Harold Ford Wants To Run For Hillary Clinton’s Senate Seat – As A Republican
Harold Ford Wants To Run For Hillary Clinton’s Senate Seat – As A Republican
by DAVID BADASH on JANUARY 25, 2010 ·
in ECONOMICS, NEWS, POLITICS
I know, amazing, isn’t it. Harold Ford, the Blue-Dog-Democrat, the Chair of the right-wing Democratic Leadership Council, the man who ran in Tennessee against gays and for god, the man who makes over a million dollars a year as a Vice Chairman for Merrill-Lynch (now, Bank of America,) wants to run against incumbent Kirsten Gillibrand to be the junior Senator for New York. But he sounds more like a Republican than a Democrat.
Or, perhaps, he sounds more like the Republicans who deny they are Republicans so they can fool voters into thinking they understand where the country’s populism is right now.
Ford hasn’t a clue.
Don’t take my word for it. Take Nobel-prize-winning economist and New York Times’ columnist Paul Krugman’s:
“Wow. Harold Ford’s op-ed in today’s Times has to set some kind of new standard for cluelessness.”
Ford gives his cluelessness — and, a lot of cash — away with these words in his New York Times Op-Ed that ran today:
“SCOTT BROWN’S victory last week in the Massachusetts Senate race, following the Republican gubernatorial triumphs in New Jersey and Virginia, marked the third time in three months that the Democratic Party has lost the support and trust of independent voters.”
“First, cut taxes for businesses — big and small — and find innovative ways to get Americans back to work. We can start by giving any companies that are less than five years old an exemption from payroll taxes for six months; extending the current capital gains and dividend tax rates through 2012; giving permanent tax credits for businesses that invest in research and development; and reducing the top corporate tax rate to 25 percent from 35 percent.”
Think Progress weighs in nicely,
The cost of the corporate tax cut alone would be about $1 trillion over ten years, or $100 billion per year. As for extending the current capital gains and dividends rates, which are a product of the Bush tax cuts, a similar move in 2008 (which extended the rates through 2010) cost about $51 billion, with more than half of the benefit going to the richest 0.2 percent of households.
Whether or not you care about doing the math, remember this: Too many Democrats and Independents thought sending Obama a “message” by giving anti-gay Scott Brown their vote was a good idea. Harold Ford –despite his claims to the contrary — is Scott Brown, sans the Cosmo skin shots and (I assume) the truck.
There’s not that much difference between the two, not in the issues that most affect LGBTQ Americans. Ford is anti-gay, and now, pro-Republican style tax cuts. He’s not even a right-wing Democrat at this point. Perhaps his ties at BOA have done him in. Funny, he could have a chance running as a Republican. Nah, scratch that. Not in New York!
On the other hand, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, whom I personally have heard speak to us and for us, has proven her dedication to repealing DOMA and DADT, to passing ENDA, and to securing a more promising future for the LGBTQ community.
by DAVID BADASH on JANUARY 25, 2010 ·
in ECONOMICS, NEWS, POLITICS
I know, amazing, isn’t it. Harold Ford, the Blue-Dog-Democrat, the Chair of the right-wing Democratic Leadership Council, the man who ran in Tennessee against gays and for god, the man who makes over a million dollars a year as a Vice Chairman for Merrill-Lynch (now, Bank of America,) wants to run against incumbent Kirsten Gillibrand to be the junior Senator for New York. But he sounds more like a Republican than a Democrat.
Or, perhaps, he sounds more like the Republicans who deny they are Republicans so they can fool voters into thinking they understand where the country’s populism is right now.
Ford hasn’t a clue.
Don’t take my word for it. Take Nobel-prize-winning economist and New York Times’ columnist Paul Krugman’s:
“Wow. Harold Ford’s op-ed in today’s Times has to set some kind of new standard for cluelessness.”
Ford gives his cluelessness — and, a lot of cash — away with these words in his New York Times Op-Ed that ran today:
“SCOTT BROWN’S victory last week in the Massachusetts Senate race, following the Republican gubernatorial triumphs in New Jersey and Virginia, marked the third time in three months that the Democratic Party has lost the support and trust of independent voters.”
“First, cut taxes for businesses — big and small — and find innovative ways to get Americans back to work. We can start by giving any companies that are less than five years old an exemption from payroll taxes for six months; extending the current capital gains and dividend tax rates through 2012; giving permanent tax credits for businesses that invest in research and development; and reducing the top corporate tax rate to 25 percent from 35 percent.”
Think Progress weighs in nicely,
The cost of the corporate tax cut alone would be about $1 trillion over ten years, or $100 billion per year. As for extending the current capital gains and dividends rates, which are a product of the Bush tax cuts, a similar move in 2008 (which extended the rates through 2010) cost about $51 billion, with more than half of the benefit going to the richest 0.2 percent of households.
Whether or not you care about doing the math, remember this: Too many Democrats and Independents thought sending Obama a “message” by giving anti-gay Scott Brown their vote was a good idea. Harold Ford –despite his claims to the contrary — is Scott Brown, sans the Cosmo skin shots and (I assume) the truck.
There’s not that much difference between the two, not in the issues that most affect LGBTQ Americans. Ford is anti-gay, and now, pro-Republican style tax cuts. He’s not even a right-wing Democrat at this point. Perhaps his ties at BOA have done him in. Funny, he could have a chance running as a Republican. Nah, scratch that. Not in New York!
On the other hand, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, whom I personally have heard speak to us and for us, has proven her dedication to repealing DOMA and DADT, to passing ENDA, and to securing a more promising future for the LGBTQ community.
Comments