A gaping hole:

The White House is apparently gearing up for a real battle over extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich, with Jared Bernstein, Biden's chief economist, telling HuffPo that a potential compromise that would phase out the tax cut won't work.

"There are many good reasons not to extend the high-end parts of the Bush tax cuts having to do with the fear that a temporary extension could be made permanent," Bernstein said. "What you are talking about -- a $30 to 40 billion range in terms of adding to the deficit by extending the high end -- could easily become $700 billion over a ten-year budget window."

"I think the phase out suffers from that vulnerability," he went on. "You are exposing yourself to the risk that it could be made permanent. The president, [Treasury Secretary] Tim Geithner have been very articulate on this point. If you wanted to, and we do, provide more help to the economy that is about the worst way you could do it. Those folks tend not to be liquidity constrained and therefore the kinds of multipliers associated with that type of spending are the lowest. So it simply is not good stimulus policy and it is not good budget policy."

The $36 billion the tax cuts for the wealthy would add to the deficit should be enough to make deficit peacocks stop squawking about extending these tax breaks for the rich. Public polling on "soaking the rich" should be enough to convince everyone else. It's good policy to get that revenue flowing, and it's good politics.

Let's start with the Senate race.

Quinnipiac. 8/11-16. Florida voters. MoE 3% (7/27 results)

Not a lot of momevement. In fact, the race has been static since June. Here's the chart including Rasmussen polling:

Meanwhile, the nasty GOP primary has given Democrat Alex Sink a boost in the polls:

Here's the chart with McCollum as the GOP nominee:

Florida may end up being a rare Democratic bright spots this November.

Try to make sense of this turd of CW from Politico's Mike Allen:

The virtue of action on Social Security is that it demonstrates the ability to begin to affect the long-run deficits. Social Security isn’t the biggest contributor to the problem – that’s still health-care costs. But ti could help a little bit, buy time, and strengthens the odds of a political consensus behind other spending cuts or tax increases. Most importantly, it would establish more CREDIBILITY with the MARKETS. The mood of the world at the moment (slightly excessive, from the administration’s point of view) is that if you don’t do anything with spending cuts, it doesn’t get you credibility.

Social Security doesn't contribute to deficit. And will be solvent until at least the year 2037 without any modifications to benefits, according to the Social Security trustees. After that, any shortfalls can be plugged by a variety of fixes, such as eliminating the cap on wages taxed by Social Security, so that the wealthy pay their fare share into the system.

On the other hand, health care costs contribute to the deficit NOW. So why not do something about that instead, by, you know, passing deficit-reducing measures like the public option? Ahh, but that wouldn't establish CREDIBILITY with the MARKETS, because apparently, they like spending cuts. You see, that leads to peace and prosperity. Just like in Greece!

The austerity measures that were supposed to fix Greece's problems are dragging down the country's economy. Stores are closing, tax revenues are falling and unemployment has hit an unbelievable 70 percent in some places. Frustrated workers are threatening to strike back.

I'm sure there's nothing the MARKETS would love more than a full-blown depression?

But nah, cut Social Security, because that would help make markets "a little bit" happier, and ponies would magically appear and suddenly, there'd be "political consensus behind other spending cuts or tax increases".

You want to cut the long-term deficit? Then trim the major factors contributing to the deficit (like health care costs) and improve the economy (stimilus) so people get back to work and tax receipts increase.

For well over a year, both professional and amateur analysts of the economy have avidly watched how many new claims for unemployment benefits are filed each week. At 674,000, the peak for new claims was reached March 7, 2009. And the numbers went down from there, with some hiccups, until December. Although those numbers weren't great, they steadily improved, indicating that hiring would soon exceed firing and some job growth would begin, which it did, although tentatively.

After December, however, the drop in initial claims - as well as the volatility-smoothing four-week running average of initial claims - got stuck. Week after week, for months, the figure went up and down around a narrow range. Over the past few weeks, however, in an ominous sign, we've moved off the frustrating plateau as claims have begun rising again, far higher than the experts expected. Today, the Department of Labor announced that 500,000 initial claims were filed for the preceding week, and the four-week average rose to 482,500. That slippage puts us at the same place we were nine months ago. And while continuing claims continue to drop, at least some of that can be attributed to Americans whose jobless benefits are now exhausted.

