Miss Manners Would Be Appalled At Jan Brewer’s Classless Behavior

Filed in National by on January 26, 2012

Jan Brewer obviously wasn’t raised right.

“I asked him if he had read my book, ‘Scorpions for Breakfast.’ And he said that he read an excerpt and he didn’t think that I was very cordial,” Brewer said in the phone call to KFYI’s Mike Broomhead. “I said, ‘Well, we’ll just agree to disagree.’ And , uh, he was somewhat thin skinned and a little tense to say the least.”

First, Governor Brewer was the host.  Her only job on that tarmac was to greet her guest and welcome him to her state.  Not, “Hi! Have you read my book?”  Tacky.

If she had to behave with all the restraint of a toddler she could have waited until a more appropriate time and place.  But like a small child she had to make it all about her – even going as far as pointing her finger at the President.

ap obama jan brewer lt 120125 wblog President Obama, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer Share Tense Tarmac MomentCredit: Hazar N. Ghanbari / AP Photo

And make no mistake, this isn’t about political differences – this is about basic manners…  Something Governor Brewer doesn’t possess.

Actually, many in the Republican Party would benefit from an etiquette class.  Joe “You lie” Wilson springs to mind.  Rush Limbaugh’s and Congressman Jim Sensenbrennerattacks on Michelle Obama’s looks.  Seriously, they aren’t fit for polite society.

Tags:

About the Author ()

A stay-at-home mom with an obsession for National politics.

Comments (95)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. socialistic ben says:

    how many CONs now think she is a brave hero for standing up to the evil one? Remember, Joe Wilson got re-elected. a lot lf the baggers came to power on the promise of poor manners, and then there is Newt. Frau Brewer is just a leathery byproduct of the hate.

  2. Que Pasa says:

    So Mr. “I Won” gets a little back talk. Boo hoo!

    The way Obama treats this country, I’m surprised the “thin-skinned” diaper dandy doesn’t get more of it.

  3. socialistic ben says:

    see?

  4. Jason330 says:

    Classlessness and being unbound by any sense of morality, decency and integrity are essential traits for modern Republicans. Newt’s two biggest strengths going into the general election will be his capacity to lie with agility and fluency, and unlimited funding from wingnut millionaire super pacs in order to spread the lies quickly and forcefully.

  5. MJ says:

    QP is the poster boy of the blogs for bad behavior.

  6. Geezer says:

    What they reportedly disagreed about is what happened when they met previously. Obama told her that her account was not accurate. Maybe he was just giving her hints on how to write an autobiography that sells.

  7. Que Pasa says:

    Or, Geezer, having an “auto”-biography ghost-written by a mentor.

  8. Que Pasa says:

    “Classlessness and being unbound by any sense of morality, decency and integrity are essential traits for modern Republicans.” – Jason330

    Then there’s this by Delaware’s own perpetual embarassment, Joe ‘Blowhard’ Biden:

    http://nation.foxnews.com/joe-biden/2012/01/26/biden-does-indian-accent-during-outsourcing-speech

    Explain away, komrades…

  9. Jason330 says:

    I’ll happily ameliorate your confusion. If the alternative is Sarah Palin, Joe Biden looks like George-fucking-Washington.

  10. Geezer says:

    “having an “auto”-biography ghost-written by a mentor.”

    Are there any mental-illness-based conservative memes that you don’t take as gospel truth? I liked you dumbbells better when you stuck to wailing about the gold standard.

  11. Geezer says:

    I’ll explain it for you, since you have the reasoning skills of an underage chimp: A rude Democrat does not disprove rudeness in Republicans.

    Try taking an introductory course in logic sometime.

  12. Hi from google says:

    miss manners would send an ipod full of her speeches to the queen and sign it “you’re welcome.”

  13. socialistic ben says:

    who needs logic when your dad is Cpt America and your uncle is Superman!

  14. pandora says:

    Looks like Brewer has a habit of changing her stories:

    “At some moments during her interviews, Brewer said that the president was the first one to bring up the book. At other points, she said she was the one to ask him about it.”

