The imbecile misquotes ... again!

Misquoting articles in an attempt to back his wild, imbecilic claims seems to be a habit with our moron. If Mark posts a link, which he rarely ever does, check it. Nine times out of ten, it has nothing to do with what Mark is claiming. We all have seen how Mark tries to say that Boortz now tells us that we won't bring home our entire paycheck, when the article Mark quotes says entirely the opposite. In Mark's mind, he probably does see it that way. Why is it that nobody agrees with him? Mark is a busy little fucker. The more people challenge him, the more he goes out searching for any little tidbit that might help him prove his wild claims. So far, he's found Bruce Bartlett and some obscure article from a retail sales organization. Mark says it's the National Federation of Retailers. This is what Mark quotes them as saying:

"Under the proposed national sales tax rate of 30 percent at the cash register, consumers would simply stop spending on anything but the barest necessities for a prolonged period of time," Pfister said. (Whoever Phister is).
"This would have a ripple effect throughout the economy with an impact far beyond the retail industry. Even at lower rates, the psychological effect on consumer spending would be profound."

But here's where it gets screwy. Again, I'm sure Mark does this on purpose. He puts this link in, which says nothing about the FairTax... nothing: (click here). Since Mark takes everything he reads at face value and doesn't possess the brain power to think beyond what he reads, let's look at what this Phister guy talks about. He says:

"Under the proposed national sales tax rate of 30 percent at the cash register, consumers would simply stop spending on anything but the barest necessities for a prolonged period of time."

What Phister considers a prolonged period of time is a mystery, and why would consumers stop spending on anything but the barest necessities? Hmmm, do you suppose that for the first time in their lives, they're able to save some money or invest for their future? Mark doesn't mention that. Nor does Mr. Phister. And again, he goes on to say:

"This would have a ripple effect throughout the economy with an impact far beyond the retail industry. Even at lower rates, the psychological effect on consumer spending would be profound."

Hmmm, you know, he's probably right on this one. Once people find out that they actually get to bring home what they earn and spending less means saving and investing for their future more. It certainly will have a profound effect on the economy. All those businesses and industries coming back to the U.S. That 17 trillion dollars in off-shore tax havens coming back into the economy certainly will have a profound effect. All those new jobs opening up... yep, profound! Thank you for again misquoting Mark! And thanks for only seeing these articles at face value! Keep up the good work Mark!