ThinkFast: March 29, 2006
ThinkFast: March 29, 2006
“How do you say revolving door in Japanese?” Former Senator Howard Baker (R-TN), the U.S. Ambassador to Japan until last year, has already registered as a lobbyist for Toshiba Corporation.
Halliburton actually did “a worse job under its second Iraq oil contract than it did under the original no-bid contract,” repeatedly overcharging the government and exhibiting “profound systemic problems.”
30 out of more than 180,000 millionaires were audited by the IRS last year. Poor taxpayers were almost twice as likely to be audited as the wealthy.
At the “War on Christians” conference yesterday, Texas Baptist minister Rick Scarborough said, “I believe the most damaging thing that Tom DeLay has done in his life is take his faith seriously into public office.†Mr. Scarborough, here are thirteen real candidates for the most damaging thing DeLay has done while serving in public office.
Also: After the conference, DeLay said Justices O’Connor and Ginsburg “don’t get†the right-wing attacks on the judiciary, and that society “all but treats Christianity like some second-rate superstition.â€
Gulf Coast residents will experience “quick and massive evacuations during the upcoming hurricane season, even if the approaching storm is minimal,” due to their fragility of their temporary housing. It’s especially bad news since New Orleans still lacks even a single emergency shelter.
$335,000: The cost of a 200-page government report on the impacts of outsourcing on “knowledge-based industries” that the Commerce Department is refusing to release. Instead, it has handed out a 12-page summary that lawmakers “suspect whitewashes the worst news about job migration to India and other countries.”
Thousands of political refugees from authoritarian states are being denied safe harbor from the federal Refugee Resettlement Program because of the Homeland Security Department’s “Kafkaesque interpretation of who is deemed a terrorist.”
Former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz has been leading the World Bank for just 10 months, but already he seems to have alienated much of the staff. Among the criticisms: “too much reliance on a few crafty conservative Republicans he brought with him†and too little use of the bank’s experienced staffers.
And finally: More than 260 “friends, relatives and beneficiaries of Abramoff’s largesse” have written letters to the federal judge who is sentencing him Wednesday, “asking that he be shown mercy.” One supporter wrote the judge “about the time Abramoff tried to ‘find a lost hamster on a Friday night.’”
What did we miss? Let us know in the comments section.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
30 out of more than 180,000 millionaires were audited by the IRS last year. Poor taxpayers were almost twice as likely to be audited as the wealthy.
Random audits my arse.
What’s to audit for all the uber rich? I mean with all of the tax breaks they’ve given to them, there’s no tax money to audit.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:17 amThe Disney Protest Song
(To be sung as a round)
Hakuna Matata means nothing here.
When kids work in sweatshops,
And Live in fear.
Where they’re told it’s a treat,
Eating nine times a week,
And we just don’t care.
They can’t have a union,
Or health care plan.
And where they’re workin’
Ain’t Disneyland.
But don’t Mickey look swank,
Dancin straight to the bank,
Cause he just don’t care.
It’s the Third World after all…
March 29th, 2006 at 9:19 amOne supporter wrote the judge “about the time Abramoff tried to ‘find a lost hamster on a Friday night.’
Wow….this joke just writes itself….
March 29th, 2006 at 9:19 am“Poor taxpayers were almost twice as likely to be audited”
Dosn’t that make sense? The rich can afford the best tax lawyers, who are less likely to make mistakes, the poor are more likely to do it themselves, which would seem to mean more chance for mistakes.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:22 amAnyone catch the Texas Baptist minister Rick Scarborough this morning on Air America with Rachel Madowl (ummm… not sure how to spell her last name, so I went with the phoenetic spelling).
Oh my goodness. The guy is crazy.
She kept asking him legitimate, pointed questions and every single answer was “liberals, ACLU, gays are bad.” He couldn’t answer anything. Just rhetoric. He actually has written a book called “Liberalism Kills Children.” I’m not making that up.
Rachel played that quote about DeLay, and asked him whether or not the ethics charges and the charges in Texas were very Christian of Tom DeLay. Nothing. Just more “liberals are the devil.”
They have no argument. Just fear, hatred, and ignorance wrapped up in the flag of God.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:24 amThe time has come for Tom DeLay and his ilk to be neutralized (politically and personally)…
The DeLay, anti-Christian facists are the most dangerous enemies this democracy has ever come up against…
…to allow them to gain any more ground in our government and society is to invite DISASTER…
…you live amongst these TRAITORS and moral miscreants…
…they are your friends, neighbors and family members…
…they are also an enemy to freedom and democracy…
…their stances on abortion, same-sex marriage, illegal wiretapping, media censorship, dismantling the social safety net, deference to the wealthy at the cost of oppressing and destroying the poor/middle working class masses, and their insistence on FORCING their misguided, racist, homophobic, xenophobic morals and values on our DEMOCRACY…
…is demonstrative of the need to NEUTRALIZE them…(politically, and financially)
March 29th, 2006 at 9:24 amDosn’t that make sense? The rich can afford the best tax lawyers, who are less likely to make mistakes, the poor are more likely to do it themselves, which would seem to mean more chance for mistakes.
Except for that little fact that the IRS touts that audits are random.
So, yes. The poor may make more mistakes but how do you explain the fact that they are selected “randomly” twice as often?
March 29th, 2006 at 9:27 am#3 – There should be some people writing the Judge, and ask:
Leniency is all well and fine for someone who truly regrets their past illegal decisions. As long as they fully allocute to their crimes and express regret.
From what I can tell, there’s still much to be told about how Abramoff “bought and paid for” his Republican politicians.
Now’s the time for the trolls to continue the calumny and mendacity that “Abramoff gave money to Dems too!” Abramoff tried to make sure as little money as possible went to any Democratic politician, he was a whore for the Republicans in general and the neo-con’s in specific.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:29 am“So, yes. The poor may make more mistakes but how do you explain the fact that they are selected “randomly†twice as often? ”
Probably, because there is a larger number of poor people than rich people, especially in Bush’s America
March 29th, 2006 at 9:30 am#5 – No, I didn’t get to hear it. Usually I listen to Rachael Maddow (correct spelling) but the AM station was off the air this morning.
If I were a wacked-out conspiracy theorist, I’d say it was all them thar Republicans and Kon-serve-a-tives what took Air America off the air this mornin’ in Austin! ;-)
Oh well, I’ll have to give them a call and ask them if I should keep praying they get their act together, or give it up and buy an XM radio so I don’t have to expect constant problems with my Air America Radio.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:33 amI would audit Tom Metzger first.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:33 amDemocrat Soldier –
Nice city you have down there. Except for the fact that it’s in Texas. ;)
The more I think about that Rick Scarborough guy, the more confused I get.
These are the type of people that at least 30% of America like? If that’s the case, we are in some serious trouble as a country.
America: The Declining Empire.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:37 amChristianity is a fine religion. The fundamentalist mumbo jumbo that holds the Bible as more important than doing the work Jesus taught is not Christianity. These alleged Christian Fundmentalists are simply idol worhipers. Their idols are not stone, but ink and paper. Too bad they don’t get it, the world would be a better place if they practiced Jesus’ teachings.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:44 amBobcat- Isn’t there two types of audits, the random ones, and then, if there are obvious mistakes that throw a flag that tax return also gets audited?
