Posted on 06/08/2011 4:01:53 PM PDT by markomalley
Author Ann Coulter sparred with Joy Behar on Reaganomics on Wednesday's episode of The View. "How are you going to solve it if you don't have any revenue coming in?" asked Joy Behar of the conservative commentator, who is currently promoting her latest book, Demonic. "When Reagan cut taxes, each year, as the taxes went down, revenue to the treasury went up" Coulter responded.
As The View's most ardent leftist, Behar went on to try to blame bad loans and the housing crisis on Republicans. Coulter merely rebutted with the facts. "You cannot blame the Republicans on that" said Coulter. "The big banks then bundled them to the mortgage-backed securities, they got spread out into everyone's portfolio. So it was like a poison in the economy."
Coulter also deflected blows delivered by Whoopi Goldberg, who trolled out the classic trope of the Clinton surpluses being annihilated by the Bush tax cuts. "Where did that money go? What happens? What's happening?" the comedian asked. "Social security, Medicare, Medicaid, paying congressional salaries" Coulter shot back.
The View's audience was audibly irritated by Coulter's suggestion that entitlements were part of the problem. "I'd even go beyond blaming the politicians. I mean, it is the people. It's very hard to take their treats away. Once you start giving them the treats to tell them we're going to take them away is very hard." Elisabeth Hasselbeck, who did not intervene in this discussion, tried to maneuver the conversation in the direction of Coulter's new book, but was cut off by Behar, who apparently took offense at Coulter's characterization of government entitlements. "A lot of is it is not treats. A lot of it is necessities, let's not get on that track. It's not treats for some people, Ann." Coulter rebutted by pointing out one of the most obvious flaws with the entitlement system. "Ok, but how about treats being Social Security going to Donald Trump, because that's the way the system is set up right now?
Wednesday's encounter on The View provides more evidence, if any were needed, that intelligent commentary is best left to those who have some idea of what they are talking about. Suffice it to say that the population of ABC's morning gaggle of giggles does not meet this apparently insurmountably high bar.
A transcript of the exchange, which aired at 11:26 Wednesday on ABC, follows below:
JOY BEHAR: I want to know what you think a Republican would do that the Democrats can't do?
ANN COULTER: Well, I don't want to sound too wonky, but it would be-. Peter Ferrara keeps writing about -
BEHAR: Who is he?
COULTER: -he's just a brilliant writer, economist, I think he's with CATO. And he keeps writing: "okay, this is what Reagan did to turn the Carter economy around, you know, cut regulation, cut taxes, this, that." He says Obama looks like he studied what Reagan did and did exactly the opposite, and when I came on your show when you were sitting in for Larry King it was about a month into the Obama administration and I believe I was pessimistic about him turning the economy around because he's doing all of the things, micro managing from the top, big government, raise taxes.
BEHAR: But he hasn't been able to raise the taxes, the taxes are still in place.
COULTER: The debt's going up. Taxes are going to have to go up at some point.
BEHAR: You heard that, you heard that. That's a Republican saying that.
COULTER: Well, because the debt's going up because you're spending.
BEHAR: Well how are you going to solve it if you don't have any revenue coming in? You've got to do something.
COULTER: Well what- well what this is, and this is counterintuitive, but you must trust me on this, it's in every Thomas Sowell book ever written. When Reagan cut taxes, each year, as the taxes went down, revenue to the treasury went up. When people say, which is disingenuous and sort of a sleight of hand, is, "yes, but the deficit grew." That's because for each additional dollar he brought in, congress would spend three more dollars. I mean, you can't overcome that, but more revenue came into the treasury the more you cut because people-
WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Then how do you explain what happened once Bush got in? Because we had money when, when Clinton left. So what has happened? I know you have,I know you have an idea.
COULTER: It was, and this is so going to drive your viewers away, but I mean we know
GOLDBERG: Believe me. You can't drive them away. A lot of stuff will drive them away, but not you. Trust us.
COULTER: We do know it came from - thank you - we do know it came from the housing market crash, and you had the government - Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, HUD, pushing these politically correct, suicidal loans, they were allowing unemployment benefits to be used as collateral for mortgages. Then you have the big banks.
BEHAR: And who allowed that?
COULTER No no no, oh, no. You cannot blame the Republicans on that. Just let me finish the train before you get to that. The big banks -
BEHAR: You can't?.
COULTER: - the big banks then bundled them to the mortgage-backed securities, they got spread out into everyone's portfolio. So it was like a poison in the economy.
GOLDBERG: Not that. What happened to the money that Clinton left in the-? That's what I'm asking. What happened to the money that Clinton left -
BEHAR: A war was started.
GOLDBERG: - Oh god child. Clinton left when he left office? Where did that money go? What happens? What's happening?
COULTER: Social security, Medicare, Medicaid, paying congressional salaries.
GOLDBERG: So are we not all guilty, then?
COULTER: Sure.
