government and Washington a plus.

As a Monthly editor, you’ll be following in the footsteps of many fine journalists who have had the same job, including: James Fallows, Nicholas Lemann, Jonathan Alter, Kate Boo, Matt Cooper, Jon Meacham,Taylor Branch, Amy Sullivan, Timothy Noah, James Bennet, Joshua Green, Michelle Cottle, Gregg Easterbrook, David Ignatius, Nick Confessore, Joe Nocera, Steven Waldman, Jason DeParle and many more.

Candidates should send a cover letter, résumé, and writing samples (not necessarily published, but showing fact-gathering and analytic ability) and at least two story ideas appropriate for our publication to: careers@washingtonmonthly.com.

 

[Measley]

Wow, that's some serious bullshit right there.

I'm pretty sure most of Obama's senior staff including the VP told him not to do the raid.

Revisionist history at its finest.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

So I havent been in Poligaf for a few days....

Just want to know....

Was the Louisiana caucus discussed?

It doesn't even seem sporting to laugh at Ron Paul anymore.

What school did you end up picking, by the way?

 

[Averon]

They are so so so fucking bitter about this. Quite funny watching them whine and try to revise history.

 

[Tim-E]

Here's the "Swiss Bank Account" ad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5e0QoUdPJM&feature=g-all-u

Love it.

 

[Stinkles]

They are so so so fucking bitter about this. Quite funny watching them whine and try to revise history.

I like that they had to put a caption in so the mouth breathers would understand what's happening. Also, the drawing style is really cool, but the characters are completely indecipherable - I thought Obama was Bush Jr.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

It's a beautiful thing, seeing Republicans crying foul over getting whooped on national security. Obama is going to bloody them at their own game.

 

[GhaleonEB]

In the first two years after “Obamacare” was signed, Medicare reforms in the law saved seniors a total of $3.4 billion in prescription drug costs by bridging a coverage gap, according to official figures.

Over 220,000 beneficiaries have saved an average of $837 in the first three months of 2012, the Medicare agency said Monday. That’s on top of $3.2 billion in savings enjoyed by some 5.1 million seniors in 2010 and 2011 thanks to the Affordable Care Act, according to the advisory on the new figures.

The savings were wrung through a combination of discounts on Medicare prescription drugs — 50 percent on brand names, 7 percent on generics — and rebates for seniors who fell under a coverage gap known as the “doughnut hole.”

“The Affordable Care Act is helping millions on Medicare save billions of dollars on care and prescription drugs,” top Medicare official Marilyn Tavenner said in a statement. “The Affordable Care Act gives people on Medicare the relief they need from medical costs and more resources to stay healthy.”

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...saving-seniors-billions-on-meds.php?ref=fpblg

Naturally, they hate the law. Also, Scott Brown's daughter is getting insurance through the provision that requires insurers to offer coverage through the parent's plan up to age 26.

 

[Clevinger]

It's a beautiful thing, seeing Republicans crying foul over getting whooped on national security. Obama is going to bloody them at their own game.

I'm not so sure. I don't remember this much, let alone any really, media backlash and constant "Is this appropriate?" when Republicans were exploiting 9/11 victims for 8 years. It seems that, like usual, Republicans are effectively manipulating the media.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

I'm not so sure. I don't remember this much, let alone any really, media backlash and constant "Is this appropriate?" when Republicans were exploiting 9/11 victims for 8 years. It seems that, like usual, Republicans are effectively manipulating the media.

That should subside as the media gets used to it.

 

[Neuromancer]

This is just sad.

 

[The Librarian]

Also, Scott Brown's daughter is getting insurance through the provision that requires insurers to offer coverage through the parent's play up to age 26.

Oh my.

 

[Hawkian]

I'm listening to the Glenn Beck show on the radio, they have spent about 30 minutes straight making the same "point" as that cartoon.

"Jimmy Carter would have made that call"
"Woodrow Wilson would've made that call"
"If it hadn't worked out, how could Republicans have criticized Obama for trying to go after bin Laden? Never in a million years would I say that he shouldn't have gone for that mission"

 

[Averon]

I'm listening to the Glenn Beck show on the radio, they have spent about 30 minutes straight making the same "point" as that cartoon.

