Mika Brzezinski: Return Taxes to 'Normal Levels'
MSNBC once again repeated the liberal line that returning to the higher pre-Bush tax rates is somehow not raising taxes. "If you just go back to normal tax standards, it's not a break of the [no tax hike] pledge that many of them signed" said Mika Brzezinski on Thursday's Morning Joe.
Brzezinski was reacting to Joe Scarborough's explanation of why Republicans don't like to negotiate tax deals. "A lot of Republicans, a lot of conservatives, and I include myself fiscally in that category, have seen it time and again where we have heard, 'well you raise taxes and we'll take care of cuts later.' Cuts are never taken care of." Scarborough had just finished explaining to the panel that tax hikes can hurt the economy by citing the example of Connecticut under Governor Lowell Weicker.
The "Morning Joe" co-host, however, objected to Scarborough's characterization of tax increases as tax increases. She twice repeated "It's not raising," and insisted that Democrats only wanted to bring taxes "back to normal levels."
Mika Brzezinski now joins contributor Mike Barnicle among those at MSNBC who refuse to acknowledge that raising tax rates does actually amount to an increase in taxes.
A transcript of the exchange, which aired at 6:44 am on Thursday, follows below.
MSNBC
Morning Joe
July 21, 2011
6:44 a.m. EDT
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: If you revoke some of the Bush - if you just go back to normal tax standards, it's not a break of the pledge that many of them signed-
JOE SCARBOROUGH: A lot of Republicans, a lot of conservatives, and I include myself fiscally in that category, have seen it time and again where we have heard, "well you raise taxes and we'll take care of cuts later." Cuts are never taken care of.
BRZEZINSKI: It's not raising.
SCARBOROUGH: It's actually the easy thing to do in American politics, to raise taxes.
BRZEZINSKI: It's not raising.
SCARBOROUGH: Because the editorial boards will praise you. You will be seen as a respectable, responsible man about town. I mean - I hear this constantly. When is the pressure going to come to make really tough cuts on the programs? I never see those editorials.
BARNICLE: You know, one of the big problems with taxes, whether you raise them -
BRZEZINSKI: Back to normal levels -
# # #
- Eric Ames's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Props for Joe
Submitted by inquiringmind on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 3:30pm.
At least he said what we all have been saying for some time now. It's easy to raise taxes. The tough thing to do is to cut spending.
As for Mika...
Ok cool...let's go back to
Submitted by Maideneer on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 3:39pm.
Ok cool...let's go back to normal spending levels too then...I say ohhhh, 1924 spending levels, deal? It's not cutting spending, it's just going back to normal levels.
That works for me
Submitted by mandrake on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 4:06pm.
But then we would have to go back to 1924 population levels as well? A lot of people would have to disappear..oh well, small price to pay.
No Problem
Submitted by Joe W. on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 4:23pm.
We could convert all of the liberals into energy wafers, a la Soylant Green.....3 issues solved.....
No Problem
Submitted by Joe W. on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 4:33pm.
We could convert all of the liberals into energy wafers, a la Soylant Green.....3 issues solved.....
The only problem there is...........
Submitted by OldJarhead77 on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 4:57pm.
There is NO ENERGY there they are full of hot air and whines!
They're also full of other
Submitted by killa37 on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 6:41pm.
They're also full of other substances that we don't want to deal with...........
Hmmmm....
Submitted by Unsane on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 7:37pm.
Why would we have to go back to 1924 population levels? Government hasn't been growing proportionately with population.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Can't slip anything by you
Submitted by mandrake on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 7:49pm.
You know I have to make at least one stupid comment per day or I don't sleep well. It's an OCD thing..so now I'm done..good night.
Hmmm...
Submitted by retrocon on Fri, 07/22/2011 - 11:18am.
Not sure i agree that we'd have to go back to the same population level, that implies that the feds are spending money on a per-capita basis "properly."
How about the feds don't do social programs, don't do education, don't do EPA, policing, etc.
I think we could go back to 1924 spending levels, adjusted for today's dollars, and just do national defense and some limited interstate commerce projects (highways and air transportation).
Lord love a duck
Submitted by mandrake on Fri, 07/22/2011 - 11:23am.