Tie this into the lackluster Bureau of Labor Statistics job reports for the past three months, during which a paltry number of private-sector jobs have been created. Add in the weak second-quarter GDP report in July (which almost certainly will prove to be even weaker when the first revision is announced later this month). Plus, every few days, there's another release like that from today's gloomy manufacturing report of the Philadelphia Fed: not just the stalled growth of the past two months, but a move into negative territory.

The stock market took a three-digit tumble on the news.

To understate, none of this is very encouraging. That applies both to those without jobs and those fearing they may lose their jobs, including Democratic incumbents in the House and Senate. It-could-have-been-worse will not make for a very persuasive get-out-the-vote message if those statistical improvements we started seeing in the economy more than a year ago still seem on the precipice of reversal come election day. Not that voters shouldn't be constantly reminded of who the major obstacle in improving the situation is. President Obama once again on Thursday urged obstructionist Republicans to stop blocking the modest jobs bill. We know how that will likely end.

The only faint glimmer of hope is that these awful jobless claims numbers and associated calculations, distorted by Census layoffs and other statistical "noise," will turn out to be temporary, just part of a choppiness that accompanies many recoveries.

There is a silver lining of sorts. Not as many people are dying on the job, according to Businessweek, because not as many people are on the job.

CNN profiled seven Silver Star recipients in Afghanistan -- the third highest military award for battlefield valor. Look at the surnames:

Nunez died saving the lives of his fellow soldiers.

I highlight the Spanish surnames because it's a reminder that as Republicans demagogue Latinos and their families, they are putting their lives on the line for their country. And while there are Latinos whose families have lived in this country for centuries (in New Mexico, for example), most are recent immigrants (Pinilla was born in Colombia). Yet these guys aren't engaged in the criminal enterprises that conservatives fantasize about. Rather, they are serving their nation in uniform, and sometimes giving their lives in its name.

Instead of strutting around the border like tough men, the Minutemen could walk into their local military recruiters office and maybe, someday, do half as much for their country as the names above.

(Via DWT)

Yesterday we saw how Republican nominee in this closely fought South Florida district attempted to hijack a truck carrying a direct mail piece from an opponent attacking him for being a woman beater. Today, the Miami Herald moves the story forward:

The allegation arises from a 1994 petition for a domestic-violence restraining order filed in Miami-Dade Circuit Court against one David M. Rivera. The court file has been destroyed -- by law, family court files are not retained after five years -- along with any details or additional identifying information. Only a computer record of the docket is available today.

The restraining order was dropped after a month, and no criminal charges were filed, records show. But inconsistencies in Rivera's responses to the claim in years past and today have helped make it a campaign issue heading into the Aug. 24 Republican primary, a Miami Herald/WFOR-CBS 4 review has found.

"The 1994 case has absolutely nothing to do with me. I am not the David Rivera in that case, and to suggest otherwise is a blatant and shameful lie,'' Rivera said in his statement.

Rivera -- whose middle name is Mauricio -- also said that he has never met the woman who made the 1994 complaint, Jenia Dorticos. Dorticos, who now lives in New York, gave a sworn statement to Rivera's attorneys saying she does not know the politician and that he was not the target of her complaint.

However, a Miami woman who says she is friendly with Dorticos' brother told The Herald that Rivera and Dorticos came to her home as a couple to attend a dinner party about 10 years ago. Dorticos' mother also once worked on one of Rivera's political campaigns, records show. Rivera and Dorticos deny attending the party.

There's more evidence in the story that 1) Rivera is lying, and 2) that he's a serial liar, and a brash one as well (as noted yesterday, he even lied about knowing one of his best friends, despite ample documented evidence to the contrary).