"Jimmy Carter would have made that call"
"Woodrow Wilson would've made that call"
"If it hadn't worked out, how could Republicans have criticized Obama for trying to go after bin Laden? Never in a million years would I say that he shouldn't have gone for that mission"

If it hadn't worked out, the GOP, their SuperPacs, and their other allies would make damn sure we're reminded of Obama's failure, Obama's "Blackhawk Down 2.0, Obama needlessly endangering the troops, Obama's foreign policy incompetence, etc...

They go after Obama for speaking to school children. They attack him for the pettiest of reasons. Do they think they're fooling anyone when they say they wouldn't have criticized Obama if the operation had failed?

 

[RDreamer]

I'm not so sure. I don't remember this much, let alone any really, media backlash and constant "Is this appropriate?" when Republicans were exploiting 9/11 victims for 8 years. It seems that, like usual, Republicans are effectively manipulating the media.

Bu... bu... bu...b... but they told me the media was liberal

 

[cartoon_soldier]

ISM Manufacturing up in April

http://money.cnn.com/2012/05/01/news/economy/ism_manufacturing/

The Institute of Supply Management's monthly index rose to 54.8 in April, from a 53.4 reading in March. Any reading above 50 indicates growth in the sector.

That is the 1st piece of good economic news I have read for last month.

 

[GhaleonEB]

There's been others, such as the incomes data yesterday, but it's a definite bright spot. Stocks went vertical on the news.

This week's earnings report will be hugely important, confirming last month's slow down or signaling it as a blip.

 

[kehs]

Here's the "Swiss Bank Account" ad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5e0QoUdPJM&feature=g-all-u

Love it.

God damn, jab after jab, and then "oh yea".

lol

 

[Averon]

You can tell Team Obama spent years preparing for Romney. The speed and power of their attacks showcase a team who knows their opponent. I think this will be a case where the GOP's habit of nominating the "next guy in line" will hurt them. When you nominate someone that the opposition was expecting years in advance, it's not a good thing if that opposition is competent and well financed. And it certainly doesn't hurt that the nominee is weak as well.

 

[The Librarian]

If Romney hasn't released more tax returns by the debates, how much will Obama hammer him about it?

 

[Atilac]

If Romney hasn't released more tax returns by the debates, how much will Obama hammer him about it?

Romneys anus will bleed if doesn't release them.

 

[The Technomancer]

God damn, jab after jab, and then "oh yea".

lol

Yeah, that ad was fucking slick

 

[Tim-E]

He's been absolutely dreadful at dodging the tax return issue. By dodging it, he's reinforcing the "Out of touch rich guy" image by making it seem like there may be something more to his tax returns that he doesn't explicitly want out there. On the other hand, if he does release them, he'll likely be hammered for some of the stuff in there. He's damned either way.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

You can tell Team Obama spent years preparing for Romney. The speed and power of their attacks showcase a team who knows their opponent. I think this will be a case where the GOP's habit of nominating the "next guy in line" will hurt them. When you nominate someone that the opposition was expecting years in advance, it's not a good thing if that opposition is competent and well financed. And it certainly doesn't hurt that the nominee is weak as well.

I don't know that an exceptional degree of competence is required to run as a Democrat against a highly wealthy, categorically unprincipled vacillator who has been running for office for five years.

 

[reilo]

I don't know that an exceptional degree of competence is required to run as a Democrat against a highly wealthy, categorically unprincipled vacillator who has been running for office for five years.

Romney has been running for office longer than he's actually held public office.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Romney has been running for office longer than he's actually held public office.

Because he spent his life in the private sector, duh.

I was referring specifically to his running for president in this case, but you're right.

 

[GhaleonEB]

If Romney hasn't released more tax returns by the debates, how much will Obama hammer him about it?

Probably a wee bit.

 

[RDreamer]

Hmmm my dad just sent me this email on Obamacare and the effects it would have on where he works and my mom's business. Besides the obvious grammar issues, is there anything he's wrong about here? For info sake my mom owns a beauty salon, so that's the Shop he's talking about. She has no employees at all. And from what I understand she really doesn't make much at all. I don't know the exact numbers, though. My dad has a normal office job and, I think, makes about ~$35,000 if I remember correctly. So those are the numbers that I know. Here's what he says:

Just got threw our yearly meeting on health insurance –rates for our insurance-

The provider is not for or against obama care they merely provide the administration of our health insurance. [Name of my dad's company] is self insured.

If obama care goes into effect this company and employees will have to pay 40% tax on what our health care program is worth. (Value)

The company will most likely drop health care and pay the penalty as penalty is much lower than the tax amount.