Unsane already nailed me on that one..do you have to repeat it? Well I've got my one stupid in for the day ;)
Actually we are at normal tax
Submitted by kg on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 4:53pm.
Actually we are at normal tax levels. Clinton rose taxes to an abnormally high rate. Bush just brought them back down. Besides that we have been at normal levels longer that we were at the abnormally high levels.
"DumbAssity of Dope"
Umm, wasn't The Brain whining about living on the edge recently?
Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 3:41pm.
Oh yeah, that was her.
Good thing you're kinda cute, Mika ...
Submitted by Newsbubba on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 3:51pm.
... because your IQ doesn't exceed that of a 10 gallon bucket of chum!
I'll agree. Let's go back to normal tax levels, along with normal size of government levels, normal spending levels, normal borrowing levels, normal presidential IQ levels, normal sexual relationships levels, etc, etc, etc.
Bubba, the lib/Dems have a
Submitted by killa37 on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 6:45pm.
Bubba, the lib/Dems have a 'new' definition of just about anything, including 'normal'..........and, personally, I can't get too much past 'kind of cute', when a woman is as clueless and humorless as this dimwit is.........
"clueless and humorless"
Submitted by Newsbubba on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 7:14pm.
That's why they make duct tape, Killa!
Mika Brzezinski is the kind
Submitted by Beukeboom on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 4:00pm.
Mika Brzezinski is the kind of an uber-lib who would pick up a dog turd and claim it was a rose.
I'm thinking more like
Submitted by djwolf12 on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 8:04pm.
She would put saran-wrap underneath the presidential toilet and claim when Obama exits he leaves gold.
I have a better idea
Submitted by V the K on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 4:02pm.
Let's return *spending* to normal levels... 18-20% of GDP instead of 25%.
Even better....
Submitted by almostacowboy on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 4:31pm.
If 10% is good enough for Jesus..........
There ya go, cowboy, mixing
Submitted by killa37 on Fri, 07/22/2011 - 1:11pm.
There ya go, cowboy, mixing that 'church and state' thing again...............you damn Christians just don't know when to stop, do ya????
At least the Dem lies about
Submitted by robert108 on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 4:30pm.
At least the Dem lies about taxation are consistent; when obama caved and extended the present tax rates last December, the Dems started talking about how he "cut taxes".
It's also good to note that, in Demspeak, homosexuality is also "normal".
Now, if we could just get.....
Submitted by almostacowboy on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 4:32pm.
....Mika's IQ up to "normal".
LOL almostacowboy...Actually Mika
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 7:11pm.
was repeating the identical [return to "normal" tax rates] remark she had made last week. I cringed then, too. If it's any consolation, she did vigorously defend Bachmann this morning against the r*dic*lous attacks on her alleged debilitating migraines.
Jer
Whattya mean her "alleged"---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 9:49pm.
debilitating migraines?
Was that a liberal crack liberally made by some liberal at large? :o)
MD
p.s. - good thinking with the asterisks
md...re **
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 9:58pm.
Can't afford to take any chances these days.
Jer
Of course she was repeating it.
Submitted by almostacowboy on Fri, 07/22/2011 - 10:35am.
When one's IQ is that limited one can't be expected to come up with a different thought EVERY week. ;-)
Know Your Value???
Submitted by Hozeking on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 4:41pm.
...not worth a nickel.
Your cute aside looks into the camera are wearing old. You're over 40 yrs old for cryin' out loud with two kids. Try using that English degree to offer an original thought.
Oh.....you ARE great reading a teleprompter.
George W. Bush did NOT "cut"
Submitted by TE on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 4:50pm.
George W. Bush did NOT "cut" tax rates.
Bush only partially repealed Clinton's massive tax rate increases.
I agree with red-eyed, frothing at the mouth, uber, ultra, hard and far, far, far, far, far left, virulent, militant, hardline, hysterical, fundamentalist feminist/leftist Mika Brzezinski that we should return to "normal tax standards", i.e., the standard that existed for more than half of this country's existence, to wit: NO FEDERAL INCOME TAXES!
Tariffs
Submitted by Unsane on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 8:27pm.
Back to tariffs?