March 29th, 2006 at 9:44 am#12 – Most of my extended family is like Ricky. I’ve got an uncle who was a missionary for the Southern Baptists who is under the impression that Pres. Bush is as close to the “second coming” as he’s willing to accept.
He and I have agreed to disagree. I asked him about the contradictions in the Bible and he almost had conniptions. When I was able to back up my claim, he REALLY got his knickers in a knot. Until we bumped heads, He’s never met someone who could hold their own against his arguments before, so while we disagree, he respects my ability to debate without getting dismissive or insulting.
We now give each other the space to believe what we want, while we still disagree with each other on numerous points.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:48 am#5 bobcat
March 29th, 2006 at 9:55 amI heard Rachel Madow interview Rick Scarborough. The man is a raging lunatic, and Rachel had to actually request that his microphone be turned down so she could be able to ask a question. He is a crazed homophobic, who has defined his lunacy through his version of the Bible. He has no logical replies – only hatred, bigotry and rhetoric.
People like him should get more air time, so the average American will be able to see the insanity that has become the religious movement in America.
“Didn’t you see the comments of Sandra Day O’Connor and Ruth Ginsburg over the last couple of weeks?” DeLay, R-Texas, asked reporters after a speech to a group of Christian conservatives. “There’s still a problem, they don’t get it. There are three branches of government. All wisdom doesn’t reside in … people in black robes.”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but he isn’t suggesting they trade in their black robes in for black bags, is he? I mean, he’s living proof there isn’t much “wisdom” in that.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:56 amThe easier the tax return the easier it is the less work it takes to find a mistake and the fewer lawyers you probably have to deal with in the process.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:57 am#15 -
That kind of describes my relationship with my father. He’s not uber religious, but he is a Bush apologist at every turn.
I make it a point to continue to show him the contradictions, errors, and lies of the Bush administration and he just sits there and shrugs.
He’s an old-school Republican: the kind that used to be fiscally responsible, promote small government, and call for accountability. When I try to point out that his beloved Republican party has been hijacked by corporation-loving, bible-beating, debt-creating, beuracracy-bloating, crony-promoting people, he just refuses to acknowledge that perhaps at this point in time, his views really do align more to the Democratic side.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:57 amMy take on the “christians” leading their little conference:
The bulk of America is religious. Many liberals/progressives are religious. We just don’t view what they call christianity as christianity. Now the fundies seem to feel that they are the only ones who can define christianity. We don’t accept their definition. We don’t accept their limitations as to who is religiously viable and who isn’t. We certainly don’t want them as the definers of anything christian, because in our view, they are not living by, preaching or believing what we see as what Jesus/Abraham/Mohammed/Budda/etc has taught us.
It’s really just the usual Orthodox vs. non-orthodox struggle. They don’t own christianity.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:00 amlike some second-rate superstition
They finally get it… well said Delay.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:04 amI wonder how many non millionaires that were audited actually had CPAs prepare their returns. Rosencrantz’ point is very true. The smaller guy just hasn’t accepted the best defense strategy is a nice wall of professionals between the tax payer and the government.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:04 amDosn’t that make sense? The rich can afford the best tax lawyers, who are less likely to make mistakes, the poor are more likely to do it themselves, which would seem to mean more chance for mistakes.
Comment by squegeeboo
Considering they dont have anything to itemize or anything like stock earnings or 401k earnings or anything other than what is reported from their employer then there isnt much to get wrong. I guess they could lie about the number of children they have…
March 29th, 2006 at 10:08 amand to top it off, SD may soon have more abortion clinics, not less!
http://blogdebogs.blogspot.com/2006/03/reservations-for-abortion.html
March 29th, 2006 at 10:08 am#20 – Personally, I think the difference between Right and Left religious beliefs can be summed up this way:
Left – We believe in God, and we allow people to have their perspective based on their relationship with God as they understand it and it’s an individual belief between the person and God.
Right – We believe in the Christian god, as the Bible (only the portions we accept) state, and anyone who doesn’t believe exactly as we believe is wrong and going to Hell. If you believe everything we tell you to believe, the you are most likely going to Heaven, if you question anything we tell you, you’re going to hell.
It all boils down to: Is your faith something that must be approved by the “right people” or is it something between you and God?
March 29th, 2006 at 10:13 amOf course there is a war against Christians. Anyone with one eye on the news and the other on radical front groups like “Think Communist” knows it and this site while calling the idea ridiculous blatantly links to one such anti-Christian atheist loser….Annika Carlson; overweight, unlovely sperm receptacle and anarchist in-training at some low rent college in Wisconsin.
“It opened with what I thought was going to provide me with a few moments’ escape from the pretty frightening scene around me: Representative Todd Akin opened his speech by saying, “Imagine you are at a baseball game.”
I can do this, I thought. I can picture pretzels and summer and no-hitters and all that instead of a room full of ridiculously backward Christianists.”
Backward Christianists? WTF is a Christianists? Oh yeah, that’s the new name for someone who actually takes their faith seriously and isn’t embarrassed to admit it. To a “Progressive” that’s backwards. But what do you expect from some pig that eats pretzels at baseball games? She probably puts catsup on her hotdog as well…communist sow.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:15 amHave you never heard of tax shelters? Do you really believe that a poor person could create one let alone fund it? Do you know how many of the very large international accounting firms have been fined in recent years because of the tax shelters provided to these wealthy clients?
There are attorneys and accountants out in the US whos sole job is to help the rich avoid tax.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:16 amIRI please do not even try to spin this to say that only republicans have faith. I guess if your faith is to accept kick backs, steal and lie to the American people, then yes the republicans have won hands down!
March 29th, 2006 at 10:18 amIRI
You are not christians… People that actually take seriously the teachings of Jesus (NOT the taliban old testiment) do not need “pride” and they take their beliefs very seriously… it is just that they SERIOUSLY do not accept that Jesus was a bigot or a extemist or a murderer… or most of the other things that you think he was even though you have no where in the Bible or else where to base your beliefs on…
And when thou pray, thou shall not be as the hypocrites are: for
March 29th, 2006 at 10:22 amthey love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be
seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou pray, enter into
thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret… [Matthew 6:6
& 7]
By the way, it’s not the lawyers who fill out the tax forms for the rich, it’s the accountants who do it.
My father is a CPA, and he’s been audited twice by the IRS in his life. Both times, he found mistakes the auditors have made, and calmly explained their mistakes to them. (He was also a professor at Western New Mexico University) After they apologized for their mistakes, they moved on to bigger fish to fry.
Personally, I always go to a CPA for my taxes. I don’t have all that many forms to fill out, but why take chances? Ever time, I’ve done a quick fill out of the forms, and after I have them prepared by a third party I always end up with a higher return/lower payment than I expected.
Poor people tend to be less likely to understand the intricacies of our tax system, and are more likely to make minor mistakes. It’s the rich people who look for loopholes and try to take the maximum deductions even if they didn’t qualify for them.
It’s the “Alternative Minimum Tax†that’s going to get the American people into a tizzy. It was designed to make sure rich people don’t skip out on the their share of the tax burden, but it isn’t adjusted for inflation so more and more middle income people have to pay the ATM than ever before.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:23 amWhy is it the left always groups the right into the christian right? I could give a damn about who does what in the name of which god, as long as doing something != killing or anouther violent act. Yet I’m more to the right than most people on any non-god related issue.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:23 amIt is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:28 am#31 – Because the right wrongly believes they are morally superior than the left.