Republicans want to put a serial abuser of women in Congress. We can help elect a good Democrat instead in Joe Garcia:

Contribute to Joe Garcia
Joe Garcia for Congress

• A shot was fired into Al Franken's condo in MInneapolis. No one was home. Police are investigating.
• The teabaggers have given us some of the least popular Senate candidates this cycle. Thanks, guys!
• America's Muslims are most middle class and mostly mainstream. But given the GOP's incessant appetite for things to hate, it was inevitable they'd be lumped in with gays, African Americans, Latinos, Chicagoans, New Yorkers, anyone from Massachusetts, single women, anyone having premarital sex, foreigners, Californians, and any graduate from an institution of higher learning that isn't Liberty or Regent "Universities".
• MoveOn is quaking in its boots, I'm sure.
• Remember how I argued that MSNBC president Phil Griffin is really conservative (he booted me off the network after I hurt Joe Scarborough's feelings)? More evidence:

  MSNBC has rejected an ad created by the progressive group MoveOn.org that calls for a boycott of Target over the company's contributions to anti-gay political candidates.

  In a statement, MoveOn said that MSNBC had notified them that the ad--which mimics Target's red and white motif and tells people to boycott the company because "our democracy is not for sale"--violated NBC's "Controversial Issue Advertising policy," because it was an explicit attack on an individual company.

  MoveOn's executive director, Justin Ruben, blasted MSNBC and its parent company, General Electric, in the statement.

  "According to MSNBC and GE it is alright for corporations, like Target, to attack candidates and buy elections, but it is not OK for citizen organizations, like MoveOn, to fight back. This is the height of hypocrisy," he said.

• Sunlight Foundation plays with anagrams:

  Sarah Palin - Sharia Plan
  Charlie Rangel - Clang! Liar Here
  Joe Biden - I Need Job
  Harry Reid - Hair Dryer
  Michael Steele - Ethical Melees
  Bill O'Reilly - Lib Yell Roil
  Keith Olbermann - Oink! Blather Men
  Jon Stewart - Rant! Jest! Ow!
  

• A Senate without filibuster is a Senate that represents the will of the voters, that is accountable, that ensures that elections do have consequences.

  The filibuster is the best thing ever for defenders of the status quo and for corporations that can buy a few obstructing senators for relatively cheap, whether its Max Baucus or Ben Nelson.

  If you want to see the filibuster gone, and along with it the culture of obstructionism that has broken Congress and ensured that corporations write our laws, then sign our petition to abolish it.

• Jonathan Singer looks at one pollster's "likely voter screen", and notes a glaring problem with it. Fact is, polling is as much art as it is science.
• Digby:

  [I]f young people don't want to pay into social security they probably need to start saving for a very big house with a couple of extra bedrooms for mom and dad and possibly grandma and grandpa too. That's how everyone used to live before social security was enacted --- with most of those that didn't have kids able to take care of them living in grinding, horrible poverty. Perhaps the prospect of that will make people realize that social security is a very good deal.

• In Republican land, Republicans deserve all credit for everything that is good, and none of the blame for all things that are bad. Convenient!

  In any case, the Iraq War isn't over. We still have 50,000 troops in the country, and it's no post-war Germany or Japan. People are still getting shot, still getting blown up.

PPP. 8/14-15. Likely voters. MoE 4.1% (6/13 results)

Note, a Libertarian candidate has just qualified for the ballot, giving disaffected Republicans who think Kirk is a RINO another ballot option.

The previous PPP poll used registered voters, so tightening the screen didn't really change the underlying trend -- that this is a tight race, and that both candidates are thoroughly unloved. Guannoulias favorability rating is at 26/42, while Kirk is at 26/34. Furthermore, just 51 percent of Democrats have a favorable opinion of Giannoulias, while just 49 percent of Republicans have a favorable opinion of Kirk (hence the relevance of the libertarian candidate on the ballot).

PPP's Tom Jensen:

These polls results are premised on an extremely depressed Democratic electorate. Those surveyed report having voted for Barack Obama by only 9 points, in contrast to his actual 26 point victory in the state in 2008. That's a dropoff even worse than what Democrats saw in Virginia last year and the fact that Kirk is behind even when that's the case does not bode well if Democratic interest in this election gets any better over the next three months. And it's not as if Illinois voters just don't know Giannoulias yet- they know him and they know they don't like him and they still give him a small lead.

In Kirk Republicans got the candidate they wanted in this race. But it looks more and more like they might have wanted the wrong candidate. There's no way with everything that's happened to Giannoulias since the last couple weeks before the primary that he should be ahead in this race. But he's hanging on...