That would meqn I have to get into government plan w/deductible at a set % rate of my income. Approx $4500 per year.

Mom owning a business will have to pay the government a set rate for health care based on her income-as business

Must pay penalty or rate no matter what in order to provide health care to the people who do not have health care.

The % rate for Mom based on last year income is approx $4000 dollar per year. $4000 + $4500=$8500 per year

Divided by 12= $708.33 per month NOT TAX deductible in obama care goes into effect. The end result is clear

The shop will close. This is not based on right wing add or numbers this is based on real world numbers provided

By people who are in the industry.

 

[thekad]

jobs report on friday?

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Probably a wee bit.

To {shudder} defend Romney here, I'm not sure that it makes sense to criticize someone for investing internationally, or even for trying to reduce his tax liability. Obviously it's problematic that he's been involved with and continues to lobby for tax policy that's obviously harmful for the country, I would just like to see the Obama campaign walk a finer line on using Romney as an instance of what's problematic about the tax code, rather than criticizing him directly for complying with it.

 

[Black Republican]

jobs report on friday?

yep

 

[GhaleonEB]

To {shudder} defend Romney here, I'm not sure that it makes sense to criticize someone for investing internationally, or even for trying to reduce his tax liability. Obviously it's problematic that he's been involved with and continues to lobby for tax policy that's obviously harmful for the country, I would just like to see the Obama campaign walk a finer line on using Romney as an instance of what's problematic about the tax code, rather than criticizing him directly for complying with it.

That's what that inforgraphic is all about. The text at the top:

Mitt Romney has invested his money around the world, from the Cayman Islands to Ireland to Australia. We don’t know if he’s using these accounts to avoid paying his fair share in taxes, but we do know that in 2010, Romney’s tax rate was a startlingly low 13.9%. This means Romney pays a lower tax rate than many teachers, firefighters, police officers, and other middle-class Americans—even a lower rate than most other millionaires.

If elected, Romney’s proposed tax plan would cut tax rates for the wealthy even further—cutting his own taxes and protecting loopholes that he benefits from. At the same time, he opposes the President’s Buffett Rule, which would require millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share. That’s not right.

They're using Romney's preferential treatment under the tax code to highlight the unfairness of the tax system. The infographic does strike me as a bit tangential, as they don't (and can't, lacking the details from Romney) explain exactly how those investments help make the case. But the overarching point is that Romney has access to avenues to receive preferential treatment under the tax code, and most don't - and Romney would exacerbate the problem, not repair it.

jobs report on friday?

And if you want the full run-up:

Tomorrow:

Challenger Job-Cut Report

ADP Employment Report​

Thursday:

Jobless Claims

ISM Non-Mfg Index​

Friday:

Employment Situation​

Use it. Love it.

 

[Chichikov]

To {shudder} defend Romney here, I'm not sure that it makes sense to criticize someone for investing internationally, or even for trying to reduce his tax liability. Obviously it's problematic that he's been involved with and continues to lobby for tax policy that's obviously harmful for the country, I would just like to see the Obama campaign walk a finer line on using Romney as an instance of what's problematic about the tax code, rather than criticizing him directly for complying with it.

I agree it's a bit disingenuous to attack Romney on that in the context of the general election, but generally, I think we need to stop treating tax evasion as a socially acceptable thing.
It's a classic anti-social behavior.

 

[Baraka in the White House]

I agree it's a bit disingenuous to attack Romney on that in the context of the general election, but generally, I think we need to stop treating tax evasion as a socially acceptable thing.
It's a classic anti-social behavior.

That's going to be kind of hard to do when so many people see taxes through the lens of DIRTY GUBMINT TAKIN' MAH MONEY. To people who hold this view tax evasion is almost a righteous endeavor.

 

[kehs]

Alright, so Obama might spiking the ball a bit too much, they just reposted the Osama announcement from last year on G+.

 

[Chichikov]

That's going to be kind of hard to do when so many people see taxes through the lens of DIRTY GUBMINT TAKIN' MAH MONEY. To people who hold this view tax evasion is almost a righteous endeavor.

Those people are wrong.
It's a system that rewards cheating, I don't see how that's a good thing, I never did.

Also, if no one cheated on their taxes, us honest people could've had lower tax rates.

Biden was right when he said paying your taxes is patriotic, but of course we labeled it as a gaffe, because... well... LOL BIDEN!