Why does the right always group all liberals as Un-Godly, American haters?
I served my country, most of mine and my husbands family served in the military, hell even my mother served in the military (old army-air corp).
I believe in the golden rule – the real one, not the republican one (he who has the gold rules). I cannot recite very many bible passages like Gerald – but that does not make me any less a believer.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:30 amOn the overall question of redistribution of wealth and income, having rich people is fine, as long as no one is dying because the rich hoard too much of the wealth. Once everyone is at least minimally taken care of, then the super-greedy can be allowed to have more than their fair share. [71]
The liberal case, however, is that because the rich monopolize such a grotesquely huge share of the income and wealth, there’s not enough left for everyone else. [72]
The top 10% of individuals in the United States receive 46% of the income and control 71% of the wealth in this country. Globally, 25% of the people receive 75% of the income, and the richest 20% of the world’s population monopolizes 86 per cent of global wealth. [73]
In other words: 80% of humanity must try to survive on a mere 14% of the world’s wealth. To look at it in perhaps more comprehensible terms: Dividing up $100 among ten people in the same proportions would produce two people with $4.30 each, and 8 people with 18 cents each. How can anyone doubt that such an inequitable division of the world’s resources means that those at the bottom will suffer and die as the very least of “the least of these”? [74]
http://www.right-wing-pseudo-christians.com/jesus-liberal-conservative.htm
March 29th, 2006 at 10:31 amWhat is it with rich people that 60 percent of a $100 million is not enough? What kind of sickness is that? You make $100 million on stock options, do you honestly think you earned it? Did you work 10,000 times harder than a guy who gets $10,000 a year for digging ditches? Even a thousand times harder? A hundred? Ten?
March 29th, 2006 at 10:33 amHere’s a joke for women. Why? Why not. Most of you losers on this site are women or somewhat effeminate and so you’ll get a kick out of this.
Subject: Oil Change instructions
for Women:
1) Pull up to Jiffy Lube when the mileage reaches 3000 miles since the
last oil change.
2) Drink a cup! of coffee.
3) 15 minutes later, write a check and leave with a properly maintained
vehicle.
Money spent:
Oil Change $20.00
Coffee $1.00
Total $21.00
=========================================================
Oil Change instructions for Men:
1) Wait until Saturday, drive to auto parts store and buy a case of oil,
filter, kitty litter, hand cleaner and a scented tree, write a check for
$50.00.
2) Stop by 7 – 11 and buy a case of beer, write a check for $20, drive
home.
3) Open a beer and drink it.
4) Jack car up. Spend 30 minutes looking for jack stands.
5) Find jack stands under kid’s p edal car.
6) In frustrati! on, open another beer and drink it.
7) Place drain pan under engine.
8) Look for 9/16 box end wrench.
9) Give up and use crescent wrench.
10) Unscrew drain plug.
11) Drop drain plug in pan of hot oil: splash hot oil on you in process.
Cuss.
12) Crawl out from under car to wipe hot oil off of face and arms. Throw
kitty litter on spilled oil.
13) Have another beer while watching oil drain.
14) Spend 30 minutes looking for oil filter wrench.
15) Give up; crawl under car and hammer a screwdriver through oil filter
and twist off.
16) Crawl out from under car with dripping oil filter splashing oil
everywhere from holes. Cleverly hide old oil filter among trash in trash
can to avoid environmental penalties. Drink a beer.
17) Buddy shows up; finish case of beer with him.
Decide to finish oil change tomorrow so you can go see his new garage
door opener.
18) Sunday: Skip church because “I gotta finish the oil change.” Dragpan full of
old oil out from underneath car. Cleverly dump oil in hole
in back yard instead of taking it back to Kragen to recycle.
19) Throw kitty litter on oil spilled during step 18.
20) Beer? No, drank it all yesterday.
21) Walk to 7-11; buy beer.
22) Install new oil filter making sure to apply a thin coat of oil to
gasket surface.
23) Dump first quart of fresh oil into engine.
24) Remember drain plug from step 11.
25) Hurry to find drain plug in drain pan.
26) Remember that the used oil is buried in a hole in the back yard,
along with drain plug.
27) Drink beer.
28) Shovel out hole and sift oily mud for drain plug. Re-shovel oilydirt into hole.
Steal sand from kids sandbox to cleverly cover oily
patch of ground and avoid environmental penalties. Wash drain plug in
lawnmower gas.
29) Discover that first quart of fresh oil is now on the floor. Throw
kitty litter on oil spill.
30) Drink beer.
31) Crawl under car getting kitty litter into eyes. Wipe eyes with oily
rag used to clean drain plug. Slip with stupid crescent wrench
tightening drain plug and bang knuckles on frame.
32) Bang head on floorboards in reaction to step 31.
33) Begin cussing fit.
34) Throw stupid crescent wrench.
35) Cuss for additional 10 minutes because wrench hit bowling trophy.
36) Beer.
37) Clean up hands and forehead and bandage as required t o stop blood
flow.
38) Beer.
39) Beer.
40) Dump in five fresh quarts of oil.
41) Beer.
42) Lower car from jack stands.
43) Accidentally crush remaining case of new motor oil.
44) Move car back to apply more kitty! litter to fresh oil spilled during
steps 23 – 43.
45) Beer.
46) Test drive car.
47) Get pulled over: arrested for driving under the influence.
48) Car gets impounded.
49) Call loving wife, make bail.
50) 12 hours later, get car from impound yard.
Money spent:
Parts $50.00
DUI $2500.00
Impound fee $75.00
Bail $1500.00
Beer $40.00
Total – - $4,165.00
But you know the job was done right!
March 29th, 2006 at 10:34 amI cannot recite very many bible passages like Gerald – but that does not make me any less a believer.
Comment by Jules
Oh I cannot recite … I just remember them in general and the “Giver of all knowledge” (The Internet) provides the recitation… >-)
March 29th, 2006 at 10:35 amKKKhristians? Senator Byrd anyone?
Stand up for Jesus-I stood up for him long enough to get my Eagle, then I was done with him, except for Christmas of course. He died for Santa, right?
#34 True, the dumb faction of the Right does group the left into generalizations, I suppose my comment was more towards the smart portion of the left. I know I don’t group the left that way except for the occasional joke. And its more Multi-Godly except for Jesus, then Un-Godly, can’t even get your own slurs correct :)
March 29th, 2006 at 10:35 am“like some second-rate superstition”
As opposed to a first-rate supersitition…..
March 29th, 2006 at 10:36 am#29 – Gerald, you’re wasting your time responding to “Right between the I’s”. This is a man who thinks the “joos” and “homer-sexuals” and “nig-ras” and “towel-heads” are out to get him.
Of course there isn’t a “war” on Christians. It’s another straw-man argument to try and stir up support for the anti-any-other-religion-than-Christian political leaders. They so-called “christian” leaders pick and chose the portions of the Bible they want to impose on everyone else while they ignore the teachings of Jesus because they don’t “sell well” to the masses who don’t actually read the Bible.