The latest chart, including Rasmussen:

Asshole Richard Cohen, 2/6/2003:

The evidence he presented to the United Nations -- some of it circumstantial, some of it absolutely bone-chilling in its detail -- had to prove to anyone that Iraq not only hasn't accounted for its weapons of mass destruction but without a doubt still retains them. Only a fool -- or possibly a Frenchman -- could conclude otherwise.

Tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, died because of bullshit like this, and yet these assholes have suffered no accountability.

The real fools still reign supreme.

(via Atrios.)

UN bicycle conspiracy theorist Dan Maes, the Republican nominee for governor in Colorado, is trying to go mainstream Republican. He succeeded a tiny bit, with a couple of establishment endorsements. On the other hand, he picked another teabagger sympathizer to be his running mate. Tambor Williams is a former state legislator and one of his earliest supporters.

In naming her, he gave this ringing endorsement of his own candidacy: "She brings the political experience to the table that I lack." That's confidence-inspiring, huh? That could be one of the reasons why the Republican Governors Association seems inclined to sit this one out.

Two Colorado Republicans with knowledge of the Republican Governors Association's plans said Tuesday that the political committee has decided not to bankroll television and other ads supporting GOP gubernatorial hopeful Dan Maes....

With Tom Tancredo expected to draw conservative voters away from the nominee, the group will put its money into other competitive races.

Meanwhile, moderate Republicans do seemingly still exist in Colorado. Or at least, Republicans who can't stomach Maes or Tancredo. Three prominent business leaders, one being the former chairman of U.S. Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign in Colorado, have announced their support of Dem John Hickenlooper.

So he's lost the RGA, he's losing big-money Republicans (who aren't just sitting it out, but are actively trying to defeat him), but at least he'll have the Colorado Republican Party behind him, now that he's the nominee, right? And . . . kinda, sorta.

The chairman of the Colorado Republican Party said Wednesday he presented a proposal to GOP gubernatorial nominee Dan Maes that would have removed former GOP Rep. Tom Tancredo—who’s running on a third-party line—from the governor’s race.

But despite GOP handwringing over Tancredo’s candidacy, Maes declined the offer. Why? It would have required that Maes also drop out of the race....

Pressed for more details on whether Wadhams hoped Maes would accept Tancredo’s offer, the party chairman said his statement spoke for itself.

“I passed along Tom's offer. Dan responded. They're both still running,” Wadhams told POLITICO in an e-mail. “I continue to support Dan Maes for Governor of Colorado."

It was all Tancredo's idea! Wadhams swears he was only passing along Tancredo's suggestion, and that--really--the UN bicycle conspiracy theorist is his guy, all the way.

It will come as no surprise to learn that Bill O'Reilly was the first Fox News on-air personality to to lose the Democratic Governors Association challenge:

In the wake of Fox News officially becoming the media arm of the Republican Party with its $1 million donation to the Republican Governors Association, Nathan Daschle, the executive director of its Democratic counterpart has issued a challenge in a letter to Fox News Chairman Roger Ailes:

In the interest of some fairness and balance, I request that you add a formal disclaimer to your news coverage any time any of your programs cover governors or gubernatorial races between now and Election Day.

During Wednesday's broadcast, Bill-O had the Republican gubernatorial candidate from Ohio, John Kasich, on his program and didn't bother to inform his audience that he had a vested interest in promoting Kasich's candidacy.

On the other hand, O'Reilly was fair and balanced. He opened by calling Kasich his "pal," cited a Rasmussen poll, said that Kasich's Democratic opponent wouldn't come on his show because he couldn't handle the questions. O'Reilly then peppered Kasich with hard-hitting questions on the President, how the liberal media might hurt him, and whether Sarah Palin would be campaigning for him. Ouch.

Media Matters has the video here ... but save yourself some time and aggravation and watch this for the whole story:

A couple of months ago, George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer in Britain (roughly equivalent to the U.S. Treasury Secretary), asked the British public to come up with ideas for slashing government services to reduce the country's deficit. The results have now been published at the Spending Challenge website.

Tens of thousands of ideas have been submitted across the pond. But at least one might have a future in the States. It was submitted by "Mercian":

In Victorian times, prisoners had to walk a treadmill or turn a hand crank before they were fed.  Nowadays these devices could be made to generate electricity.  This would save money by saving electricity bills for the prisons, and possibly even selling someback to the Natioanl [sic] grid.  It would also make prison more of a deterrent, thus making criminals less likely to offend.

