Loesch on AC360 and Joy Behar Show

Dana Loesch on the 12.01.2010 edition of The Joy Behar Show:

BEHAR: Senate Republicans have pledged to block every Democratic bill until the Bush tax cut issue is resolved. And they`ve evidently kept that promise by blocking an extension of unemployment benefits which expire today, just in time for Christmas.

So how is that for compassionate conservatism? Ok.

With me to discuss this and more is John Fugelsang, actor and comedian; and Dana Loesch, editor of BigJournalism.com and radio host at KFTK 97.1 FM.

Ok, John, does this make the GOP look like the party of no yet again?

JOHN FUGELSANG, ACTOR/COMEDIAN: Well, I mean, I like the GOP. I don`t like who they vote for. But the GOP is good at two things at this point -- the modern GOP is good at two things, redistribution of wealth to the upper two percent and convincing nice Republican folks that this is a good thing.

BEHAR: I know. How do they do that?

FUGELSANG: It`s easy because they blame the poor, they blame the less fortunate. Rich people pay Fox people to make middle class people blame poor people.

BEHAR: How do they do that? Dana, how do they convince poor people that they should admire the two percent that make all the money in this country and let them off the hook every time? How do they do that?

DANA LOESCH, TALK RADIO HOST: Well, what I don`t understand and I think that`s funny that -- that John mentioned redistribution of wealth. Because I thought that that was the Democrat platform but I guess we disagree on that. But I look at it like this, the Bush tax, this -- this is -- we need to start calling this tax cuts. This is essentially an extension of the current tax rate. Because regardless of whatever party does what, if this does not get continued after the first of the year, we`re looking at a massive tax hike in a quasi recessionary period -- which is not good.

FUGELSANG: For whom?

LOESCH: A massive tax hike for all Americans.

BEHAR: Oh that`s not the true.

LOESCH: And you keep talking about -- you keep talking about -- John, you mentioned like the upper two percent. You have to realize too that a lot of individuals, including my husband, files as -- as in -- his small business files as an individual. When you look at what the gross net revenue of what some of these businesses make sure it`s over $250,000. But what is their actual take-home pay? You have to look at the facts of the matter, ok.

BEHAR: Ok we got it.

FUGELSANG: Right, so the upper two percent, like we said. Here is the thing --


LOESCH: The people who create the jobs.


FUGELSANG: Right. Because they`ve done --

LOESCH: Because you want to penalize the people who create them?

FUGELSANG: Yes, because they`ve been doing such a good job of creating so many jobs over the past nine years haven`t they?

LOESCH: No that`s the government who gets involved and decides to put all of these regulations --

FUGELSANG: So Bush`s tax cuts that didn`t create the jobs are actually creating the jobs. We just haven`t heard that?

LOESCH: But what about -- we have like this $3 trillion stimulus here; all of this -- this huge massive deficit. Where are the jobs for that? We`re looking like at 10 percent unemployment rate.

BEHAR: All right, let`s -- let`s can we talk about unemployment insurance a little bit? Why would the Republicans want to block the extension on benefits? I mean, people are out of work. They have come up with no solution. They are the party of no, as we just discussed. They have -- they have no compassion for people who are out of work apparently except let it trickle down from the top. And then they cut off people`s unemployment right before Christmas. Answer that, please. Answer me.

LOESCH: There are so many false premises with that statement but what I`m going to look at is this --

BEHAR: All right, let`s -- don`t -- don`t filibuster now Dana, just answer my question.

LOESCH: No, I`m not filibustering.

BEHAR: Go ahead.

LOESCH: I`m going to -- Joy, you -- you think apparently that it`s -- it`s cool to pay people for doing nothing. When it`s the government backed --

BEHAR: No, no, no. It`s unemployment insurance.

LOESCH: If the government got out of the way of job creation and stopped taxing the crap out of people who create jobs we would actually see a rise in employment. That is --


BEHAR: But that didn`t work on the Bush why would it work now? It didn`t work.

LOESCH: That is history, it worked under Reagan and --


BEHAR: That was then.

FUGELSANG: And here`s the thing --

LOESCH: -- and Bush administration in 1916 -- and you can you can go back. There are cycles of this.

BEHAR: Wait a second. Let me get you on that -- I want to just ask you.


BEHAR: What would you say to somebody who`s unemployed now who has four children who is now -- now broke. What is he supposed to do this Christmas? You tell me. Tell me.

LOESCH: I would ask, if I were that person -- and I grew up with a single mother in that environment -- I would be asking why the administration is making it difficult for job creation by way of taxing --

BEHAR: Oh that`s what you --

LOESCH: -- people who create jobs. That`s where it starts. That`s where it starts.


When you have less discretionary income, you`re not going to -- employers aren`t going to be spend money on things like job creation or benefits.