    And…

    “The description in question came from a particularly harsh passage in which Brewer called the president “condescending” and described a scene in which she sat silently for 10 minutes while he “proceeded to lecture” her.
    [...]
    It was a totally different picture than Brewer had painted publicly immediately after the meeting. At the time, the governor described the meeting as “very cordial” despite some disagreements with the president.”

  15. pandora says:

    And others aren’t backing up either version.

    She is an embarrassment. A rude, classless, tacky, untruthful embarrassment.

  16. Liberal Elite says:

    It looks like she’s a typical tea party liar…

    The tea party: Where lies are told to make a better America.

    Right??

  17. MJ says:

    I have another way to describe her, but I promised my co-editors that I would be nice. :-)

  18. Aoine says:

    and Why would Faru Brewer be ma?? – HMMMM let me count the ways

    1. her advisors are connected to Corrections Coorportions of merican and make billions off the Fed from houseing immigrants — and we all know about it.

    2. she signed SB1070 to boost CCAs profits – and the Obama administration sued AZ over it.

    3. her friend and fellow racist,, AZ Senator Russell Pearce, who with Mitt Romneys new friend, Kris Kobach authored it – was recalled and voted out of the state senate – the first time in American history that this has happened and he was the Senate ProTem as well *are you listening Tony DeLuca?)

    3. Sheriff Joe – her other buddy has been under federal investigation for civil rights issues for 3 years and on Dec 15th,,2011 a scathing 22 page report was issued byt the USAZ stating this was the worst case of racial profiling they have ever seen, (they must be young and now remember the 50’s and 60’s).

    4. Arpiao had until Jan 3rd to comply, and has not – WHOOPS

    5. has a neo-nazi (Russell pearces frind) JT Ready runnung as a UGH (Democrat) for Sheriff in Pinal co. AZ – another embarassement waiting to happen

    6. and those are just the highlights……..

    then again – she is a nutjob as well – there is that…..

  19. Geezer says:

    “are you listening Tony DeLuca?”

    Sadly, Delaware has no provision for recall of elected officials.

  20. John T says:

    I realize this is a progressive blog and you are pro-Obama, but why only tell half of the story? Jan Brewer got a lecture from Obama about her book. These sources are not Fox News, so you cannot accuse me of watching Fox News too much.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57366431/jan-brewer-gets-an-earful-from-obama-in-ariz/

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/arizona-gov-brewer-obama-add-to-their-strained-relations/

  21. Jason330 says:

    John T, You watch too much Fox News.

  22. Geezer says:

    “Jan Brewer got a lecture from Obama about her book.”

    That’s what I said. You just retwisted it so it has a conservative spin. And you might not realize this, but when the POTUS criticizes you for lying about him in your book, you’re not getting “a lecture.” You’re getting “an ass-blistering.”

  23. John T says:

    Geezer – I was talking to pandora. I apologize if I was not clear about that. Did you read the book? Even if you did, how do you know she is lying? I will concede that she may have exaggerated, or lied. We do not know that for sure. It is a possibility that she could be telling the truth. Do you ever question, or get suspicious about the politicians that you like, or do you take everything they say as fact?

  24. cassandra m says:

    Hey JT — this is an open blog. Meaning that you can direct any points you like or ask any questions you like and lots of people are free to weigh in on your comment. So you can get over yourself here or find someplace else to try to control the conversation.

  25. Geezer says:

    Doesn’t matter who’s telling the “truth.” When the president tells you you’re lying, it’s not a “lecture.”

    Life is too short to read an autobiography of a back-bench drunkard turned national embarrassment. When assessing the believability of a he said-she said exchange, I certainly take the credibility of both into account. Jan Brewer has none, so Obama wins by default.

  26. pandora says:

    Sorry I wasn’t at your beck and call, John T.

    But you’re a bit behind

    Out of the three officials who met President Obama on an airport tarmac near Phoenix earlier this week, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) is now the only one who has characterized the president as anything other than cordial.

    And one of those officials was a Democrat, the other a Republican.