 

[Invisible_Insane]

I agree it's a bit disingenuous to attack Romney on that in the context of the general election, but generally, I think we need to stop treating tax evasion as a socially acceptable thing.
It's a classic anti-social behavior.

Where do you draw the line between minimizing one's tax liability and tax evasion? Do you see the former simply as a polite version of the latter?

Alright, so Obama might spiking the ball a bit too much, they just reposted the Osama announcement from last year on G+.

Just as I did when he was initially killed, I find the revelment surrounding the death of even this highly contemptible person profoundly distasteful.

 

[Skiptastic]

Also, if no one cheated on their taxes, us honest people could've had lower tax rates.

Is there an estimate of how much money is in these "tax cheats"? I'd like to know the number of dollars before I jump on board with an assumption that we would have lower tax rates.

 

[SteveWinwood]

Alright, so Obama might spiking the ball a bit too much, they just reposted the Osama announcement from last year on G+.

Good thing no one will ever see it.

 

[RDreamer]

Really guys, where can I find some raw number info for the Affordable Care Act to help understand what my dad's talking about in my last post. According to things I've found if you have under 50 employees you should be exempt from any sort of penalty and you don't have to do anything. My mom has just herself. She's self-employed, but my dad seems to think she'll be paying a $4,500 tax along with my dad's $4,000 tax for the insurance. That seems really, really high, and illogical. Would a self-employed person really be taxed/penalized that much under the law?

I really want to understand this stuff, because I'd feel kind of bad voting Obama and then having my mom close down her shop. I think I'd still vote Obama, but I'd feel a bit bad about it. Something tells me though that what he's saying is a bit off. And it's really hard to find a reputable site for this stuff. Half the things that come up seem like right wing fear blogs and stuff, and the other half feel a bit too far on the other side.

 

[Zabka]

Really guys, where can I find some raw number info for the Affordable Care Act to help understand what my dad's talking about in my last post. According to things I've found if you have under 50 employees you should be exempt from any sort of penalty and you don't have to do anything. My mom has just herself. She's self-employed, but my dad seems to think she'll be paying a $4,500 tax along with my dad's $4,000 tax for the insurance. That seems really, really high, and illogical. Would a self-employed person really be taxed/penalized that much under the law?

I really want to understand this stuff, because I'd feel kind of bad voting Obama and then having my mom close down her shop. I think I'd still vote Obama, but I'd feel a bit bad about it. Something tells me though that what he's saying is a bit off. And it's really hard to find a reputable site for this stuff. Half the things that come up seem like right wing fear blogs and stuff, and the other half feel a bit too far on the other side.

http://www.healthcare.gov/using-insurance/employers/self-employed/index.html#options

 

[Gruco]

Loved the Forward ad. As much as it is exciting to see the return of campaign Obama, I also want to take a sec to state the obvious. The reason he's able to do ads like that is because the man was able to deliver in the first term. There really is a fully record of healthy, exciting accomplishments which people who followed the 2008 campaign should be excited about. And while the ads focus on the bin Laden raid and the auto rescue as important game time decisions, there is no shortage of other crucial moments, such as the last push on health care, the incredibly productive lame duck session, and the non-stop hostage-taking congress. And despite it all there is a steady supply of campaign promises met or impressive reactions to events overtaking agendas.

I've written before about how frustrating the "half a loaf" legislation we've gotten can be when thinking about prescription drug negotiations, the public option, the cap and trade bust, or the Dodd-Frank amendments falling short. And as frustrating as it is, it's exciting and rewarding to know that the work and hope that went into 2008 has given us something to build on, and genuine progress from the shit show that was the Bush years. And while it ain't perfect, and there's plenty more to do, it's probably fair to say things are never perfect and the job is never done. No matter. We are where we are. Nothing else to do but keep pushing forward.

Spoiler

Get it!???

 

[Chichikov]

Is there an estimate of how much money is in these "tax cheats"? I'd like to know the number of dollars before I jump on board with an assumption that we would have lower tax rates.

The estimates I've seen talk about 20% of the income goes unreported.
But these are the clear cases, tax evasions figures are much harder to come by (it's not easy to differentiate legitimate tax planning from tax avoidance).

Where do you draw the line between minimizing one's tax liability and tax evasion? Do you see the former simply as a polite version of the latter?

