Giuliani Attacks Reversing Bush Tax Cuts To The Rich, Then Refuses To Sign ‘No-Tax’ Pledge
Giuliani Attacks Reversing Bush Tax Cuts To The Rich, Then Refuses To Sign ‘No-Tax’ Pledge
Two days ago, former mayor Rudy Giuliani attacked a speech by Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) in which she promised “to pursue ’shared prosperity’ by increasing taxes on Americans making more than $200,000 a year.”
“This would be an astounding, staggering tax increase,” Mr. Giuliani told reporters yesterday after a visit to a restaurant on the edge of California’s Silicon Valley. “She wants to go back to the 1990s…. It would hurt our economy. It would hurt this area dramatically. That kind of tax increase would see a decline in your venture capital. It would see a decline in your ability to focus on new technology.”
As Steve Benen noted, “going after Hillary Clinton for wanting to bring America back to the 1990s isn’t exactly a persuasive pitch. Most of the country would love to go back to the ’90s.” But Giuliani’s attacks are particularly hypocritical, since he has now “refused to sign a pledge not to raise taxes if elected president.”
The conservative group Americans for Tax Reform has asked all 10 Republican presidential candidate to sign the vow.
Seven have signed the “Taxpayer Protection Pledge” – including former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who is running well in the early primary-voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire.
But front-runner Giuliani has declined thus far, as have John McCain and Tommy Thompson.
A Giuliani adviser told the New York Post that “signing the pledge was unnecessary” since “Rudy’s got a record of cutting taxes.” So why not just sign the pledge, Rudy? Or do you too want to return America to the nightmare of peace and prosperity?
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
So Rudy’s a hypocrite. Who cares? He won’t be president anyway.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:17 pmRudy is being a jerk, as usual. Bringing back tax rates to where they were in the 1990s would not hurt the economy. It certainly was not hurting it when Clinton was President. The deficit was declining, and was actually eliminated by the time Clinton left office.
Anyway, how does Rudy the Bully propose to finance the current deficit? With manna from heaven? Even Bush, who apparently has a direct line with the Heavenly One, has not managed to extract one penny from Him/Her/It…
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:17 pmTaxes don’t and shouldn’t be raised.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:20 pmAnyway, how does Rudy the Bully propose to finance the current deficit?
cut spending. Cut pork. Cut off funding for things that the government
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:22 pmAnyway, how does Rudy the Bully propose to finance the current deficit?
cut spending. Cut pork. Cut off funding for things that the government shound’t be involved in.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:23 pmcut spending. Cut pork. Cut off funding for things that the government shound’t be involved in.
Comment by Kevin — June 2, 2007 @ 5:23 pm
Like what, genius? Infrastructure, vet hospitals, health care for poor children, education, libraries? If you want services, moron, you have to pay for them.
How about having Haliburton and all the corporate cronies reimburse the billions that the sleazebag Republicans have thrown their way? How about taking back all the pork that the do-nothing Republicans have piled up in six years?
Domestic spending has already been cut to the bone, except of course Defense, thanks to your Assrocket President’s little war of choice. Taxes have been cut for the minority of the very wealthy who derive their income from investments, depriving the Treasury of much-needed revenues.
Go take your imbecile cliches somewhere else, pee-stained troll.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:39 pmBush’s tax cuts have FAILED. Who is going to pay for Bush’s RECORD DEFICITS?? Just like when Reagan was in office. We need another President like BILL CLINTON.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:39 pmWhy do Liberals/Progressives want to punish people for doing well and earning a good living?
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:40 pmWhy do Conservatives/Republicans want to take money from the poorest Americans and give it to trust fund aristocrats?
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:42 pmWhy do Liberals/Progressives want to punish people for doing well and earning a good living?
Comment by Kevin
Imbecile. You still get to keep most of your f*cking money.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:44 pmHmm…. yeah racking in a few million bucks per month is indeed “earning a good living”. And then spend them in Dubai tax-free? No problemo.
Care to join me for a martini, single mother? Bwah ha ha ha!
What? The company goes down the tubes? No problem, my golden parachute is all set. I laid a dollar pipe to the Bahamas.
Did I mention I invested into security services?
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:44 pmWhat kind of bullshit is that “Shared Prosperity”?
Please…
If you don’t work, you don’t eat.
Simple, fair, just.
What good does it do to hand lazy mofos free money?
