WOW! Can we now move on to the issue of fairness?

No wonder Big Guy thought there was a War on Women (WOW).  Certainly all the signs around here indicate there is. For example even some of our very own brave women warriors

                     

conceded that the Big White’s band of merry men created a “hostile workplace” for the ladies. (aside: has there ever been so many whiners drawn together in one place in all of history? The women whine, the men whine, the journalists covering the whiners whine…). Anyway, that issue has been resolved: all the really big trouble makers (Anita Dunn and Christina Romer) left “to pursue other opportunities.”

Then of course there is the issue of the violation of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act that both Big Guy and Lady M tout so proudly at every fund raiser. It’s supposed to make it illegal to unfairly pay men more than women for doing the same job. Unfortunately, since there aren’t any male MOTUSes around here, I don’t fall under that law. Nor, I guess, does anyone else. We must have gotten a Big White Obamacare exemption to it or something.

Because here’s the thing: it would appear as though there’s an 18% pay gap between Big White   and Big White no matter how you cut it.

So as we prepare to celebrate “equality day” next Tuesday, our enemies list will no doubt be rolling this inconvenient truth out in an effort to ridicule us. In truth, there’s a perfectly good explanation for this gap, butt we’re loath to release it, because then everyone else would use it too. Which would leave that part of the Republican WOW in the dustbin of history along with all the other great ideas around here that failed to launch.

Anyway, back to the rest of the evidence submitted in the Big White’s case for the WOW: this damning piece turned in just yesterday by Big Guy himself! It turns out not only does he make more than his secretary (which is unfair), but he also pays a smaller percentage of his income in taxes than his secretary! (really UNFAIR)

Butt here’s some good news that I discovered, thanks to Doug Ross’ excellent research: in order to get someone in Big Guy’s income bracket ($790,000!) to pay the same rate as someone in his secretary’s bracket ($90,000), we would actually have to lower his tax rate by 7.6%:

Big Guy, a 1%-er; Big Guy’s secretary, a 25%-er: is that fair?

Although, thanks to tax loopholes, apparently Big Guy didn’t even have to pay the average 23.3% that most 1%-ers pay. Which is still confusing, because Big Guy keeps insisting that the 1%-ers are currently paying only 15% - that he wants the do-nothing Congress to raise to 30%.

So I don’t know if this whole thing is fair or unfair. It’s sort of confusing. So I came up with a proposal to fix everything:

• Step #1, Big Guy should immediately write a check to the Treasury for an additional $67,150 (his full 30% fair share).
• Step#2, Issue an Order under the authority of Obamacare requiring all 1%-ers to do the same, especially the ones running around shooting their mouths off about not paying their 30% fair share.
• Step #3, I would like to propose that we change the name of the “Buffet Rule” - not to the disingenuous “Reagan Rule” butt rather to the “Obama Rule.” That way, not only can BO get the credit for it butt just in case Obamacare is thrown out by the Supremes, he’ll still have a signature legislative accomplishment.

That is if you consider a “rounding error of a rounding error” a major accomplishment (which Big Guy does.)  Apparently Rick Santelli doesn’t though:

via American Digest’s “5 minute arguments”

Butt I digress. Back to the WOW. Here’s further proof, as if you need it, that it’s really the Republican’s who are leading this war: Chickaboomer reported on the latest attack, launched by none other than Roger Ailes, head of that biased news network that Big Guy hates and wants to get off the air as part of his “Fairness Doctrine.”

Anyway, Roger referred to the completely unbiased CNN correspondent Soledad O’Brian as “that girl named after a prison.” Can you believe it? Calling a fully grown woman a “girl” in this day and age? There’s your proof right there that Republicans hate women.

Inquiring minds at Fox News are asking: does she have a sister named Attica? Or Alcatraz?

Butt I think you can see why we’d rather change the subject and drop the WOW now that the backlash has, frankly, caught us off guard and required us to throw our attack dogs under the bus.

…to make cookies.

