Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Wednesday, October 26, 2016

When Louis Brandeis wrote in 1932 that a “single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country,” he was suggesting that state innovations might advance reform on the federal level. The progressive Supreme Court justice surely wasn’t imagining anything quite like Brownbackistan.

Under Governor Sam Brownback, however, the old Brandeis metaphor is especially apt for Kansas, where a highly publicized “experiment” in extreme tax cutting has just blown up the entire laboratory. As Kansans peer through the still-smoking ruins, they evidently don’t much like what they see.

What makes the Brownback blowup feel so familiar is that the same experiment was mounted more than three decades ago, on the federal level, under the rubric of Reaganomics – by some of the same people. It crashed miserably then, too. But the Republican right has a special knack for dressing up old mischief as fresh policy. To put this one over, Brownback has enjoyed heavy support from the Koch brothers — chief financial backers of the ultra-right Tea Party — whose industrial empire is headquartered in Kansas.

The statewide tax cut that Brownback pushed through the legislature in 2012 certainly benefited the most wealthy Kansans – people just like the Kochs – while inflicting higher taxes on middle income and working-class families through sales and property tax increases. Proceeding with expert advice of Arthur Laffer, author of the “supply-side” theory underlying the Reagan tax cuts, the gung-ho governor promised that these regressive changes would promote rapid economic growth. He predicted that his plan would produce 23,000 new jobs and over $2 billion in new disposable income for Kansans. Their tax payments were supposed to offset the loss of nearly 8 percent of state revenues.

But the results have yet to justify the hype. Today, the fruits of Brownback’s experiment include a state budget deficit of nearly $340 million this year; a decision by Moody’s to lower the rating on Kansas bonds; a growing gap in education funding at every level, from kindergarten through college; a ruinous reduction in state and local workforces across the state; and a future that promises even larger deficits and service cutbacks to come.

Advocates of the Brownback cuts – who are much more likely to be found in New York and Washington think tanks than in Kansas itself – insist that with patience, the governor’s vindication will come. Noting that the tax cuts took effect less than two years ago, they say that with time will come the jobs and revenues that Kansans expected. But over the past several months, as most states have added jobs, their state has fallen behind.

The Kansas City Star, leading newspaper in the state, recently analyzed federal employment data compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics – and published an editorial comparing Kansas with other states in seasonally adjusted, non-farm total job growth. The bottom line was not encouraging. From January 2011 through June 30, 2014, job growth for Kansas at 3.5 percent was lower than its four neighbors, other Midwestern states, and even “extremely high income tax” New York, not to mention the national average of 6.1 percent. “Kansas has had one of the nation’s poorest rates of employment growth during Brownback’s time in office,” noted the Star editorial, “including since the first tax cuts took effect in 2013.” Moreover, the state actually had fewer jobs at the end of June than it did seven months ago.

As a creature of the Koch machine, Brownback naturally blames this embarrassing data on Barack Obama, the devilish socialist in Washington. But polls show that whatever Kansans may think of the president, they aren’t so easily bamboozled by such arguments anymore. Their opinion of the governor is declining almost as quickly as the state’s revenues — and in some polls he is trailing the lesser-known Democrat, Paul Davis, who bravely challenged him this year. Even some prominent Republicans recently declared they would rather elect Davis than continue the destruction that Brownback is inflicting on their state.

Nationally, the Republican Party still promotes Brownback as an innovator with expertise in growing the economy. The Koch brothers will deluge their home state in dark money and Tea Party propaganda before they let him fall. But if the voters boot him in November, this latest experiment in extremism will be ranked as an explosive failure.

Photo: J. Stephen Conn via Flickr

Want more political news and analysis? Sign up for our daily email newsletter!

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2014 The National Memo
  • Daniel Jones

    Will they never learn?
    Maybe, if Brownback blowback is bad enough.

    • gmccpa

      They will never learn. Brownback will blame Democrats. Red states, on average, lag behind in education, poverty , health care….and lead in apportionment in Fed tax dollars received, as compared to paid.

      But RW media listeners believe the exact opposite. They believe Red states are thriving. They completely ignore the tax disparity in their favor. They are convinced that educated people are ignorant….or…elitist. And they are all quite happy about the recent blow to the ACA…which, if it stands, will result in more people being uninsured. Then, anything negative, they blame on Democrats.

      So, if you refuse to accept responsibility for your shortfalls, and if some of the most important quality of life issues remain either unknown, or unimportant, to you….how would you learn?

    • jmprint

      No they will never learn. Right now they are planning on a strong comeback, They are gathering all the conservatives to this Freedom Summit, something about Dave Boss Coalition. I have already receive two calls. They have been trying to impose the Birch Society ideology since the 50’s and this is the closest they have been to reality, so NO they are not going to quit.

  • Eleanore Whitaker

    If you think Brownback policy is bad, check out the Ryan Budget. It’s guaranteed to come down hardest on the middle and lower classes. I’m guessing the GOP tyrants in the House think they ARE the US Government and need no redress from any other branch of government, least of all the Chief Executive elected twice.

    This has to stop. How much more hardship must the middle and lower classes endure before these clowns of the GOP get it?

    Every GOP governor across the country refused to set up state healthcare agencies. Now, the GOP is suing the president for allowing the uninsured in these GOP governed states to access federal funding for their healthcare needs. Are these men idiots or what?

    What their lawsuit tells intelligent Americans is that the GOP is using the people in their states as pawns in a dangerous game that will deny healthcare insurance and cause more illness and death. How stupid does this have to get?

    • Dominick Vila

      Excellent post. The thing I disagree is suggesting the GOP-TP is stupid and asking when are they going to “get it”. You are being too kind. The GOP-TP strategy and tactics are anything but stupid, they are evil. In fact, since the ACA concept was conceived by The Heritage Foundation, one of the most conservative think tanks in the country, and beta tested by Romney, it is wrong to even suggest that what they are doing is influenced by ideology. Their actions are driven by a combination of extreme hatred, greed, and political imperatives. They are willing to sacrifice the health and well being of millions of Americans if doing so allows them to get control of the Senate and have a chance to win the presidency in 2016. Why worry about Al Qaeda when the GOP-TP is doing such a splendid job at destroying the USA?
      The part that is perplexing to me is the indifference of so many Americans in the face of actions so irrational that they endanger the fabric of American society.
      When the Iran-Contra scandal became public, Congress did not challenge the claim that the man responsible for one of the most embarrassing foreign policy decisions in modern history was an obscure Lt. Colonel.
      When Reagan declared that the turmoil in Lebanon was not our war, after 271 U.S. Marines were slaughtered near the Beirut airport, Congress did not even blink.
      When Reagan provided training, intelligence, and weapons to the Jihadists – including OBL – fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, nobody questioned the logic of helping Islamic extremists.
      When Reagan provided training, intelligence, and WMDs to the Saddam Hussein regime during the Iran-Iraq war, nobody brought up the danger of such policy.
      When the Savings & Loan industry faltered in the 1980s, nobody questioned the potential impact of deregulation on that mess.
      When Bush ignored warnings of an imminent terrorist attack against the USA, and not only delegated responsibility to attend the daily national security briefings, but took a month long firewood chopping vacation in Crawford, nobody raised an eyebrow.
      When Bush lied about WMDs in Iraq, and sacrificed almost 5,000 young Americans in the pursuit of medieval crusades designed to enhance his re-election chances and help his corporate donors, nobody objected to it.
      When irresponsible tax breaks, out of control spending, accumulation of debt, several increases of the national debt ceiling, and deregulation brought to U.S. economy to its knees in late 2007, the only explanation is that the Devil made him do it.
      Fast forward to 2014, an incumbent U.S. President is being sued by Congress, for the first time in U.S. history, for having the audacity of implementing a healthcare reform system designed to provide affordable care to ALL Americans, including a scaled subsidy system to help those who cannot afford the outrageous premiums charged by our insurance companies.
      If this record wasn’t so pathetic, it would be funny. And yet, there are millions of fellow Americans who see nothing wrong with what has happened and what is happening, and continue to support the party that has done everything it can to stifle progress and hold the middle class and the poor – the infamous 47% – down.
      This is the legacy of the GOP-TP, and it isn’t pretty.