Prison treadmills are nothing new. They were invented by Sir William Cubit in 1817. Forty-four British prisons adopted them, sometimes grinding grain or pumping water. For the prisoner, it was like climbing stairs without stopping, 8 to 10 hours a day. At least one treadmill was attached to a huge fan that increased the resistance as prisoners kept up the pace, having no choice. Some of these operations continued well into the 20th Century.

Mercian's idea is not likely to get past the culling of submissions in Britain. But here in America? Wow. A way for Republicans to prove they are both tough on crime and, contrary to every bit of evidence available over the past few decades, environmentally conscious. The GOP can present this as their alternative to passing a green energy bill. Of course, the legislation will require that these treadmills only be installed in private prisons since the whole concept of public power is anathema to the Party of No.

If you look at Robin Carnahan's first ad, released last Thursday, and her second one, released yesterday, it doesn't take an experienced political strategist to see the message she's going with:

Roy Blunt, Wall Street tool. That's the message, and it should be a strong one, since the facts are damn hard to argue.

The interesting thing to watch will be if these ads start to move the polling. The Daily Kos poll conducted by PPP last week was done in the first days Carnahan's first ad was running, while Blunt had been advertising for more than a month. The question is how much Carnahan going on the air will move the numbers.

Remember the Vitter aide who was put in charge of women's issue after stabbing his ex-girlfriend? This story is about the same guy:

Taxpayers footed the bill when a former aide to Republican U.S. Sen. David Vitter traveled to Louisiana on trips coinciding with court-related activities involving the aide’s most recent DWI arrest.

Vitter’s U.S. Senate office expense account records show two trips by Brent Furer from Washington, D.C., to Louisiana — one in 2007 and the other 2008.

The dates of the trips match times Furer was scheduled to make appearances related to his Dec. 28, 2004, arrest for driving while intoxicated and other related charges, according to Baton Rouge City Court records.

Vitter was asked in writing if he was aware of the circumstances and reasons Furer gave for the travel.

Vitter was not available for comment, said his spokesman Joel DiGrado on Wednesday afternoon.

DiGrado issued a prepared statement late Wednesday, saying that Vitter "certainly doesn’t condone any questionable timing of these trips."

ABC elaborates:

The timing of the trips, paid by Vitter's office accounts, has rekindled questions about the senator's key aide just as Vitter is battling for reelection. Earlier this year, ABC News first reported on the history of legal troubles that had trailed Vitter's aide, Brent Furer. His brushes with the law included a series of drunk driving arrests, a cocaine arrest, and an arrest for attacking a female friend in 2008.

In that instance, the woman alleged that Furer held her hostage for 90 minutes, smashed her phone so she couldn't summon help, threatened to kill her, and cut her so seriously that she required stitches across her chin. Furer was found guilty on misdemeanor charges related to the altercation and permitted to return to work at Vitter's Washington, D.C. senate office, where his portfolio continued to include women's issues.

Vitter is facing a primary challenge from retired Republican State Supreme Court Justice Chet Traylor. Traylor has raised Vitter's usage of a prostitution ring, but has his own "values" problems: he currently lives with (and is engaged in a romantic relationship with) the estranged wife of his own son.

For those wondering where the bounds of propriety are on the issue of the Cordoba House controversy, let's do a quick recap of the Republican position.

Building a mosque and Islamic cultural center within a few blocks of Ground Zero?

A tremendous affront to the victims of 9/11.

Forcing victims to relive 9/11 by using footage from the attacks in a campaign video designed to inflame opposition to the mosque and cultural center, and to attempt to resurrect a political campaign on life support?

Totally legit.

Yep...former Congressman and Republican gubernatorial frontrunner Rick Lazio just went there:

(The video) goes to a place that few politicians in New York have visited over the last nine years — it uses images of firefighters surrounded by debris and dust as a prelude to interviews, set to poignant music, with average New Yorkers a block from the site talking about why having a mosque near it is a bad idea.