  27. John T says:

    cassandra m – I was not trying to control the blog. Geezer assumed I was speaking to all of you (or at least I think so) about the article. Geezer mischaracterized my post and I felt that my post deserved to be defended.

    Geezer – it would be nice to have a respect dialogue. Instead of insulting Jan Brewer, or anybody else, we could discuss facts. Just because you disagree with someone does not mean that the person in question merits abuse.

    pandora – You are siting another progressive blog to back up your blog. At least I provided links from ABC and CBS who at least pretend to be fair, but side with the liberal position when an opportunity presents itself. Do you expect a progressive blog like TPM to give unbiased reporting?

  28. Joe Cass says:

    I don’t know about Miss Manners, but I think her debate performance displays her planned and thoughtful process.
    The woman is no good without her ‘scripts.

  29. cassandra m says:

    JT, if you are posting here, you are posting to everyone. That’s the deal. If you wanted to just speak to Geezer then you should email him. But anything you post here is available to everyone to comments on (and especially in your case) to make fun of.

    That “liberal Blog” that you deride is a reported blog — meaning that TPM reporters have specifically spoken to three out of the four people present during Brewer’s meltdown. Which you would know if you had read it. No place else (yet) has spoken to all of these sources.

    Real information is highly valued here — so if you don’t like it, there are plenty of wingnut sites that will keep you fat and happy on as many conspiratorial lies as you can handle.

  30. John T says:

    Cassandra m – of course everybody is open to this. You are being way too sensitive.

    If you take blogs as gospel, I have no idea what to say about that. Isn’t it a progressive idea to question everything? Then again I thought tolerance was a liberal tenet. Insulting conservatives lets me know otherwise.

  31. Joe Cass says:

    Sloop John T, and of course everyone who is open to this:
    Jan Brewer damaged herself and the proof is in the photo. No matter from where you get your news. Hell, she damaged herself in that debate but the good people of Arizona choose for themselves, may skydaddy have mercy on their pasta.
    Tolerance is characteristic to all creatures but ignorance is owned by man. I am ignorant of any conservative being tolerant or following the path path of Christ.
    Elucidate, please.

  32. John T says:

    I will attempt to elucidate my previous post. I express my opinion in hopes of an honest dialogue with the people of Delaware Liberal. Instead of tolerance, and politeness that liberals claim they believe in, the people here are rude, insulting, and condescending to me. People I know who identifies themselves as moderately left are respectful to me. Progressives are usually condescending and rude to me. Have I been artful enough?

  33. Joe Cass says:

    You’ve been a doll! I hope you continue to illuminate the condescending and rude liberals around here. I would only ask of you two things:
    A )please don’t “lump” everyone who posts here into one box. And
    2) Don’t misconstrue being respected with being challenged. And
    the other thing, laugh a little bit. John, I get so uptight and angry my office has teeth marks, seriously, I bite. An echo chamber is an echo chamber is an echo chamber and a vacuum is no place to develop muscle. Or as PopEye puts it, “muskel”.
    Having said all that, I’d still like you to share an example of conservative tolerance.

  34. Aoine says:

    Hey Joe cass- stop using them big words- us down-state librals r confused…

    @john T=if ur r sincere hang around – im quick off the mark to defend as well – we get a lot of TROLLs here –
    Ive been smacked too – but its worth staying around – they’re a good bunch

  35. Joe Cass says:

    My apologies, Aoine. I’ve made adjustments for this new year out of fear that my previous course would sail into a storm that even Markell wouldn’t commute.

  36. cassandra m says:

    If you take blogs as gospel

    This would be one of the reasons why you aren’t treated with much seriousness. I don’t take blogs as gospel and that certainly wasn’t my claim. I do get that the only way you can get your victim on is to pretend that this is my belief. But what is really obvious here is that you never even bothered to read Pandora’s link. Because this isn’t a blog making stuff up, this is a *reported* blog (look it up) who cited not one, but three good first hand sources for their information.

    Being progressive isn’t about questioning everything. It is about being able to assess good information from bad. When you sharpen up your skills here, you might get your *honest* conversation. Working from the right wing talking points of the day isn’t honest worth a damn.