BEHAR: Ok go ahead.

FUGELSANG: Can I add please?


FUGELSANG: Ok, now I would love to see the Democrats force a filibuster on this. I`d love to see the Republicans filibuster and the Democrats actually call their bluff and make them do it. However, the modern Democratic Party is like an S&M slave that forgot its safety word --

BEHAR: A bunch of wimps.


BEHAR: I agree with you.

FUGELSANG: I mean, I love Obama.

LOESCH: So do I.

FUGELSANG: -- but the guy is like -- he`s Clark Kent without a phone booth.

But here`s the thing, getting back the -- getting back to this tax continuation, it`s actually a tax increase. And because Bush made those tax cuts designed to expire at the end of 2010, let`s call it what it is. It`s Bush`s tax increase and nothing else, ok?

LOESCH: Why is it Bush`s tax increase? It would be Obama`s tax increase?

FUGELSANG: Because he designed it. Because no, sugar because Bush designed these tax cuts.

LOESCH: Excuse me, sugar? I`m sorry, did you buy me a drink and take me out to a movie, first.

FUGELSANG: Well, I was hoping you would be here in person, Dana. Ok so forgive me for that.

LOESCH: Because you know don`t call me sugar, you`re like, I think, I was still in high school when you were on -- when you were on VH1. So you`re a little old for me.

BEHAR: We`ve had 10 years of tax cuts and still no jobs. We`ve had tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts. The discrepancy between the very rich and the very poor in this country has never been bigger. You keep saying the same thing over and over again. It`s like Groundhog Day. I`m tired of that crap.

LOESCH: No, no. Tax --


LOESCH: Big government is expensive.

BEHAR: All right. We`ll be back in a minute. Take a break.


BEHAR: Part-time governor Sarah Palin seems to be showing which party she`s running for and it`s the party of Palin. She`s not just attacking Democrats but Republicans too. She dismissed the Ronald Reagan as an actor, calling the Bushes a bunch of blue bloods and blamed W. Bush for wrecking the economy.

I`m back with my panel.

Ok. You know, Dana, she`s the patron saint of the Tea Party of which you are a part, I presume, right?


BEHAR: What do you make of this assault on Republicans all of a sudden?

LOESCH: I think it sort of -- Sarah Palin really identifies I think with the grassroots movement that is taking place, within the right and even within moderates on the left as well.

And I thought the little back and forth that she had over the air waves with the Bushes was really interesting. Because the Bushes represent for a lot of people, including myself, the sort of Republicanism that we don`t like to see. We don`t like the old Belt Way big spender type of Republicans. I think for a lot of people they look at the Bushes as being representative of that. But I`m wondering too --

BEHAR: Maybe she`s ticked off because of what Barbara Bush said about her, that she should stay in Alaska. And maybe this is just personal retaliation, you know, because that`s what she`s about.

LOESCH: Well, or it can be they`re setting up for -- they`re trying to clear the way for Jeb Bush. He said no --

BEHAR: Clear the Bush for Jeb Bush.

LOESCH: Right. They`re trying to clear the way for Jeb Bush. Maybe this is going to be like a Jeb/Palin thing, who knows?

Well, Joe Scarborough, a very interesting conservative --

FUGELSANG: An actual conservative.

BEHAR: An actual conservative who things about issues I think. He calls Palin`s potential 2012 candidacy a dopey dream and it`s time for the GOP to man up and shut her down. Will they shut her down? Maybe they should send her hunting with Dick Cheney? Go ahead.

FUGELSANG: Well, I wasn`t surprised that Joe threw her under the dog sled this week. And Dana, I do want to apologize for calling you "Sugar" if you took offense. I`m half southern, it`s how we talk. So please don`t get the wrong idea about me.

LOESCH: I`m southern too. But I just --

FUGELSANG: But what he had -- here`s the thing about Sarah Palin. It`s the same week that Sarah Palin said she could have stopped WikiLeaks from happening. Sarah Palin couldn`t stop her own daughter`s baby-daddy from leaking in "Playgirl". Ok.

BEHAR: That`s true.

FUGELSANG: That`s not going to happen. But here`s the deal.

Sarah Palin is sort of like, to the GOP what Jar Jar Banks was to Star Wars Episode 1. In that --

LOESCH: No, no. That`s -- no, I disagree with that.


FUGELSANG: May I finish Dana please? Well, let me give you my point. She`s there to distract the easily amused from a complete lack of narrative.

BEHAR: That`s right.

FUGELSANG: Ok. She`s a shiny thing we wave. People like it. And the only people who want her to run for president are gullible conservatives, smart liberals and comedians like me.

BEHAR: That`s right. And me, too. I can`t wait to see that.

