The “Party of No” benefits the Koch brothers and others of their ilk solely.

What will the “Party of No” propose other than policies that help fat cats such as the Koch brothers?

The “Party of No” always conflates tax cuts for all with tax cuts for the fat cats solely. This will make a society of top 1% fat cats pitted against 99% struggling to survive. Thanks “Party of No”.

The “Party of No” will try to diminish the EPA which helps Koch brothers solely.

The fat cats want the Keystone pipeline, which will hurt our environment, so the “Party of No” will do everything they can to get it passed against Democratic opposition.

The “Party of No” will stifle immigration reform because it doesn’t help the top 1%.

The “Party of No” will act to repeal or diminish the Affordable Care Act which shafts the 99%.

The “Party of No” wants to return us to the days before FDR’s New Deal.

The “Party of No” wants to return the US to match the yearnings of its followers who unfortunately are biased Neanderthals.

Arkansas is representative of how the fat cats stole elections for “Party of No” operatives who will show their appreciation by proposing legislation that help the fat cats solely.

The article “Inside the Koch retreat: Tom Cotton and fat cats' mutual admiration society” illustrates how Tom Cotton does the bidding of his benefactors as it states “Remember the Koch retreat at a fancy California resort that caused Tom Cotton to miss the Pink Tomato Festival in Warren. Shades of Mitt Romney. A tape of the proceedings has emerged. And it includes rich praise for Tom Cotton, particularly his votes against the interests of Arkansas farmers.”

Iowa state Sen. Joni Ernst also was identified on this tape as being a Koch brother boot licker as the article states about them “During their speeches, both Cotton and Ernst noted that this was actually the second Koch brothers' retreat they had attended. Last year, the two had gone to the New Mexico event as politicians of less stature. The Koch network has since helped usher them to the doorsteps of the United States Senate.

The candidates praised the fat cats, who hate taxes and regulation and government programs that help poor people.”

The Koch brothers was founded Americans for Prosperity (AFP) to brainwash red staters and get “Party of No” operatives elected in order to help the fat cats.

Tom Phillips is a Koch brother crony and he said “Tom Cotton is a champion.He has a 100 percent in AFP voting record. ... This guy is running for the Senate [while] actually voting with 61 Republicans in the House to vote against the farm bill — in Arkansas."

How did Cotton win in Arkansas doing that? The voters were brainwashed as they voted against their interests. The article states “Is a 100 percent AFP voting record 100 percent for Arkansas. Not if you're a farmer; fear pollution; get Medicare or Medicaid or Social Security or food stamps; depend on agriculture subsidies; hope for medical residencies at Children's Hospital; etc. etc.”

As went Arkansas so went the country. Red staters vote against their interests because they are biased and yearn to believe that the US can return to the days before FDR because that is the venomous tripe the “Party of No” promulgates.

The article “A Relentless Widening of Disparity in Wealth” shows how the “Party of No” realizes that they can give the fat cats everything.

The “Party of No” won’t give up until the 99% will be desperate for a minimum wage job.

The article states “What if inequality were to continue growing years or decades into the future? Say the richest 1 percent of the population amassed a quarter of the nation’s income, up from about a fifth today. What about half?

To believe Thomas Piketty of the Paris School of Economics, this future is not just possible. It is likely.

In his bracing “Capital in the Twenty-First Century,” which hit bookstores on Monday, Professor Piketty provides a fresh and sweeping analysis of the world’s economic history that puts into question many of our core beliefs about the organization of market economies.

His most startling news is that the belief that inequality will eventually stabilize and subside on its own, a long-held tenet of free market capitalism, is wrong. Rather, the economic forces concentrating more and more wealth into the hands of the fortunate few are almost sure to prevail for a very long time.

It is possible to slow, or even reverse, the trend, if political leaders like President Obama, who proposed that income inequality was the “defining challenge of our time,” really push.”

I am in my sixties and the oldest scam of the GOP is that they conflate tax cuts for all with tax cuts for the fat cats. Bush 43 had a sunset provision for his tax cuts which primarily, almost solely, benefitted the top 1%. Karl Rove, Bush 43’s “Turd Blossom” wanted to give his fat cat cronies a tax cut, shaft the 99% and damage the Democrats. As an added bonus, the “sunset” provision, in Beltway-speak, was a political time bomb: At some point in the way distant future, Democrats could be accused of raising taxes if they tried to undo the Bush breaks and return to Clinton-era levels of taxation.

The article states “Taxes are, of course, the most feasible counterweight. Progressive wealth taxes could reduce the after-tax return to capital so that it equaled the rate of economic growth.

But politically, “the fiscal institutions to redistribute incomes in a balanced and equitable way have been badly damaged,” Professor Piketty told me.