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Frankly I could not care less
Submitted by Beukeboom on Fri, 07/22/2011 - 10:53am.
Frankly I could not care less what they call it...the bottom line question is does more or less of my money is taken from me to go to the government?
So, TE, the question is: did tax rates for individuals go up or down during George Bush's Presidency?
To paraphrase: a tax increase by any other name still stinks.
Mika is unbearably snarky
Submitted by chazzy-kc on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 4:54pm.
Her condescending, smarmy eye rolling is of the type that would inspire me to do that which I have never done: slug a woman.
She is also alarmingly ignorant. I gave up watching Morning Joe the day she declared that Lincoln was her favorite founding father!
Forrest Gump would be proud of her....stupid is as stupid does.
Even Gump was smart enough to
Submitted by Bhaal on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 5:09pm.
Even Gump was smart enough to know he wasn't a smart man. Mika is clueless to her idiocy.
Let's go back to the tax levels when Mika and Amy Carter...
Submitted by Red Jeep on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 5:19pm.
...played with dolls in the White House with 70 percent marginal tax rates, compared to 35 percent marginal tax rates under Bush.
Look at all the money the government lost! Yea, that's the ticket, go back to those old tax rates.
I agree with Mika. Lets return to the income tax levels...
Submitted by Dave. on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 5:44pm.
...our founders intended.
That would be ZERO.
This nation survived its first 150 years without a federal income tax.
It could do so again, once it deals firmly with its mooch, leech, and tick ptoblem.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Tariffs
Submitted by Unsane on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 8:05pm.
Back to tariffs?
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
mika's insight
Submitted by rightwinghawk on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 6:02pm.
Examples of Mika's commentaries: "Yes, but." "I don't." "You can't." This doesn't seem to." "Hmmmmm." "I just want to." "I can't believe, well, it can't, you think." And then she pretends people interrupt her. So Joe says, "Go ahead, Mika, tell us what you think." And she says, "I don't, you can't, this doesn't seem to, hmmmmm, well, hmmmmm." Brilliant.
Mika I have a suggestion
Submitted by ohio granny on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 6:46pm.
Why don't you "donate" ALL your income to the federal government. You think everyone should be paying more. So I am calling on you to put your money where your mouth is.
But if am sure you don't really mean YOU should be paying more, just us little people.
Okay, Mika sweetie...the "regular" income tax rates when...
Submitted by drsamherman on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 8:10pm.
...the income tax was first enacted following adoption of the 16th Amendment in 1913 was set at between 1% and 7% based on income brackets according to the Tax Foundation website at http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html - so if you want taxes to return to their BASELINE rates, so be it.
You can tell Mika is too dumb to be Secretary of the Treasury. At least he knows enough about tax rates to evade them.
OK, Mika, I'll bite.
Submitted by motherbelt on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 8:20pm.
What's normal??
How long is a string?
I'm guessing "normal" for Mika is AFTER the Bush 41 hikes and the Clinton hikes, but BEFORE the Bush 43 cuts....
Mika, last name, MSNBC cafeteria.
OK Bubbles..............
Submitted by djwolf12 on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 8:38pm.
since YOU are an elitist and you live in the elitist part of Manhattan, I declare YOU fork over 70+% of ALL of your and your family's wealth and spread it around. You called for it, now I demand it. You have more than me, and according to you, THAT IS NOT FAIR! So, fork it over you communist skank!
Normal: adj "conforming with
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 8:40pm.
Normal: adj
"conforming with or constituting an accepted standard, model, or pattern; esp., corresponding to the median or average of a large group in type, appearance, achievement, function, development, etc.; natural; usual; standard; regular"
I had planned to link the Tax Foundation URL--but drsam beat me to it--to make a different point: If one reviews the almost one hundred year history of federal income taxation, it becomes quickly apparent that the current rates [enacted by Bush] and even the Clinton "hikes" are still significantly lower than what existed throughout most of that period, which saw upper rates in the 70-90 per cent range. In that context, a return to "normal" (i.e., median or average rates) would result in tax bracketing far higher than anyone is presently suggesting.
Jer
Just a legal question here, Jer.
Submitted by drsamherman on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 11:28pm.