  37. Not A Donkey says:

    Geezer: “Doesn’t matter who’s telling the “truth.” When the president tells you you’re lying, it’s not a “lecture.”Life is too short to read an autobiography of a back-bench drunkard turned national embarrassment. When assessing the believability of a he said-she said exchange, I certainly take the credibility of both into account. Jan Brewer has none, so Obama wins by default.”

    Now that sounds like a lecture to me. Are you a professor? Do you have some sort of credentials for lecturing everyone? Finally, how exactly do you justify your statement?

  38. Liberal Elite says:

    @JT “…and politeness that liberals claim they believe in…”

    Huh? Haven’t you heard of Northern hospitality? It’s the opposite of Southern hospitality.
    Really… You expect liberals to believe in polite? Do you actually know any liberals? Any at all?

    Hard core liberals believe in a strong moral foundation… something more solid than simple morality from a simple list for simple minded people.

    See. We believe that lying is wrong, but it’s OK to not be polite. Conservatives seem to have that backwards.

  39. Geezer says:

    “it would be nice to have a respect dialogue. Instead of insulting Jan Brewer, or anybody else, we could discuss facts.”

    Why? What would the point of that be? As you acknowledged, we don’t know the “facts” of that confrontation. Even if we did, what possible difference could our opinions of it make?

    If I were interested in the item — I’m not, except as another example of conservatives once again trotting out their double standard (imagine the conservative apoplexy if this were a Democratic governor being disrespectful to Bush) — I certainly wouldn’t turn to you to learn anything about it.

    If you want to state your opinion, go ahead and state it. I couldn’t care less what you think of mine.

  40. Geezer says:

    “Are you a professor? Do you have some sort of credentials for lecturing everyone? Finally, how exactly do you justify your statement?”

    Please see the last sentence of the comment above.

  41. John T says:

    Liberal Elite – with how many liberals (not all) bash conservatives for being racist and intolerant, I thought you guys would be champions of tolerance.

    I once got accused of being rich, and racist to my face by some liberals, so yes I do know some. People I surround myself with are apolitical.

    Geezer – Nothing gets solved by insults and epithets. If progressives and conservatives were able to talk to each other civilly, perhaps problems in Delaware and our great country can be solved.

    And

  42. Liberal Elite says:

    @JT “I thought you guys would be champions of tolerance.”

    We have tolerance for people, but not certain viewpoints. There’s a difference.

    Racism is all about denying people their rights. I have no tolerance for that. It demonstrates the lack of a proper moral foundation.

    Another example? We tolerate muslims in our community and in our workplace, but we do not tolerate any of their misogynistic tendencies when expressed as such. Again is goes back to that moral foundation and human rights.

    “I once got accused of being rich, and racist to my face by some liberals”

    Really? Are you sure they were liberals? Most liberals I know ARE the rich. Money doesn’t separate conservatives from liberals (it’s education that really does).

  43. Not a donkey says:

    Liberal elite- little history lesson on liberals and racism. http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/pcism/sad_history.htm

  44. Liberal Elite says:

    Uhh. You’re confusing “Democrat” and “Liberal”.

    Here’s a quiz for you. Read your rather awful hatchet piece and tell me which of the Democrats that are presented are, in fact, liberals.

    Happy hunting…

  45. Not a donkey says:

    Little difficult considering liberals keep changing the meaning. The term has been completely bastardized by the left wouldn’t you say? If you were a true liberal, you’d more resemble Thomas Paine that Owebama.

  46. John T says:

    Liberal Elite – if by liberal you are referring to progressive, Woodrow Wilson fit that mold in the above link.

  47. John T says:

    Liberal Elite Thomas Paine or Thomas Jefferson used to fit the definition of liberal. Does the term classic liberal mean anything?

  48. puck says:

    Democrats are liberals? I think that myth was laid to rest when Democrats passed the Bush tax cuts for the rich in 2001, and authorized the Iraq war, and passed the Bush tax cuts for the rich again in 2010. WTF are you talking about, Democrats are liberals? I wish Democrats were half as liberal as wingnuts say they are.