      • Independent1

        Dominick, I agree completely. And what’s really telling with respect to how evil many of the GOPers are, is that governors and legislatures of virtually all the red states can’t be devoid of understanding as to what they’re doing to their own states. I’m certainly not the only one who has been looking at statistics by state such as longevity projections and infant mortality and homicides and rates of poverty and environmental pollution and inadequate police and fire protection, etc.

        I’m sure many GOP legislators and governors are just as aware as I am how terrible red states compare in our country with respect to the ones I just mention and many more – and yet they obviously don’t care. The obviously don’t care that projections have been made that 27,000 people will die prematurely this year in red states simply because Republicans chose not to expand Medicaid. they obviously don’t care, in fact I think they’re proud of it, that red states BY FAR lead the nation in the percentages of their residents living below the poverty level and sucking federal dollars to keep them alive.

        As you pointed out, all of this is deliberate for primarily one end in mind – MONEY!! Keeping as much money as they possibly can get away with for those who already wealthy and contribute to their political campaigns – feeding them MONEY!!!

        • Dominick Vila

          What Republicans don’t seem to understand is that their attempt to deny President Obama the right to administer government programs – not only healthcare – as he deems appropriate, like every president before him has done, they are establishing a precedent that is going to limit the power of the Executive Branch to the point that future Presidents may not be able to govern. I suspect they are counting on Democrats not being as unpatriotic and destructive as they are…

          • Independent1

            Yes! I’d hate to think that any future president of whatever party would resort to the many devious methods that the GOP has stooped to in their effort to actually destroy our country since Obama was elected.

          • Dominick Vila

            Hopefully it will be a very long time before we see a sequel to the 3-ring circus the GOP controlled House has turned out to be.
            I think Boehner’s lawsuit is influenced, in part, by political imperatives and, also, by the fact that Boehner is a Speaker In Name Only.
            With a dismal record and an absolute lack of vision, the GOP has no choice but to rely on distractions to shift the attention to the opposition. In this case, President Obama did not do anything his predecessors did not do. If anything, the worst he can be accused of is succumbing to GOP pressure to delay the implementation of the employer mandate, which was scheduled to occur AFTER 12/31/13.
            In addition to the need to electioneering priorities, what this lawsuit is all about is the long unanswered question regarding the scope of executive power and
            Congress’ ability to let the Judiciary rule on this case. This is not a new issue. What is new is the decision of a weak Speaker pursuing something none of his predecessors pursued for obvious reasons. The consequences of a favorable or adverse decision by the Supreme Court will hve a much greater impact on future Presidents than on President Obama, who is rapidly becoming a lame duck President. The GOP establishment understand that reality, and tried to convince Boehner to reject the approach chosen by the Tea Party because of its long lasting effects.
            We all know the Executive branch is limited by the Constitution. The fact that former Presidents exceeded constitutional powers when he signed Executive Orders on matters of life and death, has not deterred President Obama’s detractors who remain intent on damaging his record, undermining the effectiveness of the ACA, and doing whatever it takes to get control of the Senate in November.
            The obvious concerns expressed by senior Republican and Democrat legislators, and the concerns of the Courts regarding the legitimacy of this lawsuit highlight how dangerous this latest attempt to attack Obama and undermine the ACA is. Courts have convinced members of Congress not to sue the White House in years past, and Congress complied when the consequences of a decision by the Judiciary were understood by all.
            It remains to be seen whether or not the lawsuit encounters difficult legal challenges before it becomes a viable approach considered by the Judiciary. The ramifications and long term impact of this lawsuit, if it goes to the Supreme Court, are likely to be huge, not just for President Obama or the ACA, but for the ability of future presidents to govern.

          • Independent1

            As I mentioned earlier, I don’t think Boehner’s lawsuit has a leg to stand on. Previous precedent has been set that a lawsuit cannot be brought unless the litigant can show that what they are suing for has caused them damage. And since extending the date of the employer mandate has had absolutely no effect on the members of Congress, they are not qualified to even bring the lawsuit.

            See this:

            The False Statement Of Fact That Forms The Backbone Of John Boehner’s Anti-Obama Lawsuit

            Last January, the two lawyers behind Speaker John Boehner’s lawsuit claiming that President Obama is not implementing Obamacare fast enough authored an article in Politico Magazine laying out the legal theory behind this litigation. Yet, this article contains a glaring misrepresentation of a recent Supreme Court decision that undermines much of the basis for this lawsuit.

            David Rivkin and Elizabeth Price Foley are the lawyers behind Boehner’s lawsuit. In their Politico piece, they correctly acknowledge that the biggest obstacle to suing Obama is something known as the “standing” doctrine. Standing is the requirement that a plaintiff bringing a lawsuit must have actually been injured in some way by the person that they are suing. But neither Speaker Boehner nor any other member of Congress has been injured by President Obama’s decision to delay implementation of a provision of the Affordable Care Act requiring employers with more than 50 employees to pay a fine if they don’t offer a minimal level of health insurance coverage. Boehner has not lost his health insurance because President Obama delayed this provision. Nor has this delay cost Boehner a single cent.

            Here’s the link to the whole article:


          • Dominick Vila

            I agree. In addition to there being no basis for a lawsuit, it may not be long before the litigants consider the consequences of what they are doing, which include irreparable damage to our form of government and undermining its effectiveness.
            Don’t be surprised if the lawsuit evolves into impeachment. The fact that the articles of impeachment have not been violated is of little concern to those accustomed to setting up Presidents they don’t like when the only recourse to retain their credibility in the face of progress is personal attacks against the men who are doing what they failed to do.
            Anyway, judging by the amount of time we spend debating stunts like this, the GOP already achieved its objective.

        • Dominick Vila

          Something that always amuses me is when I hear Republicans criticize prosperous states like California because they have raised taxes to balance the state budget and fund the programs or services the electorate expects, and they proceed to talk about fiscal responsibility!