If you really want to get a so-called “christian” in a heated argument, ask them about the multitude of contradictions in the Bible, or why they don’t support ALL the verses of the Bible. Corinthians 14:34 – Women should be quiet in Church. Matthew 5:32 – No marrying of divorced women. Leviticus 25:37 – Do not pay/charge interest on loans.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:36 amWhy is it the left always groups the right into the christian right?
Are some on the left guilty of this? Yes. But don’t fall into the same trap as you accused the left.
Not everyone on the left groups everyone on the right as the Christian Right. But you have to admit, some of the Christian Right are doing an excellent job of giving the rest of the Right a not-so-good image.
I could give a damn about who does what in the name of which god, as long as doing something != killing or anouther violent act.
“I answer to a higher father. It was this higher father that said I should go to war with Iraq. What could I do, disobey my higher father?”
March 29th, 2006 at 10:36 am–President George W. Bush
26. You can take your faith as seriously as you wish, as I do. It’s just when folks start telling other people how they have to believe, or else, is where I draw the line in the sand. Frankly if folks like Jerry Fallwell are going to Heaven and folks like Gandhi and Lao Tsu are going to hell for not being a Christian, then hell don’t look all that bad.
If you are intent on being a Christian, then do as your Christ has commanded of you. Love one another as he loved you. Frankly, all else is bullshit.
50 Ways To Dump The Dubya
March 29th, 2006 at 10:37 am#42 He’s not refering to god, but his actual father, wasn’t this war revenge for trying to have him assasinated?
March 29th, 2006 at 10:38 amKKKhristians? Senator Byrd anyone?
Comment by squegeeboo
Thats right… and you know what he did? He DENOUNCED his old ways… he didnt “stay the course” until hell froze over… I do not respect everything about Byrd, but one thing is for sure… You can tell he THINKS deeply about things that are far greater than himself and because of this humility he was able to change himself because he could see that HE was not more important that truth… THAT is a leason well worth learning…
KKKhristians… yep that is right… with the emphisis on KKK. The evangelicals are an upspring from a movement that came from the south after the civil war. That is why they are so steeped in racism, bigotry, intollerance, and hate…
March 29th, 2006 at 10:45 am#10
March 29th, 2006 at 10:48 amWhy does everything have to be a conspiracy? People on the right support free speech as much as you do. Did you ever consider that Air America hasn’t paid their bills for a while? They are still struggling to stay afloat and continue to lose stations because no one is listening to them.
If you are intent on being a Christian, then do as your Christ has commanded of you. Love one another as he loved you. Frankly, all else is bullshit.
This deserves repeating…
If you are intent on being a Christian, then do as your Christ has commanded of you. Love one another as he loved you. Frankly, all else is bullshit.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:49 am#45 – More background on the difference between Sen. Byrd and Sen. Thurmond.
http://www.slate.com/?id=2075662
“Contrast that (Sen. Byrd apology) with an interview Thurmond gave Joseph Stroud of the Charlotte Observer in July 1998 to commemorate the 50th anniversary of his presidential bid on the segregationist Dixiecrat ticket. Asked if he wanted to apologize, Thurmond said, “I don’t have anything to apologize for,” and “I don’t have any regrets.” Asked if he thought the Dixiecrats were right, Thurmond said, “Yes, I do.” Thurmond said this four years ago!”
March 29th, 2006 at 10:50 am“You can tell he THINKS deeply about things that are far greater than himself ” He might not have tried to build a bridge to nowhere, but drive thru West Virginia, and it’s amazing how many things have his name on them, last I checked wasn’t he the king of Pork? Seems all he thinks about is himself.
I know theres some bigots and other unsavory persons in the republican party, my point was there are also ones in the democratic party.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:50 am“… society “all but treats Christianity like some second-rate superstition.†Nope, the Christianity these people practice is a FIRST-rate superstition.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:51 amI know theres some bigots and other unsavory persons in the republican party, my point was there are also ones in the democratic party.
Comment by squegeeboo
And your point is? That you are for bigotry as long as you can point fingers at others also? I dont accept that excuse from my children.. I most certainly do not accept it from an adult… if that is what you are.
I think most progressives idolize the idea of America finally living up to the ideals in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights… it does not matter what party you are from or what color your skin is… if you are against that vision then you are against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights which is worse than being against the bible.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:57 am#47 – Did you even read my post? Let me repeat: “IF I were a wacked-out conspiracy theorist”
Actually, Air America is stil GAINING listners and is picking up stations in more rural areas. Whenever a station is sold by the owner to another party and drops Air America the right yells “See! They’re losing!” Completely ignore it when Rush Limbaugh gets droppped.
http://www.freepress.net/news/14388
March 29th, 2006 at 10:59 amMy point was that both parties have flaws, but in a two party system you get to pick one or the other, or in the words of the Simpons “Go Ahead and throw your vote away” or in real life, risk the chance of tipping the election away from the lesser of two evils from your perspective, such as Nader and Perot caused.
And while the Republicans trash the Constitution in the name of security, the Democrats trash it in the name of Entitilments. Programs such as the DOE, welfare, and DOT are all constitutionally illegal, but are now an accepted fabric of American Society.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:02 amI know theres some bigots and other unsavory persons in the republican party, my point was there are also ones in the democratic party.
Comment by squegeeboo
The Republicans’ crazies are just louder, more obnoxious, and kooky.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:08 am#54 – Careful about bringing up the term “constitutionally illegal” while pres. Bush is in office. There is FAR MORE FODDER coming out of Pres. Bush and the Republicans for this type of argument then you can dream about trying to hold against the Democrats.
by the way, how is the Department of Transportation and Department of Education “constitutionally illegal”? Why do you hate educating our children? Why do you hate having roads and highways?
See how the “talking points” of the ultra-radical right wing-nuts can be easily turned against their own talking points?
March 29th, 2006 at 11:10 amPrograms such as the DOE, welfare, and DOT are all constitutionally illegal, but are now an accepted fabric of American Society.
I’m sorry, where does it say in the Constitution “Don’t help people?”
March 29th, 2006 at 11:11 amThe Republicans’ crazies are just louder, more obnoxious, and kooky.
If were kooky dosn’t that make us fun? Here that, bobcat says were the fun party, so you all should switch sides, and have some fun. But first, convert to baptism, otherwise we don’t want you.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:11 amIn December past, I think it was, the repuglicans passed, unanimously, a bill they called the BUDGET REDUCTION ACT. That sounds great, does it not?
What the bill actually did was ADD over 50 billion to the budget deficit. The bill wiped out 40 billion in programs, and gave 50 billion in tax cuts to people making over $400,000 per year.
I wonder if they will be able to explain this to their constituents this fall?
March 29th, 2006 at 11:15 am#57 I was under the impression that anything not specifically mentioned in the consititution was a right reserved for the states or the people. Maybe I read #10 wrong.
#56 I’m for educating children, just feel it should be done on a state level, in accordance with the constitution. Roads and highways? If an area wants them, they can build them.
Why do you hate following the consitition? Look I reversed your point back around. See how easy it was.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:17 amIf were kooky dosn’t that make us fun? Here that, bobcat says were the fun party, so you all should switch sides, and have some fun. But first, convert to baptism, otherwise we don’t want you.
kook·y also kook·ie ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kk)
March 29th, 2006 at 11:18 amadj. Slang kook·i·er, kook·i·est
Characteristic of a kook; strange or crazy.