So we’re temporarily tabling the WOW and moving on to the Class War, where the issue has turned from the silly issue of deficit reduction to the much more important issue of “fairness.” 

“If we collect the Buffett tax for the next 250 years — a span longer than the life of this republic — it would not cover the Obama deficit for 2011 alone.”  - Charles Krauthammer

WOW! No wonder we want to change the subject to “fairness.”

For starters, the “fair” part. And the “share” part.

Linked By: Gateway Pundit, and Larwyn’s Linx on Doug Ross@Journal, Thanks!

Failure to Launch. What the Fluke is going on here? UPDATED

Well, that was ugly.

There’s nothing worse than shooting a powerful rocket in the air, only to have it fail to launch. Or worse, blow up right in front of your eyes.

I suppose it’s partly due to the fact that we are just so darned committed to being transparent around here. Here’s our standard attack strategy:

1. The drop: someone close to the administration drops a non sequitur into an otherwise innocuous conversation.
2. The slap-shot: one of our media lap dogs wins the face off and slaps the puck as hard as he/she can down a very slippery surface.
3. The score: the designated player zips around the goalie and puts the puck in the net, thereby launching the...
4. “Liberal echo chamber elite cocooning”  offensive: (i.e. the talking heads can’t stop talking about it).

That’s how we introduced our Class War with the Buffet Rule; that’s how we launched the Republican’s “War on Women” (WOW) with the “contraceptive” issue, and that’s how we launched our “If I had a son he’d look like Trayvon” Race War.

Big Guy used to stay out of the fray until such time as the mine fields had been swept and AxeMan had determined it was safe for him to wade in (e.g. our poll numbers are in). Theoretically this had already occurred with the WOW, so last Friday Big Guy himself launched a missile in what was not intended as a declaration of war, butt rather a simple tactical assault. 

“And then there’s the woman who once advised me at the law firm in Chicago where we met. Once, uh, she gave me very good advice. That’s why I decided to marry her. And once Michelle and I had our girls, she gave it her all to balance raising a family and pursuing a career. And something that, could be very difficult on her, because I was gone a lot. Once I was in the state legislature, I was teaching, I was practicing law, I’d be traveling. And we didn’t have the luxury for her not to work. And I know when she was with the girls she’d feel guilty that she wasn’t giving enough time to her work, and when she was at work, she was feeling guilty she wasn’t giving enough time for the girls. And like many of you, we both wish there were machines that could let us be in two places at once.”

Then we had Hilary Rosen, one of our paid DNC strategists and frequent Big White visitors – if you consider 35 times “frequent” – escalate the offensive. And offensive it was: “She’s never worked a day in her life” !?? Yikes! You really shouldn’t let your elitism slip out that easily.

Butt she has a point. Maybe Ann should have just hired herself a nanny to take care of the boys…

so she could have done something more important:

Like become a world famous Famous Icon and Busy Mom.™

After initially standing her ground against Ann Romney’s very civil push-back (and getting thrown under that very crowded “Obama Express to Nowhere” bus)  Hilary was forced to apologize. Butt trust me: she’s not happy about being set up like that.

How do I know? You don’t say things like  “Can’t we just put an end to this phony war?” - thereby letting the whole dead cat out of the bag - unless you’re PI**ED about being under that smelly bus.

And I think the fact that the Big White denied her 3 times (“I personally know 3 Hilary Rosens” Jay Carney) didn’t help matters one single bit.

The 3 Hilary Rosens that the Big White knows:

Hilary #1: CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America; who spent her early career working for the Big Recording Business. Her major responsibilities included prosecuting kids (note: if this little girl had a stay-at-home mom this probably wouldn’t have happened) and stay at home moms for downloading songs off the Internet, and promising the “talent” that “the guy with the cocaine will be at the bus 20 minutes before the show.”

Hilary Rosen, CEO going after working Mom’s who let their kids use Napster and kaZaa

Hilary Rosen #2:  Democratic lobbyist (paid by DNC), strategist (paid by CNN) and LGBT activist (paid by Human Rights Campaign):

Hillary Rosen, Democratic lobbyist, strategist and LGBT activist

Hilary Rosen #3: Working mom.