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:45 pmBEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP
Whats that noise?
Giuliani backing up!!
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:47 pm> Bush’s tax cuts have FAILED. Who is going to pay for Bush’s RECORD
> DEFICITS??
Hey peon! Do I REALLY have to explain deficit spending 101 to you?
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:47 pm#12: I agree. Let’s fire BUSH. He takes more vacation than anyone I know. He’s the biggest “lazy mofo” I can think of. And, when he IS working he just f**ks up anyway. Fire his lazy a$$.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:48 pmWhy do Conservatives/Republicans want to take money from the poorest Americans and give it to trust fund aristocrats?
Comment by And You Thought REAGAN Was Stupid — June 2, 2007 @ 5:42 pm
The poor don’t pay taxes. Nobody takes money from one set of people and gives it to another except the government.
As for what to cut…. Lets start with the IRS. Get behind the fair tax. Read up on it and love it.
Lets cut NEA. Farm or corporate subsidies. Find government waste and cut it.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:48 pmImbecile. You still get to keep most of your f*cking money.
Comment by Zooey — June 2, 2007 @ 5:44 pm
You’re the imbecile. It’s my money to start with. I earned it. I worked hard for it.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:49 pmMr. President! Old friend! Did you look at my new Olympic-sized pool?
Please don’t pay attention to the McJobbers at the fence. These people
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:50 pmhave no work moral. Whining and moaning all the time…
#14. Go ahead, dumba$$. explain away.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:50 pmWhy do Liberals/Progressives want to punish people for doing well and earning a good living?
Comment by Kevin
Please, as if the wealthy don’t have more loopholes than swiss cheese.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:50 pmThe fact is the middle and lower class will fight for and pay for this political debacle.
The “Fair Tax” is not fair. Any other questions. Oh, and I HAVE read about it.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:51 pm#16. Let’s cut spending on IRAQ. And all money to Halliburton. And corporate welfare for the oil companies.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:52 pmIf you don’t work, you don’t eat.
Simple, fair, just.
What good does it do to hand lazy mofos free money?
Comment by Mr. President — June 2, 2007 @ 5:45 pm
And how exactly is your idiotic comment, trollie, relevant to the post at hand?
Go get a life!
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:52 pmHere’s one for the trolls, because you guys have never, ever got this:
Remember that government is supposed to be Of The People, By The People, and For The People?
Government is us, collectively, doing what we cannot do individually.
The reason why so many Republicans and Libertarians are against taxes, and are therefore against “big government”, is that the government can, if the people choose, provide a number of services — police and fire protection, military, diplomacy, National Guard, safety inspection, pollution regulation, street maintenance, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. — that the private sector would otherwise have sway over. And the private sector is, at this point in this country, all about bottom-line profit. Period.
Taxes pay for your civilization. Cut them, and you have less of it. Shift what you’ve got into the military-industrial complex, and all you’ve got is a poor country with big bombs.
I am not against companies making profit. Hell, I hope to be rich myself someday. But I will not do it at the needless expense of others. Our society does better when all of us do better.
And this is something Repubs will never, ever understand.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:52 pmIf you don’t work, you don’t eat.
Simple, fair, just.
What good does it do to hand lazy mofos free money?
Comment by Mr. President
Tell that to the trust fund babies.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:52 pmF**ing idiots. I have more money than Kevin + “Lauging all the way to the bank” combined too! You should speak of what you know.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:52 pmComment by And You Thought REAGAN Was Stupid — June 2, 2007 @ 5:48 pm
I’m glad to that you believe in one *earning* his or her pay.
But why do you think that some want to take money from the poor and give it to the rich (this refers to your post #9)? That sounds absurd. I have never heard of that.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:53 pmThe “Fair Tax†is not fair. Any other questions. Oh, and I HAVE read about it.
Comment by And You Thought REAGAN Was Stupid — June 2, 2007 @ 5:51 pm
Can you explain how being taxed on what you spend and not what you make is unfair?
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:55 pmYou’re the imbecile. It’s my money to start with. I earned it. I worked hard for it.
Comment by Kevin
I’m willing to bet I put out much more effort (energy) than you did.
Economists want to talk about energy vs profit. How much physical labor have you done? Call me liberal, conservative, or whatever, but I am for the working man and the uniformed class of America. I support my police and my brothers in labor that you take for granted. It is the working man that built America! And it is the working man that protects it.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:55 pmComment by Devil’s Advocate — June 2, 2007 @ 5:52 pm
Are you familiar with the definitions of the terms “shared” and “prosperity”?