  49. Not a donkey says:

    Wingnut? You want to debate or call names? Come on. Democrats call themselves liberal.

  50. puck says:

    Not on campaign literature they don’t.

  51. Not a donkey says:

    You think it’s because they’ll get laughed at or lose votes?

  52. Geezer says:

    “Nothing gets solved by insults and epithets. If progressives and conservatives were able to talk to each other civilly, perhaps problems in Delaware and our great country can be solved.”

    No, they wouldn’t. I’m not interested in conservative solutions, and you’re not interested in liberal ones. Based on what you’ve said here so far — nothing, basically, but whining about people not being nice to you while you trash Obama and spout conservative nonsense about what “liberals” are supposed to act like — I’m not interested in what you’ve got to say. If you want to say something interesting or new, please get around to it soon.

  53. Liberal Elite says:

    @Geezer “I’m not interested in what you’ve got to say.”

    The good news is that every day America is less white, less racist, less religious, more diverse, more tolerant.

    The Republican strategy of catering to the social Luddites will surely backfire in the long run. The America that we know and love will be replaced by something better. We liberals welcome “better” with open arms, while conservatives just get angry when coveted crap slips away. They know it’s going away and it just makes them cling to stupid things.

    Reading JT’s piece reminds me of how fast and how far we have come as a nation. It makes me proud to be an American.

    So thank JT for that (though that may not have been his intended effect).

  54. Not a donkey says:

    The insult I saw was you saying “conservative nonsense.” If you think that departing from constitutional limitations on gov’t (what conservatives are fighting) is nonsense, you might want to re-evaluate your liberalism. Departing from constitutional limits on gov’t is exactly what the progressive agenda is. Everytime you support a bill that adds to the size of gov’t or takes away any form of liberty you are advancing a progressive agenda, not a traditional form of liberalism. Everytime you support a bill that congress is pushing that is outside of the enumerated powers in the constitution, you support a progressive agenda. Progressivism leads one direction…toward a tyrannical gov’t. I don’t think that’s what you want. But Everytime you support anything that trades any bit of liberty, you are advancing progressivism. To maintain liberty and a free society, it is imperative that gov’t actions be looked at through the lense of the constitution and declaration of independence.

  55. Liberal Elite says:

    @Nodo “If you think that departing from constitutional limitations on gov’t (what conservatives are fighting) is nonsense, you might want to re-evaluate your liberalism.”

    I don’t think that means what you think it means.

    But I agree with the sentence as written. Conservatives aren’t funding the primary organization that fights for constitutional limitations, The ACLU. In fact it’s quite the opposite. Conservatives seem to be happy to tell young women what they can do with their own bodies. They seem happy so shove religion and religious symbols at everyone in their fake “War on Christmas”. Yup… No reach for constitutional limits there. When conservatives say they want “Freedom” you need to look up the word in an alternate universe dictionary.

  56. John T says:

    Liberal Elite – if you call regulations, high taxes, entitlements and frivolous laws freedom, then you don’t know what freedom is. That is control. It is the government owning us. If you trust the government to make decisions for you, good for you. I believe in true freedom. Being ALMOST independent of government.

  57. John T says:

    The ACLU picks and chooses what they like from the Constitution.

  58. Not a donkey says:

    1st, ACLU is primarily the Anti Christian Litigation Unit because of their lack of (or total disregard) of understanding the meaning of the establishment clause.

    2nd, in a free society, conservatives and liberals will always tell the other how to live. Freedom of speech lives, even the freedom to treat others like dirt, unfortunately. Cons and libs can continue to squabble and that’s fine for a free society. The problem comes if you allow too much power to a central gov’t, they will be able to tell you how to publicly speak and act. No one wants religion (your example) shoved down anyone’s throat. At the same time, atheists need to play fair and not shove their beliefs down anyone’s throat. A free society allows both, but neither are productive. Calling names or blowing someone off as stupid because they see things differently only proves the intolerance and ignorance of the other.

  59. Liberal Elite says:

    @JT “I believe in true freedom.”

