Quote for the Day

[jake]

<shake, shake, shake>

Why are the Dems turning into such chronic masturbators?  You are going to go blind.

[jake]

You REALLY need to diversify your information sources. Clinton said that nothing would likely be done before the election. Faux Noise snipped the soundbite and tried to make it mean Clinton supports extending the Bush Tax Cuts. So of course all of YOUR news sources are riffing off the Faux Noise lead. Nice try.

Watcher,

I watched this on the initial airing of the Maria B interview on CNBC.  Then I watched it again about half a dozen times the next day on CNBC as they replayed it over and over.  Here is the transcript from CNBC:

MARIA BARTIROMO: So does that mean extending the tax cuts?

PRES. BILL CLINTON: Well, I think what it means is they will have extend-- they will probably have to put everything off until early next year. That's probably the best thing to do right now. But the Republicans don't want to do that unless he agrees to extend the tax cuts permanently, including for upper income people.

And I don't think the president should do that. That's going to-- that's what they're fighting about. I don't have any problem with extending all of it now, including the current spending level. They're still pretty low, the government spending levels. But I think they look high because there's a recession. So the taxes look lower than they really would be if we had two and a half, 3% growth. And the spending is higher than it would be if we had two and a half, 3% growth because there are so many people getting food stamps, so many people getting unemployment, so many people are Medicaid.

"I don't have any problem with extending all of it now."  That is pretty clear, especially from a guy who wants to debate the meaning of "is."

In any case, the CNBC interviewer, Maria B., also took it to mean extending the so-called Bush tax cuts for ALL. 
Maybe you should try to diversify into PRIMARY sources once in a while. 

And please, don't risk blindness and hairy palms from all of your shaking it.  I am sure there is a woman (or man?) out there for you somewhere that can offer something better than your calloused palm. 

[jake]

The Huffington Post (to diversify my sources):

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/05/bill-clinton-country-is-i_n_1572069.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+HP%2FBusiness+(Business+on+The+Huffington+Post)

Bill Clinton: Bush Tax Cuts Should Be Extended Temporarily (VIDEO)
Former president Bill Clinton caused additional headaches for the Obama campaign on Tuesday when he told CNBC that he wouldn't have a problem with Congress temporarily extending all the Bush tax cuts, which are due to expire at the end of the year.

Clinton went on to insist that President Obama should not sign off on legislation that would extend the top end tax cut rates permanently, a concession that Republicans have demanded. In that regard both he and Obama are on the same page: They both believe the high-end Bush tax cuts need to be de-coupled, extended for the middle and lower classes and ended for the upper earners. But Clinton's insistence that he would have "no problem" extending all of the tax cuts for some amount of time puts the Obama campaign in an awkward position. In this hyper-political climate, Republicans were quick to pounce on the daylight between the current and former Democratic president.

Watcher, does it sting to be wrong every time you try this with me?   

[watcher]

Watcher,
I watched this on the initial airing of the Maria B interview on CNBC.  Then I watched it again about half a dozen times the next day on CNBC as they replayed it over and over.  Here is the transcript from CNBC:

MARIA BARTIROMO: So does that mean extending the tax cuts?

PRES. BILL CLINTON: Well, I think what it means is they will have extend-- they will probably have to put everything off until early next year. That's probably the best thing to do right now. But the Republicans don't want to do that unless he agrees to extend the tax cuts permanently, including for upper income people.

And I don't think the president should do that. , That's going to-- that's what they're fighting about. I don't have any problem with extending all of it now including the current spending level. They're still pretty low, the government spending levels. But I think they look high because there's a recession. So the taxes look lower than they really would be if we had two and a half, 3% growth. And the spending is higher than it would be if we had two and a half, 3% growth because there are so many people getting food stamps, so many people getting unemployment, so many people are Medicaid.

"I don't have any problem with extending all of it now."  That is pretty clear, especially from a guy who wants to debate the meaning of "is.

The Huffington Post (to diversify my sources):

Watcher, does it sting to be wrong every time you try this with me?   

Sting? Shirley, you jest.  The transparency of your density makes me smile. Also, knowing your chiropractic future from the  contortions necessary to successfully fit your preconceptions means we shall know thee by thy calloused knees.

"But it all sounded so reasonable!" eh?

[jake]

Yeah, Watcher, I guess the interviewer herself, CNBC, the NYT, the Huffington Post, etc. all got it wrong when they heard Bill say:

"I don't have any problem with extending all of it now"

I know you Dems are having a hard time staying on message when the message changes everyday.  Next your are going to tell us Obama took himself out of context when he said "the private sector is doing fine."