The holders of wealth, hardly a powerless bunch, will oppose any such move, even if that’s what is needed to preserve capitalism against the populist impulses of those left behind.”

In the article “The “Party of No” will continue to abdicate its role as legislators to benefit the top 1%” we articulated how the “Party of No” has shafted the 99%. With their propaganda tactics the “Party of No” has managed to make red staters believe that the Democrats want to raise taxes on them, when the Democrats only want to raise taxes on fat cats who can afford increases easily. Face it, if we don’t have an economy in which every person can strive for a decent job then we don’t have the “American Dream” any longer.

The article “Mitch McConnell Says His Top Priority Is To ‘Get The EPA Reined In’” shows that Mitch McConnell is in the pockets of the Koch brothers.

The article states “On Thursday, incoming Senate Majority Leader and Kentucky Republican Mitch McConnell said that when it comes to serving his home state, his top priority is “to try to do whatever I can to get the EPA reined in.””

Lick their boots Mitch because McConnell would do the Koch brothers bidding to get their campaign donations.

Remember Bush 43’s Pioneer and Ranger contributors?

The article regarding Bush 43’s political brain Karl Rove stated “Nonetheless, the Kentucky Opportunity Coalition, a Karl Rove-linked group, supported McConnell’s protection of the coal industry from the “Obama’s war on coal” this election with ad buys.” You know the Kentucky voters were thoroughly brainwashed if Herr Karl is involved.

What others of the Koch brothers’ biddings is McConnell planning to implement? The article states “For a glimpse into the incoming Senate Majority Leader’s plans for the next two years, McConnell has told his donors that he will work hard to thwart the Obama agenda, including pushing coal, moving forward with the Keystone XL pipeline, and stopping the EPA from doing anything to confront climate change.”

The article “The House That Kochs Bought Passes Bill Muzzling EPA Scientists” shows that the “Party of No” realizes it has to distort reality to win its arguments.

The article states “For many Americans it is stunning that in the 21st Century there is a vibrant anti-science movement, especially in a highly technological nation. Of course, there is a reason two specific groups hate science and it is either because it debunks their superstition and mythos, or exposes their dirty industry practices as detrimental to the nation’s security and the people’s health….

On Tuesday, to ensure that the “right kind of scientists” are doling out advice on environmental protections, Republicans in the House passed legislation to guarantee that oil industry scientists loyal to the Kochs, and not independent scientists, serve on the Environmental Protection Agency’s Science Advisory Board. The rule change prohibits scientists not in the employ of the oil industry from talking about, or giving advice based on, independent scientific research, and prevents them from applying for grants from the EPA for further research.”

Isn’t this awful? How stupid does the “Party of No” think we are?

The article states “Real scientists, various environmental groups, and real health experts, the people protecting Americans, rightly cited the real intent of the Koch-inspired bill; “compromise the scientific independence of the SAB and EPA,” and at the least “increase the length of time it takes the EPA to implement clean air and water regulations,” and if Republicans can fulfill the Koch’s wildest dreams, make it impossible for the Environmental Protection Agency to function. The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), real academics, fervently came out against the Koch bill and were outraged that the bill prohibits real scientists on the SAB from discussing peer-reviewed research they may have been involved or have an academic interest in such as the effect of carbon emissions on climate change.”

The“Party of No” is contemptible. Our world gets destroyed so the Koch brothers make more filthy lucre.

This is simply factual. Every President Since Eisenhower Used Executive Authority On Immigration, yet the “Party of No” has threatened him impeachment because it doesn’t correspond with their wishes. The “Party of No” are ruining our government. Just within the last decade Bush 43 did what our President is doing and the “Party of No” had no problems with it. You wonder how uninformed the red staters truly that they can docilely accept the brainwashing of the “Party of No”. The article “Republicans Were Fine With Bush Acting On Immigration Reform Without Congress” describes how demented the “Party of No” is.

The article states “With his immigration bill dead, the administration rolled out a proposed rule to address some of the major issues in the failed legislation,” the Associated Press writes, before outlining some of the changes the president will enact without the consent of Congress.

But the article isn’t about President Barack Obama’s impending executive action to “expand temporary protections for millions of undocumented immigrants.” It’s from 2007 and it details President George W. Bush’s push to enact changes to immigration law after his own immigration reform bill failed in the Senate.”

The article “Republicans confront own worst enemy on immigration” illustrates the vile measures that the “Party of No” is considering against our President who is only acting to help innocent immigrants.