    Pure BS. Everything you’ve mentioned smacks of selfishness. That has little to do with freedom, and involves a complete lack of understanding about our system of government, and how a civil society works.

    Freedom only is freedom if everyone gets to play. Racism is the antithesis of true freedom. It’s our civil right we have that make us free, not some crappy tax break, and not gutting pollution regulations…

    Like I said, You need a special dictionary when conservatives talk. Freedom is based on monitary objectives. “Patriot” is usually use to refer to a “Traitor”, someone advocating the overthrow of the constitution. Yep ….need a special dictionary.

  60. Not a donkey says:

    BS? Why, because you said so? You didn’t respond to anything I said. What part of it was selfish?

    Freedom is only free if everyone gets to play? Who can’t be a part of the game in America?

    Who brought up racism? No one. But since you did, racism is not the antithesis of freedom, slavery is. Racism is is a thought process. Slavery is the freedom stripping action.

    I do like the way you changed the subject when confronted. If you want to prove your claims of my selfishness and that what I said was BS, by all means go for it. But understand that an intellectual reader will see through your “change of subject” tactic and dismiss it for what it is… Lashing out without substance.

  61. Liberal Elite says:

    @Nodo “You didn’t respond to anything I said.”

    And that’s because my post was in response to JT’s post. That’s what the “@JT” means at the top. Yours wasn’t interesting enough to respond to.

  62. John T says:

    I am confused? Where does racism and greed come in to play. That is a typical comeback when one doesn’t have the facts on his/her side. Use facts, not insults. Please tell me how I am wrong.

    You are wrong because frivolous rules, regulations and high taxes restrict freedom of choice. Explain to me why people from Socialist, or Communist countries abhor progressivism? Are they selfish and/or for wanting individual liberty? Or are they selfish and racist because you don’t agree?

  63. Not a donkey says:

    Lib Elite: well, make interesting and respond. Would love to hear your thoughts. I responded to your post. Someone else here said posting was posting to all. Your turn.

  64. Geezer says:

    Fellas, why don’t you go find another sandbox to play in?

    Every one of your posts is full of the sort of twaddle that I would consider “conservative nonsense.” The “high taxes” you complain about are actually the lowest in the industrialized world. The regulations you complain about are our only way of keeping the corporate push for profit from impinging on our liberty to keep their crap from the commons. And so on.

    As I said, you’re not interested in learning the truth about any of this. Piss off.

  65. puck says:

    John T. is some kind of a bot.

    Use facts, not insults. Please tell me how I am wrong.

    And then you follow this up with three irrelevant questions, each of which is based on two or more false and unsubstantiated premises?

    You are wrong because frivolous rules, regulations and high taxes restrict freedom of choice.

    Explain to me why people from Socialist, or Communist countries abhor progressivism?

    Are they selfish and/or for wanting individual liberty? Or are they selfish and racist because you don’t agree?

    Whoever is paying you for this drivel should get their money back.

  66. John T says:

    Geezer – you conveniently left out corporate tax which is the highest in the world. Light regulation is fine. Why is it necessary for a seven year old girl to get a permit for a lemonade stand on her property?

    Puck. – Very insightful. You completely changed my mind with your intelligence and profound rejoinder.

  67. puck says:

    Good Lord, more false premises. Corporate income tax is 35% on the books, but everybody knows the real rate is less. The Tax Foundation estimates the real corporate tax rate is around 29%. GE and Pepco among others estimate it is zero.

    Plus, don’t compare US corporate taxes against desperate third-world nations. Compare our tax rates against other developed nations. Although, there really is no comparison for America – How much should it cost to run a superpower of 350 million people?

    Nonetheless, I agree corporate tax is too high. It should be totally eliminated in a revenue-neutral deal that replaces the lost corporate tax revenue with increases on investment taxes and personal income tax for the upper brackets. That would get rid of all the shady profit-hiding, book cooking, and other corporate tax avoidance schemes, and make officers think twice about skimming all those giant bonuses. The tax code should make sure hiring people and investing back in the business is always the cheapest option by a pretty big margin. And I think that actually would produce strong growth in the economy, liberal that I am. And by growth I mean “jobs” this time around, not just parasitical Romneyesque get-rich schemes.