          • Independent1

            Yes. And what the GOP really doesn’t want Americans to know is that over the past couple years since California raised taxes and paid down a lot of its debt, California actually leads the nation with respect to the increase that’s taken place in the state with respect to job growth. And that despite all of Rick Perry’s efforts to funnel as much money as he can to enticing companies to come to Texas during that time, that Texas has actually fallen to 6th in the nation with respect to his states increase in jobs growth during that time.

            What’s a little disheartening to me, is that in today’s Rasmussen email on polls that it’s done this week, that voters still have the misguided notion that Republicans would do better with guiding the economy, immigration and spending.

            However, I was encouraged by recent polls in some of the States that may decide whether or not the Dems keep control of he Senate. Here’s what was in today’s email update:

            KENTUCKY 49 – 46 DEM +3

            NORTH CAROLINA 41 – 34 DEM +7

            GEORGIA 48 – 42 DEM +6

            ARKANSAS 43 – 42 DEM +1

            LOUISIANA 46 – 43 DEM +3

            Let’s hope these spreads continue to grow wider.

          • Dominick Vila

            Those are very encouraging numbers. Hopefully they will still until election day and beyond. Don’t be surprised if the GOP shifts its strategy to the usual themes that energize “conservatives”, such as abortion, gay marriage, illegal immigration, and gun control. I have the feeling that GOP strategists are beginning to realize that Benghazi is a two-edged sword that reminds people of what happened when they were in control of the WH and Congress, and with the economy getting stronger every day, more and more jobs being created, and the deficit dropping, they have no choice but to go back to the things that have traditionally worked for them.

      • Independent1

        Not sure you’re aware, but in an article I came across yesterday, the GOP’s lawsuit against Obama should be dead in the water. The ACA does not specify a specific date by which the employer mandate was supposed to take effect; according to the article the law says the mandate needs to be implemented – after 12/31/2013. Which would imply that the law gave Obama the latitude to implement the employer mandate whenever he wished as long as it was after 12/31/2013.

        • mike

          Wrong again. Section 1513 is quite clear.
          (d) Effective date.-The amendments made by this section shall apply to months beginning after December 31, 2013.
          He doe not have the power to pick and choice what he likes or dislikes in a law.

          • Independent1

            1/1/2015 is after 12/31/2013. It does not say “immediately after”.

          • mike

            I see your problem with comprehension is on going.
            “Effective date…….apply to months beginning after 12-31-2013, Duh, Jan.1 2014. Months not year after 12/31/13. Numbskull.

            Read below oh great one. First sentence.

          • Independent1

            I don’t have a problem with comprehension, you have a problem with understanding the nuances of the law. When those writing the law specified that the mandate would take effect after 12/31/2013, they left it totally open to the president to decide what ‘after’ means. They did not stipulate that the mandate had to be effective 1/1/2014 – which if that was what they wanted to actually happen, should have been what was written into the law.

            And as flyinjs just pointed out to you, Bush and other presidents have created presidential ‘precedents’ by many of them doing exactly what Obama did. Teddy Roosevelt did it. Calvin Coolidge did it. FDR certainly did it. Eisenhower did it, Nixon did it. Reagan did it. The Bushes did it. All of them took it upon themselves to implement congressional laws the way they thought was best for the country; not what was best for the paranoid idiots in today’s GOP.

          • mike

            Bull Shit!!! the law states “the MONTHS BEGINNING after 12/31/13.” The months beginning after 12/31/13 are Jan. Feb., March, etc.. not Jan 1915. You really are a mental midget.!! Even the, said in 2014-not 2015.
            Just shows how bad and unworkable this law is.

            And as I have said before this country will rue the day that they gave too much power to the executive branch.

          • Sand_Cat

            Bull Shit!!! you’re right. The law states “the MONTHs BEGINNING after 12/31/13” though I suspect it left out the Bull Shit!!! part, and the all caps on the words. Day after tomorrow is after 12/31/13, too. And are you sure 12/31/13 doesn’t mean the first day of 2114 (or maybe 1914)?

          • mike

            Common sense says “the month following 12-31-2013 would be Jan. 1, 2014.
            Hey dip shit in the states it starts in 2014, not 2015. Read the first sentence.
            We all know it was delayed for one and only one reason. It is/was poorly written, poorly conceived with none of the dems knowing what was in it.

          • Independent1

            And by the way, the President does in fact, have the right to “pick and choose” what the White House will and will not enforce in laws that Congress writes. When Bush signed virtually every piece of legislation that was passed during his 8 disastrous years in office, in the signing of the law he spelled out just what it was within the law that he (the White House) would and would not enforce. He was notorious for his nefarious signing statements!!!

          • mike

            No he doesn’t .

            Executive branch is charged with enforcing the laws.

            They are called “signing statement” also used by Obama by the way.

            Funnier yet! Obama didn’t sign a “signing statement’ for ACA.


          • Independent1

            Yes, and if the President can take it upon himself to dictate what it is the White House will and will not enforce within a specific piece of legislation at the time he signs it, without giving the Congress any chance to rebut his edicts at the time of his signing the law; then he certainly has the right after signing the law to take into account situations in the country which the legislators who wrote the law did not consider when writing it, by incorporating changes with respect to his actual implementation that make enforcement of the law more humane and beneficial to the country.

          • mike

            So show me the signing statement on Obamacare. Produce the statement he can ignore parts of the law and his signature law of his administraton.

          • Independent1

            It’s only the GOP that would come up with the disastrous notion that its Congresses’ right to create legislation with the notion that: President you must implement this law exactly the way we wrote it, even if that is not good for the country. Anyone with common sense, which leaves out the GOP, would think that laws are written for the betterment of the country, so if the president needs to tweak a law that makes it more humane and beneficial to the country – then that’s the right thing to do. As I said in the begging: ONLY THE GOP WOULD HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT!!

            And the fact that a large plurality of the American citizens think what the GOP is doing is wrong – supports what I just said!!

          • mike

            I see you still have a comprehension problem. The founding fathers set up the govt. so the legislative makes the laws(article 1, section 1-US Constitution) and executive enforces the law( article11, section 3, clause 5.
            Humphrey’s Executor vs United States (1935), supreme court ruled that law must still be enforced no matter if President likes it or not.
            If it is a bad legislation then it must be declared unconstitutional or repealed/amended through legislative process.

            Our govt. was set up that no one person has full authority. If one fails to enforce the laws of the country he/she has not upheld the responsibility of his/her office.

            Those who believe Obama can do what he wants and when he wants-phone and pen, will rue that day. Someday, sometime, the shoe will be on the other foot, and watch the screaming then.

          • Independent1

            I don’t have a comprehension problem, you have an ignorance problem. I makes no difference what the founding fathers wrote if Congresses over the years have permitted presidents to go outside the boundaries of what was written by the founding fathers without making an effort to prevent future presidents from doing the same. Laws are not always what is in writing, but what has been permitted via use and history.