#61 Touche
March 29th, 2006 at 11:20 amRegulating interstate commerce was not given to the states. As we need well maintained roads (and in some places that point is debateable) DOT is a federal responsibility.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:26 am#63 thats an over extension of the interstate commerce clause, just like their ruling on marijuna in california. Which I suppose is why you covered yourself with the debatable part….well played, well played indeed.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:32 amI was under the impression that anything not specifically mentioned in the consititution was a right reserved for the states or the people. Maybe I read #10 wrong.
Gotcha. So where are legal wiretaps mentioned in the Constitution?
And the Air Force?
And Executive Privelege?
And marriage?
And the right to vote?
And the right to travel?
Oh wait. None of that’s mentioned in the Constitution. Guess that means it shouldn’t exist.
I’m for educating children, just feel it should be done on a state level, in accordance with the constitution.
So states that have less money are stuck with stupid kids? How compassionate of you.
Roads and highways? If an area wants them, they can build them.
Okay, stop using them. You, Squeegeboo, are no longer allowed to use any goverment service not in the Constitution of the United States.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:34 am#65 Marriage, regulated by the states
March 29th, 2006 at 11:41 amRight to vote, covered in several amendments last I checked
Right to travel, not sure what you mean, the federal gov’t dosn’t do anything one way or the other for travel within the US
Executive Privelege- in what respect? IF you mean things like Bush tacking on little notes at the end of bills, even with the precedent set, I still hate the concept.
Air Force-Yes, it is technically consititionally illegal, which is why I would support an amendment creating it, however, if you take an example such as the federal banking system, which the supreme court ruled as consititional because while not mentioned in the consitition it was ruled necissary for conducting the business of the gov’t as set out by the consitition, I would think the Air Force would also fit into it, as part of Feds responsiblity for national defense.
I meant that the roads being well maintained is debateable. The commerce clause is well settled law.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:41 amAlso, just like to thank you guys for actually attacking my arguments on merit, not being conservative, nice to have a real debate. Sort of a pleasant change from previous threads.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:43 am#68 – you have brought up debating points – not personal attacks.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:47 am#66 -
Go read the link I provided in 65. It explains all the things not explicitly in the Constitution that are integral to our government and our daily lives.
If you want to be a literalist, then you better start campaigning your party to get rid of everything there.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:50 am#67 Trying to look it up, failed so far, there was a presidential veto in the 1800’s over the first attempt by congress to pass a transportation act, his reasoning was basically “I find no place in the constition to allow this to happen”(Paraphrase from memory) while otherwise agreeing with how useful it could have been. Yet somehow today, with no amendment allowing a DOT they exist.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:52 amAlso, just like to thank you guys for actually attacking my arguments on merit, not being conservative, nice to have a real debate. Sort of a pleasant change from previous threads.
Comment by squegeeboo
Don’t hate the conservative, hate the conservative view points. ;)
March 29th, 2006 at 11:53 am#71 – look further – like the 1930’s.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:58 amMore things not in the Constution that Squeegeboo doesn’t think we should have:
FDA
March 29th, 2006 at 11:59 amUSDA
FCC
FBI
CIA
NSA
You all are reading the constitution as if it should be read literally. Every document, including the constitution, must be interpretted for intent. If we read it as written we would still be living in the 1700’s.
Otherwise Bush would be required to interpret the laws AS written, not as he interprets them to be. Kind of like his twisted logic on the wiretapping, or HIS interpretation of the anti-torture bill.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:06 pm#70 I like my explination for the airforce better than your links. I’m supprised the federal bank didn’t make it onto their list. It seems likea plurality of them are state level issues and as such as long as they are not in contradiction to the consitition can be set up however each state wants to do it.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:07 pmMore things not in the Constution that Squeegeboo doesn’t think we should have:
FDA
USDA
FCC
FBI
CIA
NSA
Comment by bobcat_grad
You forgot a couple of other unimportant organizations not in the Constituion Sqeezeboy should find objectionable: the TSA and Homeland Security.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:10 pmJules, theres all sorts of things FDR did in the 30’s that most conservatives don’t feel are constitutional. At some points even his own party wouldn’t vote with him on his plans. However do to the great depression, many of these concerns were overlooked and it allowed his programs time to become settled law.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:13 pmRegarding Audits. I have worked in the tax field for 17 years now as both a private practice preparer and for a large multinational corporation. For large multi nationals every last one of the biggest firms is audited every year. At the company I work at we have a department of 30 professionals and when push comes to shove each audit cycle ends up with payments that we have to make or refunds that we receive. There has never been a no-change audit for us. I only say this to debunk the “wealthy have the money to buy high priced professionals so they make less errors” argument.
We hire big four consultants, we have all worked for big four firms, we have access to the best legal representation money can buy, we are current on legislation etc… ultimately for us when we have billions of transactions occurring each year it is impossible for all f them to get classed properly so errors are made in original entry. On top of that there are the facts and circumstances errors where we make a reading of the facts and circumstances on an issue and confer with our consultants, then we but heads with the service over the issue. We win some and we lose some. So it really is not at all about hiring the best and the brightest because we work so much in the grey areas of the tax code.
Granted for individuals there are far less grey areas. However when your income is W-2’s some interest and dividends and some deductions, maybe a rental or two or a schedule C (small business) which comprise a majority of those filing taxes, there really is very little grey area. There may be a few dollars here or there, or perhaps outright fraud, but generally these end up being low dollar issues. With the upper tier of tax payers there is far more chance for the issues to get muddied. For instance I have prepared returns where the total tax has run into 8 figures. On a couple of these there were intense calculations involving basis in business ventures sold. None of these returns was audited. For all I know there could have been big mistakes made and they passed through un checked. For a couple that I am thinking of specifically there could very easily have been ten million dollars in basis errors which would have amounted to pretty big dollars if the service did not accept. At the time our thought was we believe A to be true, but the service could argue B. If they win we lose $x. We decided to go with what we beloved knowing that the returns not get audited.
I am of the opinion that if the return is simply w-2 interest and dividends that there is little need for an audit regardless of the size of the W-2. However if there is significant $$ on the return and it revolves around sales, small business rentals etc… these returns need to be audited. The audit selection process for personal income taxes is supposed to be random, but I have heard at seminars where the IRS is the presenter that is not truly the case anymore and that some people stand a far higher chance of being randomly audited than others. There has been no indication that this is a political tool, but it does appear that it is purposely skewed based on income.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:15 pmFDA
USDA
FCC
FBI
CIA
NSA
TSA
Homeland Security
Some I like, some not so much, but they are all unconstitutional per the letter, some could be explained into existance the same way as the Federal Bank, or how I did the Airforce above. If we actually did what we were supposed to and required an amendment for them all to come into existance, imagine how much lower our taxes would be, as well as the debt, even pre-Bush.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:16 pmAttention Christians – You will be happy to know that contrary to popular belief there are some people out here that are actually at war with you… I am one of them.
I do not war with conventional weapons though, but instead I war with knowledge… Knowledge is like kryptonite to you ignorant SOB’s.
Christian beliefs, like all religious beliefs, are second rate superstitions. The only purpose they serve is to propagate fear and ignorance. Without the suppression of knowledge and repression of those that are different than you, your religion would not last two weeks.