But I mean she call the family blue bloods.

FUGELSANG: She was right.

BEHAR: Well, but the thing about it is that George Herbert Walker at least is a -- was a veteran of World War II.

FUGELSANG: Sure. But he was also --

BEHAR: He was shot down many times.

FUGELSANG: He`s a millionaire at birth. His son was a millionaire at birth with a fake Texas accent. I mean George W. Bush went to Andover, Harvard and Yale.


BEHAR: And the same people who love Sarah Palin worshipped at the shrine of George Bush. Let`s get clear.

LOESCH: Oh, no, no, no. No they don`t. A lot of it. The very first people in fact that there were out there for the Tea Party movement, these were the people who were complaining about all of the poor under the last eight years, of which four of those were Democratic rule with Congress.


BEHAR: She told Barbara Walters that she could beat Obama. Is that chutzpah or stupidity?

LOESCH: Well, no. I don`t know if it`s -- I mean look -- you have to look at some of the polls that have been released from the past several months --

BEHAR: She`s going down, down, down, baby.

LOESCH: Neck and neck -- it either shows them neck and neck or showed her beating him because his unfavorables are really, really high right now.

FUGELSANG: So are hers in her own state. What Joe Scarborough --

BEHAR: Don`t you think that it`s not going to pay to attack Ronald Reagan in Iowa. I mean really -- St. Ronald Reagan of the Republicans.

FUGELSANG: She didn`t so much attack Reagan. And I`ll defend her on calling the Bush family blue bloods because they are. But here`s the thing --

BEHAR: Blue hair, I think she meant --

FUGELSANG: What Scarborough`s right about is that the GOP leadership are afraid to criticize her until she announces whether she`s running or not. Until then, no one`s going to stand up so maybe Scarborough`s running.

BEHAR: Thank you very much guys.

Back in a minute.


Dana Loesch on AC360, spewing out more nonsense:

COOPER: Well, that's Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona saying that 80 percent of the American people do not want to see taxes rise.

In fact, it's not exactly true. According to that very poll he cited, the Gallup poll, just 40 percent of Americans want to keep all tax cuts for all incomes. Forty-four percent want to keep tax cuts, but set limits for wealthy Americans. And 13 percent want the tax cuts to expire for all Americans.

Joining me now is editor of BigJournalism.com and radio talk show host Dana Loesch and Democratic strategist and pollster Cornell Belcher.

Dana, this -- all this talk from yesterday of working together, I mean, is that all just complete hooey?

DANA LOESCH, EDITOR, BIGJOURNALISM.COM: Well, I don't think it is. I think that they -- I think both sides do need to work together. And they immediately need to start with figuring out what they're going to do with this tax rate.

It's not really so much a tax cut as it's talking about extending the current tax rate, which, when you look at our economy, you look at our unemployment, you look at where everything is, we cannot afford to pay more. We cannot afford right now to have the government take more discretionary income from people, especially the people who create jobs, and attempt to redistribute. That -- it just doesn't work that way.

COOPER: And, Dana, you -- and you support them...


COOPER: ... sending a message nothing else gets done until a decision is made on these Bush tax cuts?

LOESCH: Honestly, Anderson, I don't know how we can really act on anything else at this point, until we figure out what's going to be happening with people's bank accounts after the 1st of the year. That is supremely important.

And that's going to affect everything -- it's going to affect everything, everything, every aspect of American life.


Cornell, what...

LOESCH: And I think, once we figure that out, we can move forward.

COOPER: What about that? What about the fundamental argument that conservatives like Dana are making that the only way to fix the economy is to give more Americans more control over their money? A lot of voters like that.


I mean, before I try to go off to score just usual cheap political points, let's be -- try to be informative. I think what's happening actually right now is, you have five different parties, and they all five need to get to different places.


COOPER: What are the five different parties?

BELCHER: It's very -- Senate Democrats and Senate Republicans, House Democrats, House Republicans, and the White House.

Look, arguably, from a political -- purely political tactical standpoint, House Dems right -- right now have more in common with -- with the Senate Republicans. And look what -- because -- because, quite frankly, now you can see Mitch McConnell picking up the playbook of no, no, no, a day after saying, you know, we're going to be bipartisan, a very successful playbook.

And at the same time, you have Speaker Pelosi, you know, saying the other day that, you know, I'm -- I'm going to -- I'm not afraid to be the -- the sole voice standing out for -- for -- for the middle class, because now, all of a sudden, Boehner has to come in, and he -- and he has -- he has to govern.

Now, can Speaker Pelosi now pick up the -- the Boehner playbook and dust it off, because now she doesn't have to govern, and, from a purely political standpoint, be more in line with what you see Mitch McConnell doing right now, which isn't about governing; it's about politics?