            I own a piece of property but there’s a neighbor who has an absolute right to walk down a path right next to my house despite the fact that there’s nothing in writing that allows them to do so. The only reason my neighbors have that right, is because my parents did not prevent them from using that path for 25 years – which meant that when I actually put a house on MY PROPERTY, I had to build a smaller house than I had originally wanted because the bigger house would have blocked the path my neighbors got a right to use – JUST BY THEIR USE – which I could not block. That’s called a prescriptive easement.

            In the confines of a president, precedents that previous presidents have set, which the congresses of their time did not block, TRUMP WHATEVER IS WRITTEN IN THE CONSTITUTION!!!!! When are you going to stop being ignorant of the law??????????? As well as it appears – VIRTUALLY EVERYTHING ELSE!!!!

          • mike

            Thanks for making my point.
            Actions have consequences. Sounds like your parents in their own way never researched their rights or ignored them. And you suffered the consequences.
            The same with any president going it alone and ignoring or using the law as he liked. The party that has the WH never challenges their leader which is wrong. As long as congress acts in this, at some point Congress will be irrelevant. Their lack of actions will have dire consequences for this country. Both parties are wrong.
            The system of separation of power is not simply about stopping one branch of govt. usurping another. it’s about protecting the liberty of Americans from the power of a concentrated power.
            Radical expansion of Presidential power should be a concern to all members of Congress. Left or right they are wrong for not challenging this imperial presidency model, unchecked authority.

            I will say it again: Americans will rue the day they let this continue to happen. One day they will wake up and the liberties will be gone.
            Precedents do no Trump the Constitution.
            Ignorance is all yours.

          • Independent1

            You make it sound like all this started with Bush. Do you even realize that it started with Teddy Roosevelt?? Teddy signed more than 1,800 executive orders, many of them to do exactly what Obama has done – get something accomplished around a DO NOTHING CONGRESS!!

            What’s been even more disastrous to America, has been the DO NOTHING GOP CONGRESS which has deliberately allowed America to founder for 5 plus years refusing to do ANYTHING to help Obama get the country going again. Fortunately, the GOP has even failed at that.

            But I’ll assure you, Teddy Roosevelt who signed more than 1,800 EOs, Calvin Coolidge who signed more than 1,300 and FDR who signed more than 3,500 did a lot more to get around Congress than Obama ever has.

            You have your head so far up your rear end you can’t see the light!! Why don’t you wake up some time??????????

          • mike

            You sure have that comprehension problem, don’t you??? I said Bush and Obama have overreached, nothing more nothing less. FYI: even Washington used it. about it going all the way back to Washington.

            As to Congress. Obama working with Congress, Obama is no Clinton. Obama’s way of compromise, is my way or the highway.


            Such anger from a little mind.

          • angelsinca

            In your haste to clamor for blame, you repeatedly ignore Mike’s point of excess executive power happening NOW. But you sure did showed him by calling him ignorant. lol

          • Independent1

            More absolute rot!! Nothing Obama has done exceeds anything that Teddy Roosevelt and Calvin Coolidge did. And FDR wrote an EO that expanded the reach of the WPA. A government program that spanned the country, creating jobs and reconstructing the nation. You’re as big a jackass as Mike!!!!!

          • angelsinca

            That was 60 years ago. This is now. You still can’t let Obama stand on his own merits without saying ‘they’ did it too, only worse. It’s like a big fat Romper Room of whiners The worse part is how you actually believe everything would be perfect, if it weren’t for that ‘other half’ that won’t let you run things the way you want. Or, how the Supreme Court and the House are both conspiring against Obama, along with all conservatives and those religious people as well. You folks just can’t get along with others very well. Admit it.

          • Independent1

            Only total morons such as you and Mike would be using the ridiculous reverse logic you and Mike are trying to sell!! Go fly a kite!! I’m through dealing with juveniles!!!

          • Independent1

            And for your information creep!! If there’s anybody ruining our way of government, IT’S THE GOP!!

          • angelsinca

            Yep, the government is working like a well oiled machine, the terrorists are fighting ‘the enemy’, and we are all happier than we’ve ever been. Kumbya to you too, comrade. Got GDP?

          • Independent1

            You bet!! 17.3T up from 14.4T in 5 years!! The best GDP growth in the past decade!!

          • angelsinca

            To quote your peeps, too bad 95% percent of the gdp increase has gone to the top 1%, while the median income of the middle class has dropped $4k during your president’s reign. Too bad. While the rich keep getting richer and the poverty roles continue to swell under Obama, you STILL blame the GOP.

          • Independent1

            Yeah!! Interesting you should think of that. We can all thank the GOP for that!! For contriving everything such that the rich get richer. That’s what Reagan was all about with his trickle-down BS fantasy. Which is why the idiots in the GOP House keep passing legislation that funnels more billions in subsidies to corporations that already make billions in profits; and even idiot GOP legislators at the state level, like those even here in Maine back in 2010 pass unwarranted tax cuts for the wealthy to allow them to keep more money in their pockets and less in the pockets of the 99% even though those tax cuts created budget shortages which forced towns to increase property taxes so the less fortunate had to pay more to keep their towns running.

            Yeah you fake creeps just keep on looking for ways to keep the income inequality going don’t you!! Well, let me tell you, you’re not going to escape the day when you’ll pay for this – I’ll guarantee you that!! There’s someone far more important than anyone in our government that’s keeping track of you and your party’s thieving ways!!

          • angelsinca

            Even the liberal New York state seems to get it with its current campaign to offer tax-saving incentives for businesses iwith the understanding and expectation it will bring jobs into the state. Business produces jobs, not ideological blogs.

          • Independent1

            And by the way cluess, poverty in America IS NOT increasing under Obama – just the reverse is true. When I did a poverty by state for the 2010-11 years, there were 23 states with poverty levels of 15% and higher with Mississippi having a poverty rate over 23%; when I ran the same study for 2013-14, I had to back down to the states with poverty rates over 12% (not 15%) in order to bring together about the same 23 states; and Mississippi which leads the nation with the percent of its residents living in poverty had fallen to a rate of just over 20%. So once again YOU LIE!!!!!!!!!!

            And as I said in my previous post, someone is keeping track of your lying!! And He isn’t going to forget!!!!!!!

          • angelsinca

            You are wrong about lying. That would be an intentional act of deception, as in the passing of the ACA. I seem to have been caught relying on data from the most recent US Census, not trending polls that reinforce a talking point. Good to hear the poverty rates are improving in your world. Hope your household income holds the same perception of improvement. Fact remains where the wealth has gone to and how the median income of the middle class is waning.

          • Independent1

            You’re such a pathological liar just like every Republican you don’t even realize you’re lying!!! Just like with that last post!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • angelsinca

            why bother

          • Independent1

            And I forgot to mention jerko, of the 23 states that had poverty levels of 15% and more in 2010-11, 20 of the 23 were red states; of the 24 states in 2013-2014 that have poverty levels now of over 12%, 20 of them are still GOP run states!!!!!!!!