McConnell and Boehner, the GOP leaders of the Senate and House, are pretending that the “Party of No” will not do anything excessive, but the article states “But conservatives inside and outside Congress want to use the budget process as a battleground to wage war against Obama and his immigration program. The proposed gambit raises the specter of another government shutdown, akin to the one that damaged Republicans last year…

Many conservative lawmakers, however, are shrugging off pleas from leadership. Furious with the president, they are planning a series of immediate and hard-line actions that could have sweeping consequences. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said Wednesday that Obama’s executive action should be met with a refusal to vote on any more of his nominees, and on Thursday compared the action with the ancient Catiline conspiracy, a plot to overthrow the Roman Republic…

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), likely to be the next chairman of the budget committee, has advocated for a series of stopgap spending bills with the intent of pressuring the president to relent. Sessions is the featured speaker at a Heritage Foundation event Friday morning in response to Obama’s moves, a couple hours after a scheduled Boehner news conference.

And Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) — one of the loudest voices on the right — has hinted at bringing up impeachment measures. “We have constitutional authority to do a string of things. [Impeachment] would be the very last option, but I would not rule it out,” King said on CNN Thursday….

Speaking with reporters, Bachmann had said the “social cost” of Obama’s immigration policies would be extensive, with “millions of unskilled, illiterate, foreign nationals coming into the United States who can’t speak the English language.””

For doing what every other President has done the “Party of No” has threatened impeachment and shutdown.

Then we have Bachmann whose remarks exhibit the naked hostility the “Party of No” has for all minorities, which to the “Party of No” appears to be a subset of the top 1% who came across on the Mayflower.

The article “House Republicans File Obamacare Lawsuit” demonstrates how the “Party of No” will do anything to hurt the 99%. What can devastate a family worse than medical emergencies that can’t be addressed without plunging the family into debt?

The article states “House Republicans have filed an expected lawsuit against President Barack Obama over his implementation of the Affordable Care Act, the New York Times reported on Friday….

The move comes just hours after the president announced that he was taking executive action to shield millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation, a step that Republicans also deem worthy of legal recourse because of his decision to bypass Congress. The GOP lawsuit does not, however, include immigration.

Republicans struggled to find representation for the case. Constitutional lawyer and separation of powers advocate Jonathan Turley signed on earlier this week after two major law firms dropped the case.”

The “Party of No” had to struggle to find a lawyer to take the case because it is nonsense, but the “Party of No” is desperate to do its top 1% bidding and love shafting the 99% and our President.

The article “Ignoring Obama’s Record Rewards the Party of No” shows how the “Party of No” wants to return us to a time before the New Deal.

The article states “Presidential historian Douglas Brinkley describes Obama as a new type of 21st-century Democratic chief executive: a curatorial president. Obama, he writes, is a “progressive firewall” standing between an energized right-wing Republican Party and the legacy of the New Deal, the Fair Deal, the New Frontier and the Great Society.

FDR, Brinkley writes, redefined the American presidency as an institution capable of improving the lives of ordinary citizens. Social Security, the right to collective bargaining, Wall Street regulation and government-insured bank accounts are New Deal legacies that define the country we know today….

As Brinkley reads it, Obama is the president the historical moment requires: the curator-in-chief.

As long as he is president, Social Security will not be privatized (as proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan); Medicaid will not be turned into a voucher program (per the Ryan budget that the House passed in 2008); the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and National Public Radio will not be defunded (a John Boehner initiative); and the EPA will not be abolished (as proposed by Senators Richard Burr, John McCain, Mike Enzi, John Thune and Roy Blunt).”

The “Party of No” lies to red staters and propose legislation that benefits the fat cats solely. President Obama defies this and as the article states “it was Obama’s success in advancing New Deal-Great Society programs that antagonized right-wing Republicans who questioned the legitimacy of his presidency from its inception….

Obama’s modest progressive legislative agenda ignited a populist fury on the right, which came to be fueled by corporate donors who recognized the utility of Tea Party activists and Christian extremists carrying pitchforks.”

How furious are the “Party of No”? The article states “Republican John Boehner’s criticism of the 2009 stimulus package helped fuel an anti-spending, anti-taxation, nativist, racist movement of white conservatives.”

Bachmann spoke the vile view of our society that the “Party of No” possesses, but tries to hide. It sneaks out—remember Romney’s “47%” remark, but the “Party of No” doesn’t want to stand by it because they will never get enough votes to win if it does.

Speaking with reporters, Bachmann had said the “social cost” of Obama’s immigration policies would be extensive, with “millions of unskilled, illiterate, foreign nationals coming into the United States who can’t speak the English language.””

We earlier detailed the “Party of No” as being anti-spending, anti-taxation, nativist, racist movement of white conservatives who want to return us to a time before the New Deal and who distort scientific evidence to ruin our environment so that the Koch brothers and others of their ilk can make a bigger profit.

The “Party of No” will gladly shutdown the government or impeach the President if it serves its vile purposes.

The “Party of No” has its boots on the neck of the 99% while it does the bidding of their top 1% masters.