COOPER: Dana, can't, though, members of Congress do multiple things at once? I mean, can't you have a vote on don't ask, don't tell or other issues at the same time that you're working on -- on whether or not to -- to continue these tax cuts?

LOESCH: Oh, sure, absolutely.

And I might say, I'm not -- I -- I'm just going to lay it out. I'm not BFFs with Mitch McConnell, by any stretch of the word. But, at same time, I'm a little impressed to see him get a little bit brassy, finally, and start getting tough with some of this stuff.

I agree, we have played politics for too long with American people's money, individual money. I don't understand this incessant push to have the state control the output of that -- that -- the fruits of the labor from people.

If you look back from -- you can go back so far as 1916 with Woodrow Wilson, and look at what happens when you raise taxes on folks. Look at the discretionary income be taken away, out of people's hands, and then look what happens to the revenue that comes into the government. You get more net revenue, the government does, by letting people have their own money and decide how to spend it. That's ultimately what this argument's about.

BELCHER: Look, Anderson, the truth of the matter, if these taxes -- if tax -- if these tax cuts were creating jobs, we would have jobs out of our -- out of our ear holes.

What this is fundamentally about is, is -- is, you know, we're in an economic crisis. And do the rich have an obligation to carry their fair share? I mean, the other day, you know, you...


LOESCH: They are carrying their fair share. They're paying the majority of the taxes.


COOPER: Let him finish. Let him finish.

BELCHER: No, actually -- no, actually, they're not paying the majority of the taxes.

LOESCH: Yes, actually, they are, and that's according to IRS data. Yes.


LOESCH: Yes, absolutely.

BELCHER: And if you look -- and if you -- and if -- and if you look at sort of, I mean, what -- I mean, Warren Buffett said he went to his office the other day and he saw that he was paying a higher -- that his employees were paying a higher proportion of their taxes -- in taxes than -- than he was.

And the fact of the matter is...

LOESCH: You know what, Cornell?


COOPER: Let -- let -- let him finish his thought, and then come in.


BELCHER: Can I finish my -- can I finish my point?

The fact of the matter is, look, we're in an economic downturn. We're in great debt. Why on earth would we take $1 trillion away from the middle-class children and give it to -- and give -- and give it to the wealthy under this ideal it's going to create jobs, and it hasn't created one job yet?


LOESCH: Well, yes, why don't we do that with the stimulus?

I will tell you what. If it was -- if the stimulus, that was supposed to create jobs, and it didn't do anything. If you want to pay higher taxes, you know that the Treasury Department accepts donations.

I -- why aren't -- are you donating more, Cornell, to the Treasury Department right now? You think that people should be paying higher taxes? So, I assume that you are freely and voluntarily donating to the U.S. Department of Treasury.


LOESCH: Because, if you're not, then I believe that you like the government like to come in and force people to divide up their money as they choose.

And, quite frankly, I trust my own acumen...


LOESCH: ... when it concerns my finances over that of the government, because they're not doing so hot right now. BELCHER: You know, the -- you know, the -- the heightened political rhetoric has just gotten so dumb in this country right now, that it doesn't move the argument.

LOESCH: That's not rhetoric. That's fact.

BELCHER: It doesn't -- it doesn't -- it doesn't move -- it doesn't move the argument.

COOPER: Let -- let Cornell respond.


BELCHER: It doesn't move the argument forward.

The truth of the matter is, these millionaires came out the other day saying that, you know what? We don't need more tax cuts. We want to pay -- pay our fair share.

And, quite frankly, what you're talking about doing is Robin Hood in reverse, is taking $1 trillion from middle-class families and giving them to -- and -- and giving that to the wealthy, and it's not creating jobs.


BELCHER: And, by the way, the stimulus, if you do check your statistics, it did create jobs.

LOESCH: No, it doesn't.

BELCHER: And, quite frankly, the CBO said it create jobs.

LOESCH: No, it didn't. You're moving the goalposts. You're moving the goalposts with that.

BELCHER: No, I'm not.


COOPER: We have got -- we have got -- we have got to, guys. I'm sorry.

LOESCH: That's pseudoscience.

COOPER: Guys, appreciate it.

Dana Loesch, Cornell Belcher...

LOESCH: Thanks, Anderson.

COOPER: ... thank you very much.

BELCHER: Thank you.


  1. will tell you what. If it was -- if the stimulus, that was supposed to create jobs, and it didn't do anything. If you want to pay higher taxes, you know that the Treasury Department accepts donations.

  2. will tell you what. If it was -- if the stimulus, that was supposed to create jobs, and it didn't do anything. If you want to pay higher taxes, you know that the Treasury Department accepts donations.


Tweets by @JGibsonDem Tweets by @JPCTumblr