Hilary Rosen, with her 2 children (and former partner Elizabeth Birch). NOTE: if Big Guy had a LGBT child, he/she would like one of these.

It’s possible the 35 Big White visits were split evenly between the 3 Hilary Rosens.

Well anyway, don’t worry Hil, you won’t be alone under the bus for long. Whoever came up with that stupid talking point: “what could stay at home moms who’ve never worked a day in their lives know about the economy?” will be right there along side you pretty soon.

Unless of course it was someone who is bulletproof.

Lady M, Fashion Icon and Busy Mom™, rockin’ with Military teens yesterday in Jacksonville

UPDATE: Yes, it’s the same orange frock recycled from our first Big White Food TV special. Different shoes this time though.

 

Further proof that stay-at-home moms don’t even know how to dress correctly:

Everyone knows that boob belts don’t belong around your waist.

…and that you wear two of them at a time.

UPDATE: This just in from American Power - “Well, shoot, at least somebody decided to mention that Hilary Rosen is a lesbian freak radical feminist.” So there you have it, MOTUS, American Power, American Digest, The Other McCain, Maggie’s Notebook and the Daily Mail: doing the work the lap dog media refuses to do. Full disclosure: MOTUS is a card carrying member of the Daily Mail’s yellow journalism school.

Linked By: Maggie’s Notebook, and American Digest, and Blonde on NewsBusters, and NOBO2012 on Free Republic and HotAir, Thanks

Joining Forces…with Ronald Reagan? Did I miss something?

Back to the TeeVee screens last night:

Lady M appears with that little Colbert man last night

As part of the official first year anniversary of the “Joining Forces” campaign, Lady M appeared on the Colbert Report to hype Big Guy’s reelection. Not officially of course, butt since the subject did come up, she did go on record to “back her man.”

 

“I am endorsing Barack Obama. I think he’ll be a phenomenal president. I think he’s done a wonderful job so far. He’s my man.”

And then she and the little host discussed the fact that Lady M is actually more popular than the phenomenal president:

“Do you ever lord over the President the fact that you’re more popular?” The talk show host questioned.”

It’s ok Buh-rock, we’ll have Gallup do a new poll next week.

For the record, the official answer to that question is “no.”

Let’s hear it! Who’s Number1?!!

And seriously, it’s way too early to begin talking about Lady M’s running for President, Big Guy’s still got 8 more years, at least. Besides, when it’s time we’re thinking of going the South American route and just appointing MO to the position ahead of a Chicago-style election. It makes for a much smoother transition.

Viva El Presidente!

 

Then Mr. Colbert returned to the alleged reason for Lady M’s appearance: supporting military families:

“When I was campaigning (as opposed to NOT campaigning i.e. vacationing - although more and more they tend to overlap) I got to meet all these military families, and I was awed by their sacrifice...It’s hard to be a whiner around a veteran.”

Although, clearly, not impossible.

Anyway, a quick recap of the appearance:  Big Guy is Lady M’s man, so far. And she thinks he’ll make a phenomenal president. Next time.

Anyway, before flying off to do the Colbert show we grabbed an umbrella to weather the early spring dampness and marked the first year anniversary of pandering to Joining Forces on the South Lawn.

unfortunately it was a patio umbrella,

and we chose to wear it, rather than simply have someone hold it. Understandable, given previous umbrella incidents and accidents.

Are you sure that’s the best way to use a piece of military equipment?

Are you sure that’s the best way to provide umbrellacare coverage?

Later MO and Jilly were in Pennsylvania to take credit for nursing organizations that have pledged to train nurses to treat soldiers with PTSD.

Lady M, sans plum umbrella, and Dr. Jilly in PA.

And yes, I know that Lady M’s appearance on The Biggest Loser, Part II aired last night. Butt since nobody watched it, I thought I could wait until tomorrow to report on that.

Especially since there was this far more important breaking news yesterday: “Ronald Reagan endorses Big Guy’s “#BuffetRule!”