GOLDBERG: Isn't it both parties that have -
BEHAR: Screwed up.
GOLDBERG: - messed this up? Messed this up? It's not just one. So shouldn't we try to figure out how to fix it together?
COULTER: Yes. And Not only that, I'd even go beyond blaming the politicians. I mean, it is the people. It's very hard to take their treats away. Once you start giving them the treats, -
GOLDBERG: That's right.
COULTER: - to tell them we're going to take them away is very hard.
GOLDBERG: That's absolutely right. So it's all of us.
BEHAR: A lot of is it is not treats. A lot of it is necessities, let's not get on that track. It's not treats for some people, Ann. Some people need the money. I would not have survived. When I - when I got fired from my job from Good Morning America, I was a single, divorced mother. If I didn't have unemployment insurance, I would [censored].
COULTER: Ok. But how about treats being Social Security going to Donald Trump, because that's the way the system is set up right now?
BEHAR: Well, fix that part.
**WAIT***
behar lost her job @ good morning america... and went on unemployment???
are you freakin kidding me?
did she need it? i’m 100% certain that job pays a tad more then $50k/year. what? couldn’t she save anything? didn’t she have enough to hold her until the next gig showed up?
i’ve gone months (not intentionally, like now) where i’ve been looking for work... and not once in my life have i ever collected unemployment (i’m not sure i’d know where to start, even if i wanted to, which i dont)
this is a sign of the problem. and one reason i intentionally stopped working and paying in. i refuse to pay for people like that.
mooching scumbags, all of them
and bullsh#t...and that many of the woes the country faces today are directly attributed to the grifters(Clinton's)and their selfish, greedy, corrupt friends(both here and abroad)playing their games.
I keep seeing these posts on FR about how 'wonderful' Anne is and how she schools the opposition, but these days she acts almost as if she does not believe herself. She always seems to allow her opposition to steamroller right over her. Granted, her opposition shouts, screams and drools, but is that a reason to allow them to win.
Precisely - also, what was not mentioned is that the economy was going into a recession when Bush came to office, even before the 9/11 attacks. Bush blew it big time when he went along with Kennedy on the No Child Left Behind and the Medicare Drug benefit - plus the debacle of the Pelosi Congress in 2006 —the beginning of the end. Clinton benefits from the Repub Congress & Bush tanks under the Dem Congress. IN the end, they’re all Big Govt. Boobs, and none of them deserve to be defended.
What surplus did Clinton leave? The National Debt kept growing and was higher than when he became POTUS. Plus we were heading into a recession at the time, so the surplus was going to be VERY temporary anyway. If you find a hundred dollar bill on the street, but you have $6000 in credit card debt, you have a “surplus” that is meaningless.
Poor Joyless Bear, she would not have survived going from Good Morning America to this gig making $5 Million per year. Isn’t she supposed to be a comedian and couldn’t she work at that while she was waiting for her DNC propagandist job? What a greedy baffoon.
Pray for America
The Federal Government has been spending too much money for far too many years. That's a fact.
IIRC - Clinton’s presidency did not go into “surplus” (whatever that word means in DC nowadays) until the Democrats lost control of Congress to the Republicans.
IIRC - Clinton’s presidency did not go into “surplus” (whatever that word means in DC nowadays) until the Democrats lost control of Congress to the Republicans.
The surpluses during the Clinton administration were almost entirely the result of the fall of the soviet empire and the Clinton's winding down the cold war military. The soviet empire failed as a result of Regan and Bush 41 policies. Bush 43 was forced to build the military back up because of 9-11 and because Clinton left it in shambles..
Somehow that never seems to get done, Joy.
Neither does means testing your 401K or your other assets.
You have that backwards. It was under the Newt-led house that the budget became temporarily controllable and had a surplus (under some, but not all, definitions).
The Republicans kept grinding away at Clintoon until he signed their budgets with far less spending than what he wanted.
Check any chart that shows government spending and deficit levels and superimpose which party ran the congressional houses and you’ll see a correlation. Republicans aren’t great, but overall they tend to spend less.
The early Bush 43 years were an anomaly. Republicans had the white house, the senate and the house of reps and still overspent to reward their establishment buddies.
Think about that for a minute...
Just because it bears repeating.
Or a leopard against a crocodile.
That doesn't matter. The truth is, both parties are responsible. There are a lot of RINOs who need to be removed from office, including Bohner.
Terrible fare.
Coulter should have said, "Even with your lousy ratings, your income at GMA was many times the income of your average viewer. Perhaps if you had lived a bit below your means, you could have saved a few bucks for just these types of emergencies and would not have needed unemployment welfare. That's the problem with liberals: They don't think ahead and spend way more than their means."
COULTER: Ok. But how about treats being Social Security going to Donald Trump, because that's the way the system is set up right now?
Coulter should have referred to the govenrment "treats" going to well-paid talk show hosts and others in the leftist Hollywood elite.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.