In swiftly-deleted posting, GOP links Legend of Zelda to progressive taxation


Originally published at:


Both links are the same. Neither goes to Google cache.


No screen shots? Both links 404 and all you provided was a screen cap off your own response. I lt would have been nice to see what you were responding to!




Ew. The bit about Zelda is a total distraction. They’re proposing to lower your boss’s tax rate to one-half of yours.

Read that last part again.


Good point.


Maybe they meant Zelda Fitzgerald. I mean Daisy Buchanan.


They say, with my own emphasis:

The Legend of Zelda series is Nintendo’s best-selling video game franchise enjoyed by more than two generations of gamers. The action-adventure game was released in 1986, only one year after Nintendo’s founding in 1985.

And you know what else was released in 1986? Yeah, you do. The last major reform to the American tax code was signed into law in 1986.

Nintendo was founded in 1889. Arrgh.


fixed, sorry


It was also released in the US in 1987.


Saw this response:

It’s like Zelda in that the 1% who have the most rupees hide them in pots and tall grass (HEDGE FUNDS GET IT!?) rather than putting them into circulation in the economy to stimulate growth.


Know what else happened in Japan in 1986? Universal Healthcare coverage turned 25 years old.



Apparently, what Zelda and taxes have in common is that the GOP doesn’t understand anything about either of them.


Maybe they meant “Dark Souls” rather than “Zelda”?

@jeffreyfisher that is a tip top comment. Thank you.

@the_borderer when clicking on the “Our Agenda” tab on the House Republican’s page I was expecting, “Ssssh, its secret” or “404”.


I had no idea what the relevant dates were when reading their fake Nintendo history, but my initial thought was, “That can’t be right.” The numbers didn’t make sense (how could the company have been formed, released a console with games and then a follow-up game within a year?). The “1985” date presumably was taken from the North America release of the NES, which makes using the '86 date for Zelda all the stranger. I know this is a such an insignificant and ultimately irrelevant bit of information to their argument, but the fact that someone couldn’t even look at Wikipedia (or at least without fucking it up) indicates how half-assed the whole thing is.


So the answer to their click-bait title question is literally “Nothing”?

Good, thought so.


While at the same time complicating the tax code.

Got to keep those accountants and tax advisers in work, you know.


If you click on the ‘Would you like to know more?’ link at the bottom of the Zelda article you get this:

If you click on the equivalent link there, you get:

It’s crappy pop-culture clickbait all the way down!

And none of it tells you anything useful about what their tax proposals actually are.


SPOILER: What they have in common is they were both released in 1986.

So, the entire argument is that "old = bad"?

Isn’t the entire argument of Conservatism that "old = good"?