You guys suck – I wish you would all go and meet your maker!!!
March 29th, 2006 at 12:17 pm#72 I have no problem with conservative ideology. It’s Republican party operating procedures that are the probelm.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:18 pmThese alleged Christian Fundmentalists are simply idol worhipers. Their idols are not stone, but ink and paper. Too bad they don’t get it, the world would be a better place if they practiced Jesus’ teachings.
Comment by Hardy Haberman #13
Hardy,
Then doesn’t that make them “anti-Christians”?
…shouldn’t those of us on the other side of this conflict (Progressive liberals) stop making the same mistakes over and over again?…
…falling for the FAKE labels these people have ascribed to themselves like:
Pro-Life…how hypocritical when one considers their support for the death penalty, and Iraq…
Conservatives…hypocrites who support Bushiva’s debt ceiling to the planet Uranus…
Christians…who despise the poor and benevolent government, in favor of the rich…
Isn’t it time WE started framing the debate?
March 29th, 2006 at 12:19 pm“like some second-rate superstitionâ€
Pot? Kettle? I don’t remember these “Christians” showing a whole lot of respect for Muslims, Atheists, or any other religious or philosophical belief.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:19 pmI think in order to be honest, we have to asses, that the number of middle or lower income individuals outweigh the number of upper income individuals, by a pretty big margin.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:22 pm#82 – I agree!
Based on “Conservative” ideals, I’m very much in line with many of them. Not all, by any means! I think for myself, thank you! It’s the so-called “conservative” politicians that belie the “conservative” values that I find disingenuous. When you claim to be a fiscal conservative, and then support our “borrow and spend†policies of the Bush administration, you become a liar.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:22 pm#84 – To the “ultra-radical fundamentalist christians” the ‘freedom of religion’ in the Constitution only applies to their particular interpretation of ‘religion’.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:24 pmAlso, just like to thank you guys for actually attacking my arguments on merit, not being conservative, nice to have a real debate.
Comment by squegeeboo
You are welcome, I’m sure. Of course, I’m speaking from the experience of a rude, redneck dipshit, myself. But courteous conservative debaters are welcome here—even I-RIGHT-I’s shallow and callous arguements full of hatred have a way of enlightening the liberals to conservative thinking.
Now for some beer and hard-boiled eyes for lunch.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:25 pm#85 – This is not about numbers. It is about percentages.
If the upper class makes up 10% of the American public, and if audits are performed randomly, then 10% of the audits will be on those from the upper class. This is a statistical reality!
March 29th, 2006 at 12:27 pm#88 I was going to ignore your comment, until I realised that it came from “rude, redneck dipshit” and now it means the world to me. Enjoy your beer. Stupid work won’t let me have one.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:29 pm#82 –
My “Don’t hate the conservative, hate the conservative view points.” comment was said in jest and in response to Squeegeboo’s thanking us for a debate, and not name calling.
#86 -
I’m right on the mark with you again.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:33 pmAnother rude, redneck dipshit here. I enjoy guns, fast cars–and beer, but only after I’m done messing around with the first two.
I like my eyes over easy rather than hard boiled though.
Rednecks don’t have to be supporters of the moneyed elite like too many of today’s righttards seem to be.
“Fight the rich, not their wars”.
An heck, I don’t even mind someone getting rich if he/she does something beneficial for society–like doctors. I just don’t like corporate fatties setting the agenda and sending my friends & family off to wars.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:33 pm#81, I’m glad you think I suck, in spite of the fact that you and I probably agree on almost everything (Bush is an incompetent pinhead, the Iraq war is a gross injustice, neocons are evil money grubbers, etc.).
Signed, the Christian anti-neocon redneck guy
March 29th, 2006 at 12:36 pmrude, redneck dipshit. Yeah, that’s me all right, squeezeboy. Marie, unbelieveable, Mary Poppin, and all the other gals here won’t even acknowledge me anymore.
Only mighty aphrodite will give me the time of day. And my rubber sex doll I keep in the closet for emergencies.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:37 pmI like my eyes over easy rather than hard boiled though.
Ouch. I prefer my eyes uncooked and still in their eye sockets. ;)
March 29th, 2006 at 12:44 pm#94 Thats to bad Joe, seems like once you get beneath your crusty exterior, your all cuddly and what not (In a completly plutonic way)
#86 True, but let me condense your point a bit more from “When you claim to be a fiscal conservative, and then support our “borrow and spend†policies of the Bush administration, you become a liar.”
“When you claim to be a politician you become a liar.”
March 29th, 2006 at 12:45 pm#56 I’m for educating children, just feel it should be done on a state level, in accordance with the constitution. Roads and highways? If an area wants them, they can build them.
Why do you hate following the consitition? Look I reversed your point back around. See how easy it was. Comment by squegeeboo — March
Was toxic waste around when they wrote the constitution? How do you safely move toxic waste from the state in which it was generated to the state in which it is to be stored? Relying on “states rights” to do the right thing has historically been a disaster. Ike would roll over in his grave if he heard you denigrating his greatest achievement. Did you not know the interstate system was originally for hauling troops and material during ww2? If he’d left it to the states we’d still be driving on two-lane blacktops.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:47 pmChristianity a “second-rate superstition”? Naaaah. That honors goes to Scientology. Christianity is the first-rate one.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:52 pm““When you claim to be a politician you become a liar.â€
Comment by squishypoop”
And one of resident trolls demostrates how the psychotic break between the reality and beliefs in CONservatism are fashioned. They ignore whatever the reichwing does, and chalk it up to the ‘right intention’. In otherwords, they’re FOOLS.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:55 pm#97 Toxic waste removal over state lines would seem to be covered by the interstate commerce clause, if the states involved could not agree on it. And I did know that the highways were done by Ike, but that would put them at after WW2.
Anyways, new thing to debate, this is the anything thread right?
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/29/national/29voting.html
Why do we need this system anymore? Havn’t the issues behind the orginial need for this been dealt with enough that it is no longer an issue in terms of voting?
March 29th, 2006 at 12:56 pm#93 – Preznit Pinhead – I’m just F’n with ya man.
I like to spew a little anti Christian sentiment once in a while just to stir things up… It makes me giggle like a school girl.
But seriously – I don’t give a shit who you worship as long as you don’t try to force your beliefs on me – or use your group influence to block others from accessing knowledge i.e., Evolution/Intelligent Design… You know what I’m talking about.
Anyway – Sorry about the previous comments.
Peace Man!
March 29th, 2006 at 12:56 pm#97 – my point exactly. Times change and with it so do interpretations.
Mr. Sixpack – why do the ladies not like you?
March 29th, 2006 at 12:58 pmJules, theres all sorts of things FDR did in the 30’s that most conservatives don’t feel are constitutional. At some points even his own party wouldn’t vote with him on his plans. However do to the great depression, many of these concerns were overlooked and it allowed his programs time to become settled law.
Comment by squegeeboo — March 29, 2006 @
Who was president when the depression started? And what were his policies? Hint: remember “Hooverville”? FDR turned the nation around, and the conservatives fought him tooth and nail on nearly every issue.
They were proved wrong then, and their track record (Star wars, Trickle Down economics, 8 billion tax dollars unaccounted for in a war of choice) hasn’t improve with age.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:58 pm#103 WW2 turned the nation around, while the initial first deal did improve unemployment, after the second new deal unemployment started to rise back up to pre-newDeal levels.