    And lemonade stands? Permits are needed almost nowhere. If you find one is needed in your home town, take that up with your local officials. They will tell you they are protecting their friends and donors, the Galtian Titans of Capitalism in the local food business.

  68. cassandra_m says:

    you conveniently left out corporate tax which is the highest in the world.

    Which is one more bit of evidence that JT isn’t here for *honest debate*. Because honest debate starts with real information, not the BS ginned up by the GOP noise machine to keep their audience in perpetual resentments.

    So JT, you are back on topic or you are someplace else.

  69. puck says:

    Conservatives are afflicted with partial knowledge of everything. When that knowledge gap is willfully advanced, it is called truthiness, which is basically a lie of omission.

  70. John T says:

    I did provide half information. 38% federal corporate tax and an average corporate tax statewide (not sure about Delaware) is 12%. No other place in the world is like that.

  71. Not A Donkey says:

    Corporate Tax Rates:

    http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/wm3146_chart1_750.gif

    Let me guess, it’s not from one of your sources so it’s fake.

  72. puck says:

    The only meaningful way to calculate corporate tax rate is:

    TOTAL TAX PAID (all corporations) / TOTAL PROFIT (all corporations)

    I don’t know if anyone has done that calculation yet, but it sure ain’t 38%.

  73. John T says:

    I got my information from a chart. Your way is spinning facts. Businesses like Getting aren’t paying anything because of connections to Obama. Plus other tax breaks like solar panels, charitable contributions, etc.

  74. puck says:

    “I got my information from a chart.”

    Oh then it MUST be right.

  75. John T says:

    That was your response? How about something insightful. There is too much mudslinging. Lets have an honest and rational debate without insults. Are you able to do that?

  76. Liberal Elite says:

    @JT “How about something insightful.”

    “it sure ain’t 38%.”

  77. puck says:

    Well what do you know. This guy actually did the calculation, and:

    The percent of Federal profit tax of the corporate pre-tax profits for 2010 was 19%, which is historically very low.

    I’ll have to take a look at his methodology later when I have more time.

  78. socialistic ben says:

    jt, considering Fox News charts (where you likely get your charts) frequently DONT add up to 100%, we’ll take your chart with a grain of BS.
    All conservatives kill and eat their first child. I read that in a book one time.

  79. John T says:

    This comes from news sources that you guys like. Maybe you ought to do less bashng of conservatives, and pay more attention to your own left wing news sources.

    This information comes from The Guardian.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/feb/21/corporation-tax-rates-world

    More information from The New York Times
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/business/economy/03rates.html

    Without loopholes we have the higest corporate tax rate next to Japan.

    The Economist had our Corporate Tax rate at 35% which was the lowest estimate
    http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/11/focus-0

    Out of the 3 sources none of the them are right wing news sources, and The Econmist ad te lowest estimate and it is the more moderate source.

    Contrary to popular opinion, I get my news from sources other than Fox News.

  80. cassandra_m says:

    The person not paying attention is you, JT. You’ve been asked to stick to the topic above.

    AND I’ll add that you aren’t paying attention to the sources you cite. Or you have no idea the difference between a statutory tax rate and an effective tax rate. Both the NYT and the Economist go to great pains to note that while the US statutory rate is high, the average effective rate for corporations (after they take advantage of loopholes and other subsidies) is about the worldwide average, which is about 17 or 18%.

    So since few companies even pay the statutory rate, your point is meaningless. And the NYT and Guardian articles point that out. Quite a few of the Fortune 100 don’t pay any taxes at all.

    Which means, sparky, that you still aren’t in the *honest* conversation that you claim to want. When you will cherry pick your info and not pay any attention to either its context or its nuance, it is clear that *honest* is not your point here. Especially since the articles you cite to make your point go to great pains to note that most US companies don’t pay anywhere near the statutory rate.

    :roll:

    You *can* take this over the Delawarepolitics where this kind of bullshit defense of right-wing talking points passes for smart.