[watcher]

Yeah, Watcher, I guess the interviewer herself, CNBC, the NYT, the Huffington Post, etc. all got it wrong when they heard Bill say:

"I don't have any problem with extending all of it now"

I know you Dems are having a hard time staying on message when the message changes everyday.  Next your are going to tell us Obama took himself out of context when he said "the private sector is doing fine."

Pointless, but WTH...
YOU said "Clinton was forced to change his mind and only support some of those tax cuts." when there was no change at all.
What he said, when he said it, was that it was likely that nothing would be done in this Congress except to extend everything until next year and that he didn't have a problem with THAT.  In his very next sentence he said that the Rethuglicans don't want to do that unless the cuts are made permanent, which he doesn't think is a good idea and that the President shouldn't do it.

Where is the schism in that? Yeah, yeah, I know... it's bad news for Obama. The message of Wisconsin is that we don' need no steenkin teachers, cops or firemen... corporations are people, GM should have been allowed to fail and Rmoney can take credit for the domestic auto recovery because his daddy, dogs LIKE to ride on the top of the family car and garages should have elevators...

Yep, it's offical in Amercia

[jake]

Watcher,

Let's just use the quote function, so you don't screw anything up (other than you hand):

This week, on CNBC, Bill Clinton supported extending all of the so-called Bush tax cuts...

CLINTON:

I don't have any problem with extending all of it now...

LOL.  You see, the key word is ALL. 
Now Clinton does not support extending ALL of them.
The rest of the world (CNBC, Maria B, NYT, Huffington Post, etc.) views this as a change, going from having no problem extending ALL of them, to now just supporting extending some of them.

I guess this is proving to be a difficult concept for you.  Keep at, you will get through it, and I will be here to help you along the way

[watcher]

Watcher,

Let's just use the quote function, so you don't screw anything up (other than you hand):

This week, on CNBC, Bill Clinton supported extending all of the so-called Bush tax cuts...

CLINTON:

I don't have any problem with extending all of it now...

LOL.  You see, the key word is ALL. 
Now Clinton does not support extending ALL of them.
The rest of the world (CNBC, Maria B, NYT, Huffington Post, etc.) views this as a change, going from having no problem extending ALL of them, to now just supporting extending some of them.

I guess this is proving to be a difficult concept for you.  Keep at, you will get through it, and I will be here to help you along the way.

Yes, NOT-the-POTUS Bill Clinton said HE didn't have a problem with TEMPORARILY extending ALL of the Bush Tax Cuts.  What he did not say is anything that could be construed as supporting making them permanent. You dare raise Clinton's parsings while disingenuously doing the same yourself? By all means, go ahead, do your little Ed Grimley dance of joy.

As the ex-president, attention whore and ego-centric media darling, that's what Bill Clinton does.  As a practical matter, extending all the cuts past the election avoids having to negotiate with terrorists, removes the pissing-match arena and doesn't distract from other more important business, (like birth certificates?)

I'm not sure what your expectations were for repairing the damage done to this country or how any substantive work could happen in an obstruction zone...

[jake]

Watcher,

Where did I mention anything about them being permanent? 

This week, on CNBC, Bill Clinton supported extending all of the so-called Bush tax cuts...

Stick to shaking stick  

[watcher]

Watcher,

Where did I mention anything about them being permanent? 

"Not even a Dem former president can keep up!  This week, on CNBC, Bill Clinton supported extending all of the so-called Bush tax cuts."

[jake]

Watcher,

Where did I mention anything about them being permanent? 

"Not even a Dem former president can keep up!  This week, on CNBC, Bill Clinton supported extending all of the so-called Bush tax cuts."

Neither the Bush nor Obama tax cuts were ever made permanent.  So why would you make an ASSumption that extending them would be? 
I see the issue as Bill's change from extending ALL of them, so now extending just some of them.

[watcher]

Watcher,

Where did I mention anything about them being permanent? 

"Not even a Dem former president can keep up!  This week, on CNBC, Bill Clinton supported extending all of the so-called Bush tax cuts."

Neither the Bush nor Obama tax cuts were ever made permanent.  So why would you make an ASSumption that extending them would be? 
I see the issue as Bill's change from extending ALL of them, so now extending just some of them.

Why? Past postings, serial Obama derangement, wanton hyperbole, conflation and regurgitated wingnutisms without cite or sight. A memory hole capable of swallowing whole decades when the recollection might expose clay-footed heroes?

How are ex-POTUS Bill Clinton's utterances on any subject, on which he is currently only an observer, germane to anything?