March 29th, 2006 at 1:04 pmThanks # 101. I figured we were actually on the same page.
To me, cramming religion down other people’s throats kinda misses the point. No one should be forced to believe one way or another. I actually stumbled into Christianity late in my life. And it’s a whole lot different than the stone-casting, mammon-worshipping crap that the righties keep throwing at everybody.
Peace to you as well, bro’.
March 29th, 2006 at 1:52 pm#105 Cool Man
March 29th, 2006 at 2:28 pmI tell ya wut, I reckon it’s dem dang ‘ol thumpity thump Bible thumpers what tell ya all “Hell Fire and damnation” sermons and all, just sucking the smarts right outa yore head if’n yew fall for it, …ya know wut I mean, man.
(I’m doin’ my Boomhauer impersonation, a la “King of the Hill”.)
March 29th, 2006 at 2:36 pm“WW2 turned the nation around, while the initial first deal did improve unemployment, after the second new deal unemployment started to rise back up to pre-newDeal levels. Comment by squishypoop”
Care to cite references on this? If big wars turn the economy around so significantly, why has the attack from terrorism and Iraq been used as an EXCUSE by republicans for economic failures? This is called a ‘cognitive dissonance’, look it up, and cite your reference data or shut up and listen to those that know more than you.
And squishypoop, one of my university degrees was in economics – so either post a real resource, or admit you don’t know WTF you’re talking about.
March 29th, 2006 at 2:52 pm#30 Yes and when the rich’s CPAs do their taxes, they aren’t mistakes you know. The poor make mistakes and the rich can afford the best cheaters. Who on earth thinks that rich actually pay more in taxes?
March 29th, 2006 at 2:57 pmI’ll help you out squishypoop, since your ‘resources’ probably consist of the crapworks from NeoCONgdom.
Poverty was also at ~40% before the new deal, but by the time of Kennedy had dropped to ~24%.
Your DELUSION that the new deal didn’t improve unemployment or the economy is indefensible – as are most positions of the Reichwing retards.
March 29th, 2006 at 2:59 pmRyan, from the FDR presidential library:”New Deal programs created during the First Hundred Days and afterwards moved the economy towards recovery and helped to lessen the Depression’s impact on citizens, but the effects of the Great Depression stubbornly held on into the early 1940’s.”
March 29th, 2006 at 3:06 pmhttp://www.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/depres24.html#
From an americanlibrary website:The end to the Great Depression came about in 1941 with America’s entry into World War II
http://www.americaslibrary.gov/cgi-bin/page.cgi/jb/wwii
Whenever repubs are caught they always reference a snippet of history charging someone else, at some point in time, was worse than they are now. Good grief, that is getting real thin anymore. The nonanswers, the “look over there” method of deflection and the obvious ineptitude of these politicians who make deals in the back with no democrats around are ruining any ruining our way of life and the way our political system works and was intended to work.
They are sneaky, greedy, ignorant and shameful. They murder doctors and criminals but want to “save” fetuses. They make little sense and use no logic whatsoever. They have let corporations make our laws and they are invading our privacy and our hospital beds. They wish the government to be in every aspect of our lives. They prey on the most ignorant in our society by using their self esteem issues against them by focusing on morality and making them think that there is always a war against them for something. War on christians? How daft.
March 29th, 2006 at 3:11 pmRyan, as to the second new deal hurting the economy again:FDR’s policies seemed to work at first. The economy began to expand again in 1933 and continued to do so until May of 1937. At that point, a second depression began and lasted until June of 1938.
http://www.amatecon.com/gd/gdoverview.html
And also:Unemployment jumped from 14.3% in 1937 to 19.0% in 1938. It was, in the largest measure, a result of a premature effort by the administration to balance the budget by reducing federal spending.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Depression#The_recession_of_1937_and_recovery
So did FDR help? yes. Did the New Deal end the great Depression? No
March 29th, 2006 at 3:11 pmAlso Ryan “Poverty was also at ~40% before the new deal, but by the time of Kennedy had dropped to ~24%.”
Pre New Deal to Kennedy, asuming you meant JFK, Encompases WW2, so you could claim either the New Deal or WW2 for that result. Which makes it a moot argument.
March 29th, 2006 at 3:33 pmWhat are the Halliboys up to now?
March 29th, 2006 at 3:35 pmSquishypoop, you clearly didn’t finish reading the wikipedia thread.
It wasn’t the war, it was his spending program (eg. the new deal spending) that helped.
Your response is typical of the carelessness and lack of attention to detail that the reichwing is so famous for. No wonder so few of you are involved in ‘intellectual’ pursuits – you don’t have the chops for it.
March 29th, 2006 at 5:02 pmSo sorry Ryan, it was his increase in spending to gear up for war that saw a decrease in late 38/39.
1939
* GNP rises 7.9 percent; unemployment falls to 17.2 percent.
* The United States will begin emerging from the Depression as it borrows and spends $1 billion to build its armed forces. From 1939 to 1941, when the Japanese attack Pearl Harbor, U.S. manufacturing will have shot up a phenomenal 50 percent!
* The Depression is ending worldwide as nations prepare for the coming hostilities.
* World War II starts with Hitler’s invasion of Poland.
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/Timeline.htm
March 29th, 2006 at 5:11 pmSorry squishypoop, but your own link proves you wrong.
The new deal DID work, and only AFTER the second new deal STOPPED/REDUCED did the unemployment go back up. In fact that this is brought out in the link you posted for huppi:
In otherwords the second new deal spending WAS working, and it was costing far less money than the war spending that replaced it did.
You haven’t proven that the new deal didn’t work, you proved that it DID work, but when it was cut the economy returned to a recession. The war spending was a kind of ‘new deal’ spending in that it supplied jobs and money (through debt spending) by the federal government. It was a different way to spend money, but it was an employment program in the end – much as the new deal was in general.
Sorry, but you’ve only proven me right. And you should read your resources more carefully – the consistently contradict you.
March 29th, 2006 at 8:28 pmRyan: Same thing as the other Thread:
let me see if I get your argument.
1. I say “WW2 turned the nation around, while the initial first deal did improve unemployment, after the second new deal unemployment started to rise back up to pre-newDeal levels.â€
2. Your final response is:It wasn’t a failure of the new deal, it was a failure to CONTINUE the new deal. Which means after the New Deal(s) stopped, there was a new recession.
Allow me to reiterate part of my point once again:â€after the second new deal unemployment started to rise back up to pre-newDeal levels.â€
Seems like we agree on that part of it.
Also in your final response:â€The subsequent war spending was in fact a JOBS program funded by the government. It may not have been called the WPA, but it was a federal jobs program that spent vast sums of money to build up the american infrastructure. The war isn’t what boomed the economy, it was the willingness to spend money to make jobs – period. Just as it had been until 1937.â€
Which seems to break down into your view, that it wasn’t the war that saved the economy, it was the war spending.
Funny thing about war spending, you need a war to be able to spend on it. So let me redo part of my point again:WW2 turned the nation around.
So basically, on my New Deal(s) stance, you agree with me, and on my WW2 stance, you agree with me.