Of course when all was said and done it turns out that the clips that Big Guy based this amazing claim on were, indeed, taken out of context by ThinkProgress. That’s almost as stunning as GSA approving $900k conferences in Vegas, baby.

Here’s an actual analysis of Ronnie’s “Reagan Rule:” 

If you translate Obama’s words, what he’s really saying is that he wants people to keep less of their hard-earned money so that additional money will be available for him to spend on welfare state programs and more Solyndras.

Obama’s failure to acknowledge this distinction was hammered home in the same speech, when he suggested renaming the Buffett Rule the “Reagan Rule.” His remarks followed up on a video clip posted by the liberal group ThinkProgress in which Reagan, in a 1985 speech on the tax code, told a story about an executive paying a lower tax rate than his secretary.

Yet Reagan told the story as part of a larger pitch for tax reform. Unlike Obama, Reagan was interested in targeting loopholes so that he could lower rates, to allow people to keep more of their own money.

“Lower, flatter tax rates will give Americans more confidence in the future,” Reagan said in the speech referenced by Obama. “It’ll mean if you work overtime or get a raise or a promotion or if you have a small business and are able to turn a profit, more of that extra income will end up where it belongs — in your wallets, not in Uncle Sam’s pockets.”

And the prize for “That wild-eyed, socialist, tax-hiking class warrior” goes to… may I have the envelope please?

Linked By: Key West Reader on Hot Air, and motherbelt on NewsBusters, Thanks!

Line-up at the Buffet - today’s special: #BuffetRule hash

This is a really, really long chart, so scroll away:

h/t Ace

Well, ok, since this has been floating around for a week or so now, we can finally get to the truth: the Buffet Rule is really more about spreading the wealth around. Just not that much wealth, according to the CBO, so it’s more symbolic of where we intend to go from here.

So anyway, the “Buffet Rule” was never about paying down the deficit? It was about making life “fair” all along?

The goal, Mr. Furman explained, is to establish a "a basic issue of tax fairness."

That’s something even your Mom was never able to do. I guess that technically does make this the ultimate nanny state edict rule.

I wonder if we should start with Big Guy’s staff? As of February they still collectively owed $833,000 in back taxes. And Warren Buffet? He could just go ahead and pay the $1 billion the IRS says he owes instead of fighting it. That seems fair to me.

And if it’s about being “fair” we’re faced with that age old question of “what exactly is ‘fair’” and which one of Big Guy’s czars gets to decide?”

What do you say we play a few rounds of the Is this fair? game. Like Jeopardy, it’s divided into several categories.

Is it Fair? Unfair weight distribution category:

 

Is it Fair? Unfair big brain distribution category:

Is it Fair? Unfair job opportunities due to political connections category:

Chelsea Clinton, MSNBC commentator

Santita Jackson, new Fox contributor

Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State

Is it Fair? Unfair wealth due to family/marriage category:

 

Is it Fair? Do we really want to go there? The fairness route? If so who do you think should be our fairness czar? Here’s a hint as to whom Big Guy is leaning towards Wright now: a man who has been preaching about how to make life fairer for most of his life by railing against “rich, white people.” And trying to set the record straight on a whole bunch of “White supremacists” – and one Black Supreme:

 

Anyway, Big Guy is droning on in the East Room about how his Buffet “fair share” rule could just as soon be called the “Reagan Rule” (do we really want to go there?)

I think not.

On another front: all hell’s broken loose again with one of Jim Messina’s (another of Big Guy’s winners in the Big Brain category) Tweet Wars: This time Jimmy had Big Guy send out a new hashtag asking his Obots what they think the additional revenue from implementing the Buffet Rule could do. It was promptly Occupied by the R-words astroturf conservatives.

and my personal favorite:

Ah yes: you’ve been here too long. Time to go now.

And take your little meat puppet with you.

Linked By: Larwyn’s Linx on Doug Ross@Journal, NOBO2012 on Free Republic, and Blonde on NewsBusters, Thanks!