My name is Legion, for we are many

underthemountainbunker:

SUPPORTING THOSE TROOPS! Romney on homeless veterans: “Let them milk cows.” — By all accounts Mitt Romney’s 1994 trip to the nation’s largest homeless shelter was accurately described by the Boston Globe as “not one of the brighter moments of his campaign for US senator.” Romney was visiting the homeless shelter, located in Boston, by invitation of the shelter’s executive director Ken Smith. […] Smith explained that the State of Massachusetts allocated $2.37 per day twice a day for each homeless veteran’s meal. Since the amount was so meager, the shelter had trouble providing each veteran with a carton of milk at each meal. Romney responded, “Well Ken, maybe you can teach the vets to milk cows.” Romney then walked out the door. – Mitt Romney’s Milk Gaffe

Support the troops! 

I tell ya, he’s certainly a “job-creator.” 

(via randomactsofchaos)

pantslessprogressive:

Awesome:

Trent Franks, the Arizona Republican who proposed a 20-week abortion ban in Washington, DC and then barred DC’s pro-choice female delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton from speaking out against the measure has a new problem on his hands: a flood of DC residents who are bringing their municipal complaints directly to the Congressman, who they’re calling “Mayor.” From potholes to rodent problems to public transportation complaints, DC residents have followed Franks’ lead and begun funneling their problems to him rather than the city’s own government. […]

The protest was a cooperative effort between Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington DC and a group called DC Vote, which aims to secure representation for DC in Congress.

Today, about 50 DC residents eagerly waited outside of Rep. Franks’ door, ready to let “Mayor Franks” know how he could make his newly claimed city better. According to the Huffington Post’s Laura Bassett, some carried plastic rats, some toted pictures of the potholes they wanted Mayor Franks to fill, and some brought disputed parking tickets.

Do not mess with the uteri of DC.

Fuck this guy. I hope they dig potholes right in front of his house. 

(via thirstforsalt)

good:

The Obama Effect: Why More Black Voters Are Turning Gay-Friendly

Since President Obama came out in favor of gay marriage a couple of weeks ago, there’s been a noticeable shift in black Americans’ opinion on gay marriage. A new Washington Post-ABC survey found that 59 percent of black people now say they support same-sex marriage—an 18 point jump since Obama’s announcement.

Learn more about “The Obama Effect” on GOOD.is

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that a bulk of people who are homophobic pieces of shit are the same people who are racist pieces of shit. Otherwise known as “conservatives.”

(via truth-has-a-liberal-bias)

demnewswire:

Contribute now to Get Out the Vote in Wisconsin

If Republicans are going to launch an assault on worker’s rights and the middle class, we’re going to stand up and fight them every step of the way from Wisconsin to Washington, D.C. We already have field organizers on the ground in key districts — but we have to get going quickly.

Please contribute right now to make sure we get out every Democratic vote we can.

Never thought blatantly obvious fascism would exist in a place like Wisconsin. 

(via randomactsofchaos)

Fuck the republican party. 

(via whenyoulosesomething)

tyleroakley:

Cher: mastery of subtlety.

Nice. lol

(via wagingpeace)

sarahlee310:

Troy, Michigan couldn’t afford to keep its library open, so it scheduled a vote for a 0.07 tax increase. The Tea Party waged strong anti-tax group waged a “Vote No” campaign against the increase. The city worked with Leo Burnett Detroit to run a counter campaign in the name of the Book Burning Party. Signs appeared around Troy with the message, “Vote to close Troy library Aug 2, book burning party Aug 5.” The campaign’s Facebook page became the hub for the new campaign, with Twitter, Foursquare, want ads, flyers and more to drive engagement. The campaign became international news as outcry over the idea of burning the library’s books drowned out the opposition and galvanized support for the library – which won by a landslide. The campaign won a Gold award for Government/Political at the International ANDY Awards 2012, and was recognized with the Facebook Integrated Media Award at the 2012 Clio Awards this week.

(via Troy Public Library Book Burning | The Inspiration Room)

In all seriousness, fuck the Tea Party.

Fuck every single one of them. I hope they all spontaneously drop dead.

Book burning? Really?? In addition to being the most anti-intellectual thing I’ve heard about in a while, I have to comment on the fact that there was another deeply-conservative group of people from the 1920’s and 30’s who also loved to burn books. They also had a lot to say about how liberalism was an evil and how “blood and soil” was the only way to go. Just saying. 

(via questionall)

There you have it. 