  81. socialistic ben says:

    can you imagine if companies like GE, or the entire oil industry actually paid taxes? the corporate tax rate could be lowered a lot.. it would just require us keeping companies honest and closing loopholes. Which, if you as a “Merkin, is socialism

  82. John T says:

    I mentioned loopholes in my post. Reread it. I gave you the sources, told you the facts. I get still attacked for giving information from liberal sites. We are going in circles with this. Unless anybody has anything substantial to say, I am done. Arguing things I already laid out is not an argument. I clearly typed “WITHOUT LOOPHOLES.” I paid attention. How about you Cassandra m?

    Socialistic Ben – reread my post again.

    Both of you need to pay attention to what I type before you argue.

  83. socialistic ben says:

    i dont believe I was arguing your post. I was making my own point. Also, “re-reading your post again” would require me to have read it a first time (and a second time), which i did not do…. nor will I. I’ll just assume you mentioned closing loopholes. I agree with you. Unfortunately, none of your (i assume) conservative allies in congress agree with you. If you have an issue about loopholes and tax fairness, your quarrel is with them.

  84. cassandra_m says:

    Then why are you here still arguing? If we all agree that US Companies are certainly not paying the highest rates in the world (which is what you started with — yes, I was paying attention), then what’s your beef?

    If you were interested in *substance* you would say that you misspoke with that conservative talking point about taxes and you were correcting yourself.

  85. John T says:

    Cassandra m – Politically connected companies pay little or no taxes.

  86. Not a donkey says:

    Puck, it was said the US has one of the lowest tax rates. This is not the same as revenue paid. You failed to prove your point. Spinning like you did proves you know you got it wrong.

  87. Joe Cass says:

    JT and Donkey dude, have you ever took a look at the rate after WWII? I’m sure I can prove a few people made 100s of millions and the middle class not only thrived but advanced. Maybe it was the bottom beginning to rise that flipped the switch. I’ve got no problem being taxed to contribute to the country that given those that came before tremendous opportunity. If only it still worked that way. Christ would want me to give a cut to help those less fortunate but you seem to be the kind of person that only wants to fund the military. I’ll tell you a secret, we don’t adventure into battle to prevent despotism anymore, we go to war to protect corporate interests, outsourced and untaxed entities. Why do Americans die for big business and you think they should get a pass?

  88. MJ says:

    Seems that Brewer has a problem telling the truth.

    My guess is that the only reason she did this was to sell books. Sort of what Ann Coulter does. How else do you explain how Gov. Terrance Stamp’s book went from 343,222 on Amazon.com’s best seller list the day before the finger point to No. 7 last Friday?

  89. John T says:

    MJ- Since you are bringing us back to Jan Brewer, are you a psychologist? We don’t know what really happened between the two. Jan Brewer and Barack Obama are the only ones who really know what happened. Why assume that Jan Brewer started everything. The news (other than Fox) makes it sound like Obama ignited this with lecturing Brewer. Despite this, my position is that we don’t know what happened.

  90. Geezer says:

    “Jan Brewer and Barack Obama are the only ones who really know what happened.”

    Untrue. At least two other people were present.

    “Without loopholes we have the higest corporate tax rate next to Japan.”

    So what? The effective rate is the amount actually paid. Who cares what the “rate” is?

    “Politically connected companies pay little or no taxes.”

    Bullshit. Companies that know how to navigate what you call “loopholes” in the tax code pay little or no taxes. You’re just repeating idiot slogans found in Conservoworld now.

    “an average corporate tax statewide (not sure about Delaware) is 12%.”

    Howzabout you learn something about the subject of Delaware before you embarrass yourself like this again?

  91. Geezer says:

    “it was said the US has one of the lowest tax rates.”

    As it does. We weren’t talking about corporations.

  92. MJ says:

    JT – look at the title of this post. And your question about being a psychologist makes absolutely no sense. But that’s typical teabagger (il)logic.

  93. socialistic ben says:

    . “MJ- Since you are bringing us back to Jan Brewer, are you a psychologist?:”
    i think John t thinks he’s talking about a psychic.. that makes more…… i guess “sense” is the correct word.