Yet you claim “Sorry, but you lose.â€
In fact your main point seems to be that the New Deal shouldn’t have been stopped, something that I have never argued for or against, all I have done is state that while the new deals helped, WW2 stopped the Great Depression.
Is it really that hard for you to admit to agreeing with a conservative?
March 29th, 2006 at 8:40 pm“Allow me to reiterate part of my point once again:â€after the second new deal unemployment started to rise back up to pre-newDeal levels.â€
Seems like we agree on that part of it. squishypoop”
Your premise is “after the second new deal was done, unemployment started to rise back – and that’s what I disagreed with. If you had instead written – after the second new deal was reversed, the unemployment started to rise. And that would be true.
Actually I don’t agree with you on the new deal, because your posting claimed the opposite. I will agree that the war spending was a large part of the increased spending that made a difference to the economy, but it wasn’t the only one. I will say a comprehensive federal spending package that included substantial war spending similarly boosted the economy as the new deal had – but at a much greater expense relative to the improvement.
March 29th, 2006 at 8:46 pm“In fact your main point seems to be that the New Deal shouldn’t have been stopped, something that I have never argued for or against, all I have done is state that while the new deals helped, WW2 stopped the Great Depression. squishypoop”
Actually, you can’t have a ‘recession’ in 1937 unless you were already out of the depression. You forget that the GNP grew 68 billion to 103.9 billion between 1933-1937. Does that sound like a ‘depression’ to you? Which means that new deal had in fact ended the depression from an economic perspective – but that many of the fundamental conditions that made the economy fragile were still present. This is why drastically reduced spending from new deal cutbacks saw a drastic economic response.
And what you also fail to realize is that the drastic war spending hasn’t stopped since then. Meaning that if we were to cut 300 billion from the military budget, without replacing that spending, we’d probably see an economic impact that would ripple through the economy.
So sorry, but the math once again doesn’t support your argument – unless you’re willing to say we’re in a depression right now. Because the GDP growth in 1937 was higher than it was last quarter. And ACTUAL unemployment is much higher to the great depression numbers than the ‘eligible unemployment’ would have people believe.
And sorry, but you do lose, on all accounts of your arguments.
March 29th, 2006 at 8:59 pm“Is it really that hard for you to admit to agreeing with a conservative? Comment by squishypoop”
Not when you’re right – but that’s a rare moment. The only thing we agree on is that war SPENDING, especially related to our physical infrastructure did have a positive effect on the economy and that it did significantly contributed to the ending of the second recession and many of the factors of instability in the economy.
The current president proves that you can have a war, and still have a mediocre economy, so saying that the ‘war’ brought us out of the depression is overly simplistic and only a part of the picture.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:03 pmDeLay’s “faith” apparently comes from the King George Bible where Jesus says lying, cheating and stealing are okay.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:15 pmAh… those “valiant” christian soldiers. They apparently are only truly happy when they are “at war”, even if they have to declare it on themselves. But “anything for the cause”, eh? Is this what is meant by “keeping the faith”? If so, you are welcome to it!
March 29th, 2006 at 9:59 pmsquegeeboo,
March 29th, 2006 at 10:42 pmi have no idea where you are coming from. The New Deal fueled one of the fastest growing infrastructure growth periods in our nation’s history prior to the race to the Moon. FM radio, Color and BW TV, analog and gear-driven digital computers, the beam pentode and microwave techniques all arose prior to WWII. My dad’s family had two PhDs, one MD and a BS in four kinder(all born about 1915 +/- 3 years).This was a technological and supportive revolution that gave the title of the greatest generation to the individuals involved. You are insane if you do not understand the implications of contributions by the people of this era. We are where we are today because we stand on their shoulders.
Gramps was a steelworker who got an education after he lost some ribs while saving two co-workers from certain death at Bethlehem Steel. They sent him off to school after that and he got a degree in ME. He also served with TR in Puerto Rico. San Juan Hill and all that, but his diaries are less dramatic than the history. The Spanish just ran from the battle.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:42 pmAccording to a story in Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal, the Pentagon issued a rare warning to Halliburton, Dick Cheney’s alma mater, to shape up or ship out. News of this comes from a report issued to Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) which seriously questioned the company’s “Restore Iraq Oil 2″ contract which was awarded in January 2004 to rebuild the country’s southern oil fields. Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root billed and received $365 million, 12% of which was part of an investigation into questionable practices such as “intentional overcharging, exorbitant costs, poor cost reporting, slipping schedules, and a refusal to cooperate with the government,” according to The Journal.
Pentagon officials on August 28, 2004 sent a “letter of concern” to Halliburton, essentially accusing it of padding cost and improperly tracking expenses. By year’s end an independent contractor hired by the Pentagon to evaluate the project concluded that Halliburton had “misled” and “distorted” its reporting. By January 2005, Halliburton was issued a rare ultimatum, a “cure notice,” to remedy the abuses or the contract would be terminated. The U.S. lifted the warning five months later, but due to Halliburton’s misdeeds, cut the company’s overall compensation and bonuses short by about 20%.
Waxman cites the Halliburton scandal as illustrative of the Busheviks’ failure to successfully rebuild Iraq.
http://www.ostroyreport.blogspot.com/#32906
March 30th, 2006 at 8:58 amAccording to a story in Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal, the Pentagon issued a rare warning to Halliburton, Dick Cheney’s alma mater, to shape up or ship out.
Comment by unbelievable #129
Seriously now unbelievable,
Should we take this as “GOOD NEWS”?
Isn’t this the equivalent of rearranging the deck chairs on the TITANIC?
…the Captain’s still the same, and the ICEBERG ain’t meltin’…
March 30th, 2006 at 12:57 pmSeriously now unbelievable,
Should we take this as “GOOD NEWS�
Isn’t this the equivalent of rearranging the deck chairs on the TITANIC?
…the Captain’s still the same, and the ICEBERG ain’t meltin’…
Comment by big papa — March 30, 2006 @ 12:57 pm
I made no requests for judgment, just passing along news… It’s a no win situation. Though, it does go to show that those of us who distrust Halliburton are with merit.
March 30th, 2006 at 1:38 pmThough, it does go to show that those of us who distrust Halliburton are with merit.
Comment by unbelievable #131
Heck unbelievable,
I think we knew that with the FIRST $100 billion…
…got any ideas on how we get a refund?
March 30th, 2006 at 1:47 pmCookie
I love your site. They really look very nice. The articles provided are long enough to provide great content but not so long as to be totally engrossing, if you know what I mean.
April 1st, 2008 at 2:56 amdui lawyers california
In nine quick and easily accessible chapters, Bachman outlines many striking truths about what an aspiring lawyer can expect to encounter in contemporary practice, it is eye opening and any student of the law should read it.
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:17 pmGas Mileage Saving Through Engine Parts Change
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.
April 2nd, 2008 at 4:05 pmJack
Thanks, this is good stuff. You are spot on.
April 3rd, 2008 at 5:20 pmJim Crow Laws Employment Law Us Supreme Court
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 5th, 2008 at 4:10 amCarl
well really i can?t understand…
April 8th, 2008 at 1:15 amGay Incest Gay Male Sex Gay Brothers
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 9th, 2008 at 4:28 amGay Incest Old Gay Men Gay Male Galleries
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 14th, 2008 at 8:27 amGlobal Bank Of Commerce
bb&t bank and trust
April 14th, 2008 at 8:29 am