            Red states are still America’s disasters waiting to happen with declining life expectancies, increasing infant mortality rates, increasing violence, increasing homicide rates, worsening life protections from police and fire officials, leading the nation in business related disasters, leading the nation in environmental pollution, leading the nation in rates of poverty and on and on and on – RED STATES – THE SCUM OF AMERICA!!.

          • Independent1

            I’m sure you’re just proud as punch with that party you love. A party who couldn’t care less whether or not people live or die. A party who would rather see the already wealthy pocket more money so they can buy a bigger yacht than someone whose starving to death could pay for some food to eat using food stamps. Or couldn’t care less that people in their states living below the poverty level die prematurely because they can’t get the medical care they need.

            You must be just so proud of these lowlifes like yourself!!!

            Well here – why don’t you peruse this list of RED STATES that have refused to expand Medicaid such that somewhere between 7,000 and 17,000 people in these states are projected to die prematurely this year!! Aren’t you just proud as punch about that!!!!!!!!!!

          • angelsinca

            You lost me with the Hubert Humphrey channeling. It takes a special person to love their party more than doing the right thing. Or excusing its party’s indiscretions for the sake of political posture. Deceiving the people and averting efforts to seek truth doesn’t seem like the right thing, yet you support it. Not only is it wrong, it is now unpopular and the sign of a sinking ship. The gop body count table is just another stale propaganda bomb that avoids the truth of the flaws within the ACA and makes fools of those that rely on it as a weapon to defend their position.

          • Independent1

            You’re so evil it’s disgusting!! Like I said: you’ll get yours!! You can falsely shift the blame all you want and have the idiots that believe your way believe it, but you’re not going to get anyone with one ounce of brain to believe your idiocy!!! I really feel sorry for you and your ilk!! You’re all truly sick!!!!!!

          • Independent1

            You and your lies about ACA – one big reason that all those poverty rates have declined is because ACA has given millions of people more disposable income in addition to insurance millions of them never had which has helped spur the economy and lift some people from living below the poverty level. Even the Republicans that have it love it!!!

            Turns Out, Republicans Love Obamacare


            It’s turning hospitals that have operated in the red into making a profit for the 1st time and reduced the burden many hospitals have placed on states like Arizona.

            An Obamacare winner: Safety-net hospitals


            Arizona hospitals already reaping benefit of Medicaid expansion because of Obamacare
            byJoan McCarter


          • angelsinca

            Juvenile, indeed.

          • Independent1

            You want to really see what’s destroying our political system!! And it sure isn’t Barack Obama!!

            It started with 15 stinking GOP creeps meeting the night he was inaugurated. Getting together to plot how to destroy our country’s economy and do everything they could to make a president fail!! That’s what’s destroying our political system!!

            UPDATE: Eric Cantor Plotted to Sabotage US Economy in Secret Meeting with Hensarling & Luntz

            Here are the Facts:

            FACT 1. In Robert Draper’s book, “Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives” Draper wrote that on inauguration night, 2009, during a four hour, “invitation only” meeting with GOP Hate-Propaganda Minister, Frank Luntz, the below listed Senior GOP Law Writers literally plotted to sabotage, undermine and destroy America’s Economy.

            FACT 2: Draper wrote the guest list included:

            The Guest List:

            Frank Luntz – GOP Minister of Propaganda
            Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)
            Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA)
            Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA),
            Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX),
            Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX),
            Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI)
            Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA),
            Sen. Jim DeMint (SC-R),
            Sen. Jon Kyl (AZ-R),
            Sen. Tom Coburn (OK-R),
            Sen. John Ensign (NV-R) and
            Sen. Bob Corker (TN-R).

            Non-lawmakers present Newt Gingrich – Failed GOP candidate for President

            And here’s the proof of that meeting (Gingrich admitted being there. He was proud to have been a party to planning treasonous actions. Wow!! Proud??:

            FACT 3: Newt Gingrich confirms meeting took place in an interview with Al Sharpton’s Politics Nation on June 12, 2012

            SHARPTON: In fact, let`s go to a book that Mr. Draper wrote about the night of the inauguration. There was a meeting at a hotel near the inaugural ball, about a mile away … He writes about that night the plan was to show united and unyielding
            opposition to the president`s economic policies … And Draper writes that you told the group — you, Newt Gingrich, “You will remember this day…you will remember this day the seeds of 2012 were sown.”
            If there was a commitment from day one, before he ever took a seat
            behind the desk of the Oval Office, that everyone was going to obstruct
            him, then what he`s done has been almost unbelievable, against those kind
            of odds, Speaker Gingrich.

            NEWT: The first is, it was an important meeting and I was glad and honored to be part of it … I said to Callista when we left the hall — because we were at the Capitol for the inaugural. As we left, I said, you know, if he sticks to the kind of moderation and bipartisanship he`s been describing, he will split the Republican Party. He`ll govern like Eisenhower and he`ll get reelected. Now this is — this is the inaugural day.

            SHARPTON: I`m glad you admit you had it.

          • angelsinca

            Mike’s points make much more sense by faulting the flawed process without making it personal. He is convincing. You are just blaming.

          • Independent1

            The only thing Mike is ever convincing of is he’s the leading NM BS artist!!

          • angelsinca

            Must be your favorite tale since you repeat it so often. Odd how you dismiss everything else Newt has ever said before this. Especially when he was vying for the GOP nomination. Sharptons obvious racist nature pretty much discounts anything he says. Can’t believe you would embrace anything a republican would say unless it supports your undying theory that democrats are without fault.

          • Independent1

            “Our govt. was set up that no one person has full authority. If one fails to enforce the laws of the country he/she has not upheld the responsibility of his/her office.”

            Exactly!! and just like the president doesn’t have full authority to do anything, NEITHER DOES CONGRESS!! The president can only recommend legislation that needs to be written – he can’t insist that Congress write it. Well the same goes the other way – Congress cannot dictate to the president that he has to implement legislation EXACTLY AS THEY WROTE IT!!

            And countless presidents have proven that by doing exactly what Obama did – not implementing or even enforcing legislation EXACTLY as written by Congress!!!!

          • mike

            Problem is both Bush and Obama have overreached on the power of executive branch. It is the responsibility of Congress(both parties) to make the laws and to make sure they are enforced correctly. Obama with his executive orders even though fewer in numbers than Bush are far more dangerous to the balance of power.
            Where is the “signing statement” for Obamacare?

          • Sand_Cat

            It is you who has multiple problems.

          • Sand_Cat

            Ah, mike. But Obama’s signing statements – which I agree are in principle as unconstitutional as Bush’s – don’t say he isn’t going to enforce the law he signed, and I’m sure there aren’t nearly as many of them. And can I take it your outrage that Obama delayed enforcement of parts of the ACA as asked – well, demanded, actually – by the GOP means you’re another strong supporter of the bill? But I thought you were one of those positively quivering in anticipation of crushing the hopes of the millions of uninsured and under-insured. However could I have gotten that impression?
            By the way, are you refurbishing your old SS or SA uniform to go to the border and shoot some kids for the cause?