Since tax rates are set by Congress by law, I do not understand where Mika gets the idea of "normal" vs. abnormal tax rates. The Tax Foundation data makes it clear that income tax rates have fluctuated mostly up during the 98 year history of their existence. Since this is a function of whatever law is in force at the time, how can anyone say what is normal and what is not?
In the medical context, we define "normal" statistically using the 95% confidence interval that has been in place for over a century. For example, laboratory index values for electrolytes, therapeutic drug levels, etc., are derived from Kaplan-Meier curves and similar methodology. I am not aware that this same methodology of defining "normal" exists in law.
How is she saying that older tax rates, which were changed using a constitutionally derived process, are "normal" in that context?
drsam...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 07/22/2011 - 12:55am.
I was grasping at a very slender straw. When I first heard Mika use the term the other day, I blanched, and when she repeated it this morning I just shook my head in disbelief--figuring NB would probably catch it this time. It's an extraordinarily clumsy statement to make. But, that's Mika. Her daddy is smart, but was not always wise. Alas, she is neither.
Jer
Let's see....
Submitted by Blonde on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 10:29pm.
Going from a 35% top marginal rate to a 39% marginal rate isn't raising?
So I propose to Mika that we do a little experiment. We'll cement her feet in the pool, just at the level where the pool is at 35% full, and it reaches to right below her nostrils. Then we'll raise the level of the water so that the pool is 39% full.
Wonder how she'll feel about 35% -> 39% "not raising"?
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
I'm in the gym this morning......
Submitted by GregE on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 10:45pm.
.......and heard her say that. It was all I could do not to yell out how completely STUPID that was.
As if the levels of the Clinton years taxes were "normal" and had been in place since 1787. Unbelievable stupidity.
Normal tax rates?
Submitted by big.league.slider on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 11:06pm.
Libs hate tax "loopholes". We can eliminate one single tax loophole that would effectively create an instant additional $100 billion per year for the federal budget, and it would not raise anyone's income tax liability by one single cent.
End the EIT.
Only those with zero federal income tax liability qualify for the EIT. So even after eliminating the EIT loophole, their federal income tax liability would still be zero. It's the perfect compromise. The libs get $100 billion more per year for social security and medicare, and one less tax loophole. The conservatives don't get a tax rate increase.
I feel like Solomon.
Mika,
Submitted by docjohn52 on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 11:52pm.
Math isn't your strong suit is it?
I am not surprised at what
Submitted by amyshulk on Fri, 07/22/2011 - 6:32am.
I am not surprised at what Mika says anymore. Disgusted, but not surprised. And to think, she couldn't understand why she wasn't being paid commensurate with her ability!
The R's need to come up with an informative video that traces the roots of income taxes and how we went from fighting to be free of taxation without representation, to *just* taxing the truly "rich" and WHY, to where we are today. Link it to how we went from doing what was required {protecting the US} to wants over needs.
FOX just hi-lighted a study that determined our "poor" have modern conveniences - well duh - they get their needs paid for {welfare/food stamps/housing/WIC, etc} so they spend their $$$ on their wants!
Ronald Reagan
Good idea. Reading this RNC?
Submitted by Red Jeep on Fri, 07/22/2011 - 6:49am.
Make the video, and post on YouTube. Shouldn't cost much and with the right promo might go viral.
Red Jeep
Submitted by amyshulk on Fri, 07/22/2011 - 12:14pm.
Glenn Beck was good at this kind of stuff, but he tended to be too repetitious. Klavin would be a good choice, but not sure if he'd just be tuned out by indies or not?
Ronald Reagan
LOL, Amy
Submitted by Blonde on Fri, 07/22/2011 - 11:52am.
She was being paid commensurate to her ability (none).
Now she is grossly overpaid.
For the life of me, I can't figure out why this woman isn't cleaning toilets for a living.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Blonde
Submitted by amyshulk on Fri, 07/22/2011 - 12:09pm.
You understood me just fine Blonde - I'm *so* glad I don't have to spell things out around here!
With her running obsession, and her judgmental nature, I pegged her more as a bored housewife, sniping and outdoing her neighbors.
Ronald Reagan