(via stfuconservatives)

alphabetspine:

No justice, no peace.

The very idea that someone can see these things happen and then still deny that there is indeed a war on women, means that they are one of two things:

• Utterly stupid; either because they simply are stupid or they refuse to acknowledge the truth of what goes on in this country, or
• Sadistically wicked; if you can see all of these things and be completely okay with them, then you are not a moral person. You are scum and I think the world would be better off without you. 

(via questionall)

I love being INFROMED! 

(via sageoflogic)

quickhits:

A GOP Economic Myth Bites the Dust

It’s one of the most enduring myths in American politics; that if you increase taxes for the wealthy (or, in the right’s favorite BS term, “job creators”), the rate of employment will take a nosedive. Nothing about this makes any sense at all, but with a media environment that values a false “balance” above truthtelling, it’s much easier to gloss over that fact. What the right is saying when they make this argument is that it would be too expensive to make profit — a ridiculous claim that ignores simple math, not to mention logic.

So, in our current political and media environment, even obviously bogus claims need to be debunked. And two top economists — Nobel Prize winner Peter Diamond and John Bates Clark award winner Emmanuel Saez — probably felt more than up to the task when they took it upon themselves to bust this rightwing myth. In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, Diamond and Saez set the record straight.

The share of pre-tax income accruing to the top 1% of earners in the U.S. has more than doubled to about 20% in 2010 from less than 10% in the 1970s. At the same time, the average federal income tax rate on top earners has declined significantly. Given the large current and projected deficits, should the top 1% be taxed more? Because U.S. income concentration is now so high, the potential tax revenue at stake is large.

[…]

According to our analysis of current tax rates and their elasticity, the revenue-maximizing top federal marginal income tax rate would be in or near the range of 50%-70% (taking into account that individuals face additional taxes from Medicare and state and local taxes). Thus we conclude that raising the top tax rate is very likely to result in revenue increases at least until we reach the 50% rate that held during the first Reagan administration, and possibly until the 70% rate of the 1970s. To reduce tax avoidance opportunities, tax rates on capital gains and dividends should increase along with the basic rate. Closing loopholes and stepping up enforcement would further limit tax avoidance and evasion.

But will raising top tax rates significantly lower economic growth? But will raising top tax rates significantly lower economic growth? In the postwar U.S., higher top tax rates tend to go with higher economic growth—not lower. Indeed, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Economic Analysis, GDP annual growth per capita (to adjust for population growth) averaged 1.68% between 1980 and 2010 when top tax rates were relatively low, while growth averaged 2.23% between 1950 and 1980 when top tax rates were at or above 70%.

So no, raising taxes on the wealthy won’t harm job creation — mostly because the “job creators” aren’t the wealthy, they’re consumers as a whole.

“With the ‘taxes harm growth’ and Laffer curve arguments undercut by research such as this, Republicans have fallen back on the argument that it’s unfair to take income away from those who earn it,” comments economist Mark Thoma (link mine). “But that presumes that the system allocates income fairly, a claim that is hard to swallow given how much financial executives are paid relative to their contribution to the productive process (to name just one example). There’s nothing unfair about using taxes to ‘clawback’ misdirected income, and it won’t harm growth to send income where it should have gone in the first place.”

In other words, the dreaded “redistribution of wealth” — although it would be more accurately described as the “re-redistribution of wealth.” Insanely low tax rates and a corporate culture that rewards even failure with tremendous bonuses represent “Robin Hood in reverse” economics, where those least able to afford it take the hit, in order to take the burden off the wealthy.

Does this create jobs? We’ve already established that the answer is no. And the reason is simple — producers will only offer the goods and service that people will pay for. The less money consumers have to spend, the fewer employees will be needed at any given workplace. By taking money from consumers to cover tax breaks for the wealthy, you do the opposite of creating jobs. Take a look at that chart at the top of the page — tax rates for the top earners are the lowest since 1950 and jobs follow that downward arc. Money in the hands of consumers, not employers, creates jobs. This is not a hypothesis, this is as solid a fact as gravity.

It’s really very easy to explain all of this: employers don’t hire people any time they can afford to — they only hire people when they can’t afford not to. Anyone who argues otherwise is either a liar or someone who doesn’t understand economics, business, or math at all.

-Wisco

Honestly, no one even needed a graph to know this.

By using simple common sense, anyone (well, except for conservatives obviously) can figure out that the concept of “lowering taxes on the rich will lead to job growth” is fucking retarded. 

(via stfuconservatives)