          • mike

            Funny!!! He has delayed major parts of Obamacare after realizing how badly written and knowing the whole democratic party would have egg on their faces.
            You know, “we have to pass before we know what’s in it.”
            It didn’t work though, American people now know how ill-conceived, poorly written, and badly implemented.

          • Sand_Cat

            What has this to do with Brownback, mike? What in fact does it have to do with reality? Had the GOP devoted itself to the good of the country rather than destroying the administration – if necessary, taking the country with it – and punishing the poor and female populations, among others, perhaps it might have been written better, though it started from a rotten model: the Heritage Foundation’s plan.

          • mike

            Just responding to your post. Have you forgotten what you wrote? Do you have dementia??
            Or, are you trying distract/change the subject from the obvious that you backed a loser.
            As to good of the country, his idea is spend more, adding to the debt, and I will be out of office and I will let the rest figure it out. Obama destroyed his administration on his own. Clinton had the sense to move slightly to the center, Obama has not. His way or the highway.
            As to the rest of your post, Baloney.

          • Sand_Cat

            You the one with dementia? Your post to which I replied was more of your own BS about the ACA and the evil Obama’s delay of parts, which has nothing to do with the article.
            And of course everything you have no rational answer for is “blah, blah, blah,” or – now – “baloney.” I guess it was intended to relieve the monotony of your unending and wholly predictable tirade about all your imaginary libels of the president. Can’t you come up with something original?

          • mike

            I guess it must be the catnip that is effecting your memory.
            I find it comical that the first time you mention the original article is two post ago. You got into this conversation on Sat. and not once did you mention the article. And now you want to change the subject. Now that is funny. Poor little putty tat! Trying to detract, distract, change the subject.
            Nothing about my post on Obama are imaginary because they can all be documented and are all true.
            Thanks for the laugh.

          • flyinjs

            Yes, he does. It is called precedent and that is what HELPS the courts interpret many of our laws.

          • mike

            So which precedent applies to this law, and Obama’s action to change the law, which he did.

          • Sand_Cat

            We could start with your buddy Reagan’s Civil Rights official, who just sat and let the statute of limitations expire on hundreds of cases, as he was hired to do, and was rewarded with a Supreme Court appointment. And then there are the appointees Anne Gorsuch at EPA and all the others appointed to NOT enforce the law or do their jobs, a precedent followed by every GOP administration since. Face it, mike: you’re just completely full of it. It’s nice you can cite laws and ignore reality; not so much your outrage that others dare to do it without your permission.

          • mike

            And now we have a EPA going far beyond its authority.
            Our economy is based on growth and we now have the EPA actually slowing down the economy.

          • Independent1

            Here’s one reason why those of us on the NM don’t like blogging with you right-wing wackos because you have no scruples and will flat-out LIE!! And here’s an example of blatant lying from the supposedly prestigious Heritage Foundation – just like GOP legislators the Heritage Foundation is staffed with PATHOLOGICAL LIARS!!!!!!!!

            Busted! Heritage Foundation economist can only defend Kansas tax cuts by fabricating data

            Moore’s column argued that Kansas needed to give Brownback’s regime more time to work its wonders, because “the national data tell us” that over the last 20 years

            The nine states without an income tax have had double the population growth and more than double the income growth of states with very high income taxes. These results are statistically significant, which means it is very unlikely they happened by chance. This does not mean all states that cut taxes have growth or that all states with high taxes don’t have growth. It means there is a strong propensity for low-tax and tax-cutting states to grow. Period. This is a problem for the left because places such as New York, Massachusetts, Illinois and California that have been following Krugman’s (and President Barack Obama’s) economic strategy are getting clobbered by tax-cutting states.

            No-income-tax Texas gained 1 million jobs over the last five years; California, with its 13 percent tax rate, managed to lose jobs. Oops. Florida gained hundreds of thousands of jobs while New York lost jobs. Oops.

            Abouhalkah found FOUR errors in that brief passage.

            No. 1: Moore’s data isn’t from “the last five years”. When challenged by The Star he admitted it was from December 2007 to December 2012. Which is a deliberate deception. The Bureau of Labor Statistics data that Moore was relying on is updated Every. Single. Month. So there is no reason to use 18-month-old data. If Moore honestly wanted to look at the “the last five years” he could have presented the numbers from mid-2009 to mid-2014.

            No. 2: even within his cherry-picked dates, Moore lied about the numbers. Texas did not gain 1 million jobs in that 2007-2012 period. The correct figure was a gain of 497,400 jobs.

            No. 3: Florida did not add hundreds of thousands of jobs in that span. It lost 461,500 jobs.

            No. 4: New York, which has one of the highest income tax rates, did not lose jobs during that time. It gained 75,900 jobs.

            Abouhalkah noted a 5th oddity as well:

            California since December 2012 — when Moore stopped measuring employment growth — has added 541,000 jobs, which is more than Texas’ 523,400. So, high taxes are good?

            Go take your lying self somewhere else!!! I’m through even discussing things with you because you’re no different than these jerks!! A total LIAR!!!

          • mike

            LOL!!! When did I mention anything about Kansas??
            Let’s see Obama disapproval rating by realclearpolitic, 53.3%, Right or a lie???
            Obama’s disapproval on Foreign Affairs-55.2%, Right or lie?
            Obama’s disapproval on Economy-54.3, Right or lie?
            Rasmussen, disapproval on Healthcare 54%. Right or lie?
            13 of 14 issues from Rasmussen show him in negatives. Right or lies?
            direction of country surveyed by Rasmussen-wrong direction 67% and going higher.
            Show me where I lied. Come on great mind, prove me a liar.

          • Sand_Cat

            Yes, mike. But you don’t sound like you’re laughing at all. I’m sorry he delayed the employer mandate, too, and – like you, I’m sure – I would have preferred single payer. But maybe he delayed it for concepts apparently unknown to you: the good of the country and assuring the success of the law in achieving near-universal health coverage without breaking the economy. I kinow all you wing nuts wish to prolong the suffering of the country as long as possible in order to turn it to the Fascism you long for, but some of us actually care for the common good.

          • mike

            Sorry you are not here to enjoy the laugh. Now you have me laughing on that single payer crap. Thanks!!
            No need to delay if it is that great a law and would save the country so much money and add all those jobs. No he found out it would hurt the economy, lose jobs and he had no choice.
            If he was that smart he would be delaying Obamacare now. No, he delayed it because as I have said earlier it is/was a bad law, It is not going to bring down the deficit or lower the debt. Already it looks like it doubled the cost. The majority of Govt programs never go down in price but end up costing more.
            What the American people are now seeing, Obama’s idea of letting the govt. do everything, is a sham. They see the implementation, the higher cost and the lies “if you like your doctor, hospital, etc., but what destroys his concept of Big Govt. is the debacle at the VA. Americans see that if they put their lives in the hands of bureaucrats they will really lose their freedoms and liberties.

          • Sand_Cat

            LOL, mike. That’s what the article you claim to be commenting on is about. Did you even glance at it?