Maggie Haberman, who writes about New York affairs for Politico is, to say the least, a bit uneasy about the incorporation of 9/11 footage into a political ad in this fashion (emphasis mine):

This may fire up the GOP base, but it still surprises me Lazio's going there. Either it's a huge blunder, or a gamble that no one will be that upset seeing images from that day in a political context, once a massive taboo.

It also seems like a disconnect to argue that having a mosque near the site is insensitive, but showing footage of a firefighter and a pedestrian literally running for their lives from the dust plume and debris from one of the falling towers isn't.

Lazio is now recent convert on the Cordoba House issue, however. He has been flailing away at this issue for more than a month, apparently with the dogged certainty (one shared, if recent events are any indication, by the GOP in general) that this issue provides him with his ticket to political relevancy.

How well is that working out for him? You be the judge:

Siena Poll. 8/9-8/16. Registered Voters. MoE 3.5%. (July results in parentheses).

Dave Weigel asks an incredibly pertinent question:

The first politician for a major elected office who came out against the "ground zero mosque" was Rick Lazio, the man who lost the New York U.S. Senate race to Hillary Clinton in 2000, who's making a comeback bid to run for governor. Lazio asked for a mosque probe more than a month ago, challenged frontrunner Andrew Cuomo to a debate about the mosque -- basically, he's milked it for all it's worth.

So what does it mean that this isn't helping Lazio at all?

The reason, at least in New York, is that voters manage to understand the nuance that while they may not personally like the construction of the mosque, they understand that there is a constitutional right for it to be constructed. While voters in the Empire State disapprove of the project by a wide margin (63-27), they also overwhelmingly agree (64-28) that there is a constitutional right for it to be built.

Something tells me that most voters can appreciate that distinction. The modern-era Republican Party, on the other hand, seems to struggle with it. Which is why their reliance on this issue as a political cudgel might not have the impact that they are anticipating.

Politico's Ben Smith and Maggie Haberman take a look at the Park51/Burlington Coat Factory Mosque from a perspective that has largely been ignored -- whether the developers really have their act together to actually follow through on their proposal:

The Cordoba Initiative hasn’t begun fundraising yet for its $100 million goal. The group’s latest fundraising report with the State Attorney General’s office, from 2008, shows exactly $18,255 – not enough even for a down payment on the half of the site the group has yet to purchase.

The group also lacks even the most basic real estate essentials: no blueprint, architect, lobbyist or engineer — and now operates amid crushing negative publicity. The developers didn't line up advance support for the project from other religious leaders in the city, who could have risen to their defense with the press.

The group’s spokesman, Oz Sultan, wouldn’t rule out developing the site with foreign money in an interview with POLITICO – but said the project’s goal is to rely on domestic funds. Currently, they have none of either.

"They are in the process of hiring an architect — but here’s the thing, you’re not going to get the architect or the engineer because they don’t want to be involved in this," Sultan, the new media consultant hired to handle some of the project’s imaging — mostly via Twitter — told POLITICO.

There's much more in the full article, which is worth a read, though I should add that I quarrel with its political framing, which is that President Obama, though his defense of religious liberty, hitched the Democratic Party to "an ill-planned, long-shot development project."

What President Obama did was defend the right to build the community center and mosque. Against the backdrop of anti-Muslim bigotry from Republicans, President Obama defended basic Constitutional principles. He explicitly said that he was not addressing the wisdom of the development, but rather he was giving voice to the American value of religious freedom.

If it turns out that the developers of this project don't really have the wherewithal to follow through on their plans (and $18,255 doesn't make it sound like they do), that does not take anything away from the moral clarity of his comments.

If the project turns out to be as ill-fated as Smith and Haberman's reporting suggests that it is, another way of looking at it is that Republicans rallied en masse to destroy something that never had a chance to begin with, and they did so using the ugliest anti-Muslim bigotry imaginable.

Whether or not this project comes to pass, President Obama and other principled defenders of religious liberty did the right thing -- and the people who came out against the project merely to score political points did the cowardly thing.

From the GREAT STATE OF MAINE...

Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers

Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers:

Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers.

Cheers Cheers Cheers! (Cheers Cheers Cheers Cheers!)

P.S. Cheers Cheers Cheers!

Cheers and Jeers starts in There's Moresville... [Swoosh!!] RIGHT NOW! [Gong!!]