Personally, I think that any activity whose whole purpose is to reduce your tax liability is immoral.
It's not the worst thing someone can do, but I never did it, nor do I plan to ever do that.
And if I can do that, so can someone like Romany who make in a week more than I make in a year.

But ideally we should have a tax code that doesn't have such grey areas.

 

[Skiptastic]

But ideally we should have a tax code that doesn't have such grey areas.

It's honestly a bit depressing that pretty much everyone agrees with this but nothing gets done on it. I blame TurboTax.

 

[Kosmo]

LOL, just ran across this Elizabeth Warren stuff - how do people think they would get away with this?

http://bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view.bg?articleid=1061128421

Desperately scrambling to validate Democrat Elizabeth Warren’s Native American heritage amid questions about whether she used her minority status to further her career, the Harvard Law professor’s campaign last night finally came up with what they claim is a Cherokee connection — her great-great-great-grandmother.

“She would be 1⁄32nd of Elizabeth Warren’s total ancestry,” noted genealogist Christopher Child said, referring to the candidate’s great-great-great-grandmother, O.C. Sarah Smith, who is listed on an Oklahoma marriage certificate as Cherokee. Smith is an ancestor on Warren’s mother’s side, Child said.

The missing link comes after Warren’s embattled campaign faced sharp questions about her Native American background in the wake of Herald stories that showed both Harvard Law School and Warren herself had touted her tribal lineage and claimed she was a member of a minority for years.

Warren’s shaken campaign faced another crisis yesterday when it was revealed that beginning in 1986 and continuing through 1995, Warren had listed herself as a minority professor in the Association of American Law Schools desk book, a directory of law professors from participating schools.

Warren had flatly denied that she ever touted her Native American background professionally.

Child — who originally could find no Native American lineage in Warren’s family when the Herald broke the story last Friday — said he uncovered a marriage certificate at 4 p.m. yesterday after fielding calls from countless media outlets and even Warren’s own campaign.

Child said he plans on further verifying the records today. “There is a possibility that their Native American ancestry could have been hidden at one point,” he said.

The campaign also hastily produced an undated newspaper clip last night from the Muskogee Sunday Phoenix detailing a “Mrs. James P. Rowsey” — who they said is Warren’s cousin — and her involvement with the Five Civilized Tribes Museum, which is dedicated to preserving Native American art.

“Mrs. James P. Rowsey was Elizabeth’s first cousin — shared the grandparents in question,” a campaign official said in the statement.

Meanwhile, Warren’s camp issued statements from five faculty members at the four universities where she’s taught, including Harvard Law School and University of Pennsylvania, to knock down any suggestion she used her Native American background to get hired.

“To suggest that she needed some special advantage to be hired here or anywhere is just silly. She was hired for her great abilities as a teacher and a scholar. Her family tree had nothing to do with it,” wrote Jay Westbrook, chairman of the business law school at the University of Texas at Austin, who hired Warren.

Suzan Shown Harjo, a former executive director of the National Congress of American Indians, expressed outrage yesterday after learning that Warren had identified herself as a Native American on law school records without documentation.

“If you believe you are these things then that’s fine and dandy, but that doesn’t give you the right to claim yourself as Native American,” said Harjo, who said Warren might have taken a job another Native American could have received.

So where did this Native American claim start? Was she actually touted by Harvard as Native American?

It's honestly a bit depressing that pretty much everyone agrees with this but nothing gets done on it. I blame TurboTax.

Blame lawyers.

 

[Rocket Scientist]

The estimates I've seen talk about 20% of the income goes unreported.

http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/econ/archive/wp2011-1.pdf

Wow... I wouldn't have guessed it was so much. That's pretty crazy.

 

[RDreamer]

http://www.healthcare.gov/using-insurance/employers/self-employed/index.html#options

There's a lot of jargon there that seems to go a bit over my head, and doesn't really specify any solid numbers. Also, when plugging in the self-employed stuff into their thing it just says get private insurance. My dad seems to be saying that they'd both need to be on the state exchange plan. At least that's how I'm reading it anyway, since my mom is self employed she would function the same as an individual getting insurance, right?

I just really want to know where the hell he's getting the numbers. Everything seems so vague right now I don't get how he gets the $4,000 and $4,500 things. It seems to me he's saying they'd have to pay in a set % of their income, but I can't find anywhere what that actual percentage is.

The only actual rates I can find are in the high risk pool pre-existing condition things. Is that the same as what the exchanges will be? Is that what he'd be getting into?