          • mike
          • Sand_Cat

            But he can rely on historical precedent and the “unitary executive,” mike, just like his predecessor, who never let a little thing like the law get in the way of what he wanted. But then, that was just ducky with you, right, mike?

          • mike

            How did that “unitary executive” thing work in Libya?
            Embassy now closed, 4 dead americans, etc..

            Senator Obama sure didn’t like Bush’s high- handed ways and now look who has taken it another level, your buddy Obama. Obama never asked for authority to attack libya, which is against the War Powers Act.

          • Sand_Cat

            I don’t think you need me to tell you how “unitary executive” worked for Bush, but you’re an idiot if you think it had anything to do with Benghazi. As nasty as I usually am with you, I thought you much too intelligent to spout “Benghazi” at every opportunity, because there’s nothing there. Oh, well.
            Obama didn’t attack Libya, he gave aid to the rebels; I doubt if it even met the War Powers act definition, plus my recollection is that it didn’t last anywhere near long enough. In any case, there are plenty of his actions I’m not prepared to defend; in my opinion, he’s entirely too fond of all the abuses of executive power Bush started now that he’s in there. Having said that, he’s still so far above all the alternatives the GOP has offered or is likely to offer in every respect, I usually end up defending him. The only guy the GOP had in the two elections so far who would have likely been a decent president ran a very distant last in the primaries until he finally caved on accepting science and joined the other morons, and still ran last after that.

            Say what you will about Obama, the alternatives offered by the GOP are all terrifying, and even though I voted Green in 2012 in protest, I’d pick Obama over any GOP member I can think of without a moment’s thought.

          • mike

            Are you that dense??

            Did Obama get authorization to use force against the govt. of Libya? Yes or No!!!!

            That was the my point, he never did, he used force to aid the rebels in their war against the govt. of Libya and had 60 days to go to Congress for authorization, which is required by the War Powers Act 1973. Which he never did, he turned it over to the NATO.
            He used force on his own without authorization from Congress and now look at Libya. Our embassy has been closed because it is so dangerous. Dangerous enough for the loss of 4 good Americans. Duh!!! Great decision on his part, Right??
            GOP “Terrifying” Now that is funny. Obama is a disaster and now scares all the right and majority of independents.

        • Dominick Vila

          I spent 40 years at NASA, a Federal government agency. The NASA Administrators changed the implementation date of projects as needed. The office of the Inspector General and the appropriate congressional committees must be notified, but their consent is not necessary when the changes do not require new appropriations. What Boehner and his zealots are doing is unprecedented, not only because no previous U.S. president has ever been sued, but because of the damage his action does to our government, to the country, and to the ability of future presidents to govern.
          Boehner & Co are putting their party and personal goals ahead of country, and what they are doing is likely to backfire on them. Catering to their rabid base, while ignoring the will of most Americans is a dangerous position to take. Hopefully they learn a lesson they will never forget.

    • Yappy2

      I say, when are the voters going to wise up and quit voting against themselves? If you cut off your own nose to spite your face you are going to end up ugly.

      • Eleanore Whitaker

        The only thing Americans can do now is to barrage the Dems in their states to stop this anarchy by the GOP House. That Ryan Budget when, not if, the House passes it, is going to cause a recession. The GOP wants this recession in Obama’s second term to show that Bush’s 2nd term recession wasn’t his fault. Spiteful little bois prodded and wound up by the Koch billionaires.

  • esg

    The GOP will never get it they keep repeating the same mistakes over and over. Can’t they figure out that when the middle class is doing well everyone does well. They take from the middle class to enrich the wealthy expecting a trickle down and all they get is wealthy hoarders of sorts. Now the wealthy cannot even get a decent interest rate on their investments so they turn to the stockmarket and over inflate the staocks setting us up for another bubble. All we need is decent wages, decent healthcare, decent jobs and a shot at the american dream and rest assured the wealthy will come out fine. It is a well know fact the the more wealth one accumulates the more hoarding becomes the name of the game and anyway to goard wealth is what the GOP is all about. Shucks they cannot even see that raising the minimum wage in certain states has been beneficial to the economies there. They have blinders on and must wake up with tunnel vision and of course no one has ever accused the Republicans of having any intellictual acumen that is for sure. Lots of them are born of wealth and exist in wealth and hoard it to the extreme.

    • ORAXX

      I fear they actually do get it, and have achieved the outcome they were looking for. Massive wealth redistribution upwards. They simply couldn’t care less about the well being of the country or its ordinary citizens.

  • The great error of this article is in its constant referral to Brownback’s policies as an “experiment,” a term which implies they had no idea what would happen as a result of them.

    The reality is that Brownback, like all advocates of Reaganomics (including Reagan himself for that matter) knew EXACTLY what would happen as a result of said policies. They just went ahead and torpedoed the economy with it anyway because the few people who stood to benefit were also the few people they could actually give a crap about.

    Brownback, like all tea-baggers, was ultimately out just for himself, and by extension, had no care for any Kansans except for the ones donating millions to his campaign. His “experiment” was a disaster for the majority of Kansas, but all that mattered to him was that it benefitted the Koch brothers.

  • Mark

    Problem is, the Democrats aren’t offering any sort of hope that they have a better idea. The only Democrats offering anti-Tea Party programs are Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Last time I checked, neither of them are on the ballot anywhere.

    • Independent1

      Is that why democrats running for Senate are leading their Republican opponents in the pools in a number of states? I think you’re knowledge of what’s going on is very limited. It may be that Bernie and Elizabeth are the only non Republicans (Bernie is an independent) that are actively in the media nationwide – but I guarantee you there are a sizable number of Democrats who are really taking it to their Republican opponents at the state level.

  • Pi_Boson

    If the people of Kansas want to be bathed in Brownback’s cesspool, let them stink-up the Midwest. Most American’s realize that just like reaganomics was a sham, a president that single handedly made debt and deceit popular and acceptable, We the People see Brownback’s policies as an empowerment for the top 2.175%. Brownback is without soul, without morals.

    • flyinjs

      Let the people of Kansas see for themselves and vote accordingly in Nov. If they are willing to wait for a better economic outlook as suggested by their Governor they are again, willing to accept the consequences. Or not…just sayin

  • Dominick Vila

    The most amazing part for me is that the GOP has been selling fiscal irresponsibility as evidence of conservatism. There is nothing conservative about reducing government revenues without reducing outlays. The deficit spending that prevailed in the Reagan era, with subsequent accumulation of debt (189%) and raising the debt ceiling 18 times, is an example of out of control irresponsibility by those who are willing to bury our children in debt if that is what it takes to keep some money in their pockets to buy the latest Made in China gadget.
    As far as trickle down goes, and giving tax breaks to corporations and the elite, the only tangible evidence is limited to higher shareholder earnings, and overseas investments. The poor are poorer, and the middle class is in rapid decline. That’s the legacy of Reaganomics.

    • stcroixcarp

      Just who are the stockholders? The overpaid CEO’s get stock options. I know that my pension funds are ties up in the stock market, so technically, I am a stockholder with no say in the corporations’business whatever.

  • elw

    I lived through Reagan, both when he was Governor of my State and then President. I know what his “trickle down” economy is about personally. Trickle down mean getting less and less and both when he was Governor here and then President that was what I experienced. Once more President Clinton showed that raising taxes on the wealthy and policies that help the middle class make the economy grow as the middle class income goes up. He left behind a booming economy, that the next President destroyed. When Bush 2 came to office he applied those same Reagan policies that didn’t work the first time, tax breaks for the rich while spending more tax dollars on unfunded wars, less regulation for banks and then the biggest financial melt down since the 1930s. I doubt that Conservative Republicans will ever accept that their idea of good economic policy is bad, they need to go – so vote.

    • ExRadioGuy15

      (standing ovation)

      • elw

        thanks 🙂

    • ORAXX

      Cutting taxes for the wealthy takes vast amounts of money out of circulation. That money has a far better chance of winding up in a Cayman Islands trust fund than ever creating a job in this country.

      • elw

        Exactly they keep it for themselves

        • ORAXX

          When taxes were very high, there were always provisions in the tax code that allowed businesses and wealthy individuals to offset taxation by reinvesting in their businesses, or in things that promoted the public good. After a generation of Reaganism, the very idea of the common good is repudiated by conservatives.

          • flyinjs

            Some folks (Repubs) do not want to be told how much or where goes their money

    • Pinegold

      Cite an example of a society where the upper segments are not doing well economically but the rest is.

      • elw

        Your request is a joke! The upper economic segments are always doing better than the rest of it – no matter how little their income is. However, if you want an example of a Society where the upper economic segments are doing so well the rest of the society is suffering – all you have to do is look at the United States of America.

  • ExRadioGuy15

    I’ve been saying for more than three years that tax cuts DO NOT lead to job creation and economic prosperity…they’re simply one thing and one thing only: upward wealth redistribution tools.
    Kansas and California show both sides of this argument. Kansas cut taxes so much that a lucky few got even richer (remember that the Koch brothers live in Kansas) while the “Starve the Beast” fiscal philosophy of the GOP succeeded in “starving the beast”, aka, making government smaller.
    In California, where there’s a Democratic supermajority in the state legislature for the first time, they RAISED TAXES on the wealthy and big corporations, which, in turn, reversed a huge deficit and turn it into a huge surplus. In fact, the plan has worked so well that a One-Percenter in Silicon Valley (I forget his name) wants to split up the state into six different states. The plan would allow that One-Percenter and his greedy and Fascist friends in the Silicon Valley to pay lower taxes and accumulate even more wealth.
    I dunno how much more proof GOP Progressives and Moderates need to realize that tax cuts DO NOT create jobs and general economic prosperity…

    • Pinegold

      certainly tax increases don’t either.

  • Charlie McKenna

    OK EVERYBODY conservatives, liberals, EVERYBODY! Look at what is happening in Kansas.That is the conservatives want for the rest of the country. WAKE UP! If you are not part of the 1% and you vote Repug YOU ARE VOTING AGAINST YOUR OWN SELF INTEREST. Stop doing it right now. Brownback’s policies are so popular that 100 Kansas republicans support the Democratic candidate for governor. REMEMBER IN NOVEMBER!

  • Erin Argast

    The basic idea behind the Trickle Down Supply Side Reaganomic Brownbackian BS, is that if we are especially nice to the Very Rich-giving them whopping tax cuts, and tax credits, and de-regulation, etc-they will return the favor by taking some of their windfall, and spending it on US,,,building better schools, new factories, etc. However, that never happens. Instead, the Very Rich take all of their windfall out of the country. What they don’t store in Swiss, and Cayman, banks, they use to buy things for themselves only: Villas in Rome, Cars in Germany, yachts in Greece, etc.

  • LasloPratt

    …certainly benefited the most wealthy Kansans – people just like the Kochs – while inflicting higher taxes on middle income and working-class families…

    And yet you’re calling Brownback’s policies a failure. Dude, they did exactly what they were supposed to. They may be a disaster, but they’re not a failure. The damage they have done is proof of their success.

  • herchato

    Ryan & Brownback in 16? What a lineup that would be! Tax cuts and coaching should straiten everything out. Lol

    • plc97477

      Except I think bauchmann has hopes in that area.

  • Blueberry Hill

    We have a chance in November to rid ourselves of these Kochroach serving TPugs. They can continue to make us miserable until we stand up to the scum and decide Enough is Enough! They are warmongers who don’t know shit about governing or economics. They are there to serve their wealthy masters and that is all that matters to them. The GOPigs are out to destroy this government, our country, and all of us with it.



  • howa4x

    It wasn’t bad enough that the investor class got a bailout for their unparalled greed, not they want to go state buy state to vanquish the middle class once and for all. the Koch plan is to have the middle class become so afraid of loosing a job they will take any lower pay and no benefits. Peons is what they want. controllable people that will do what the Koch’s want. these brothers of darkness are the poster twins of what is truly wrong in this country. Constantly grabbing with both hands there is never enough wealth for these 2 sons of Satan. They will vanquish environments all to ingratiate themselves, and those who support they quest for greed are symbols of Christianity run amok, or religion down the republican drain. Now the book What’s a matter with Kansas has new meaning. Hopefully these prairie decedents will take back the land they love and as they say in Brooklyn throw the Bums out.

  • Independent1

    The article talks about “some” Republicans choosing to support Davis rather than Brownback. According to this article from the Daily Kos, it would appear to be more than ‘some”; over 100 politically connected Republicans have chosen to put their backing behind Davis rather than Brownback. See this:

    KS-Gov: Over 100 Republican Officials Turn Their Backs On Brownback (R), Back Paul Davis (D)

    Today, I am excited to announce more than 100 Republicans – both current and former elected officials – endorsed Davis | Docking for Governor and Lieutenant Governor of Kansas.

    These are not just Republicans, they are Kansans who understand that in order to fix the mess Sam Brownback has created, we need to restore moderate, commonsense leadership to Kansas.

    They understand that the values that unite us as Kansans are much bigger than the partisan experiment Sam Brownback has brought to this state. That’s why this unprecedented group of Republicans have strongly endorsed myself and this campaign.

    This is an historic announcement. And this election will have historic consequences if we don’t join together as Kansans – regardless of party affiliation – to restore this state.

    As former Senate President Dick Bond said today: “This election should not be about electing a Republican or a Democrat as Governor. It must be about electing a moderate, commonsense Kansan as governor.”

    Take a moment, read the statements from the Republicans for Kansas Values, and join the Davis | Docking Team.

    Thank you,

    Paul Davis

  • Pinegold

    Everyone knows the Kochs are clandestine representatives of the Lizard Clan of Gorsh from the Planet Korella-3, who have infiltrated our ranks since the 1940s to exploit and bleed us. We can be grateful that Daily Kos, National Memo, and other sites still have the courage and remain unafraid to keep us advised of this nefarious conspiracy. Soon everyone will come to understand when Hillary Clinton’s skin at last molts and the Slimy Lizard beneath is revealed!