If not, I suggest you look them up… you know… like in a dictionary.
I know that may take some time for you, so I’ma go ahead and accept your apology now.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:56 pmYou’re the imbecile. It’s my money to start with. I earned it. I worked hard for it.
Comment by Kevin
We all work hard for our money, moron. We should work equally hard at our humanity.
If you don’t like paying taxes, buy yourself a nice little island and go live there — you and your money should be very happy together.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:56 pmBut why do you think that some want to take money from the poor and give it to the rich (this refers to your post #9)? That sounds absurd. I have never heard of that.
Comment by Mr. President
Jesus warned you of the perils of usury.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:57 pm#24 Excellent comment! But the trolls won’t ever “get” it.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:58 pmPlease…
If you don’t work, you don’t eat.
Simple, fair, just.
What good does it do to hand lazy mofos free money?
Comment by Mr. President
Tell that to the physically and mentally disabled. Remember them?
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:58 pmTell that to the trust fund babies.
Comment by barfly — June 2, 2007 @ 5:52 pm
All trust fund babies do is spend cash, which is good for the economy. They have to pay taxes as well, unless they are pulling a scam.
Who do you think is putting more money back into circulation, some rich ass bitch like Paris Hilton, or a lower income family saving to put some kids through college?
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:59 pmF**ing idiots. I have more money than Kevin + “Lauging all the way to the bank†combined too! You should speak of what you know.
Comment by And You Thought REAGAN Was Stupid
Yet you are a decent and caring human being — you should give compassion seminars to these idiots.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:00 pmAre you familiar with the definitions of the terms “shared†and “prosperity�
If not, I suggest you look them up… you know… like in a dictionary.
Shared as in what Jesus taught?
Why do you confuse life and conscious with money? Which came first?
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:00 pmWho do you think is putting more money back into circulation, some rich ass bitch like Paris Hilton, or a lower income family saving to put some kids through college?
Comment by Mr. President
Rich families may spend a lot of cash, but they also lock up a lot of their money in those trust funds, investments, etc.
Lower class families usually spend all of their money, because they have to — save money for their kids’ college? C’mon…..
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:03 pmTell that to the physically and mentally disabled. Remember them?
Comment by Zooey — June 2, 2007 @ 5:58 pm
I do, and we have a responsibility to take care of them. However, this can be accomplished by restrictions on the welfare checks that are handed out. We should not have to take care of a woman’s children so that she can go out to get her nails done (this is an actual phenomena that I observed when doing community service for my Philosophy of Law and Social Issues class).
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:04 pmAll trust fund babies do is spend cash, which is good for the economy. They have to pay taxes as well, unless they are pulling a scam.
Please, the harm they do thru their actions in no way makes up for what they spend.
The last thing we need is more national enquirer poster children of wealth.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:04 pmI am not against companies making profit. Hell, I hope to be rich myself someday. But I will not do it at the needless expense of others. Our society does better when all of us do better.
And this is something Repubs will never, ever understand.
Comment by filkertom
Nail on head, filkertom. Well done.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:05 pmJesus warned you of the perils of usury.
Comment by O’Really — June 2, 2007 @ 5:57 pm
What are talking about. Do you know what usury is?
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:05 pm“All trust fund babies do is spend cash, which is good for the economy. They have to pay taxes as well, unless they are pulling a scam.”
But they didn’t work for it, so your point about working for a living was bogus. You didn’t really mean it.
“Who do you think is putting more money back into circulation, some rich ass bitch like Paris Hilton, or a lower income family saving to put some kids through college?”
Comment by Mr. President
How ignorant are you? They don’t pay into the SSI fund on every dollar earned – getting a free pass that the rest of us don’t get.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:05 pmWho do you think is putting more money back into circulation, some rich ass bitch like Paris Hilton, or a lower income family saving to put some kids through college?
Comment by Mr. President — June 2, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
The operative word here is “saving”. Savings go into banks, banks use them to make loans, and through this little thing economists call “money multiplier effect”, those savings wind up benefiting more to the economy than the cash spent by the Hilton twit and assorted rich brats… Check out the “money multiplier” effect in a basic Economics book. Educate yourself before you either open your mouth or type, or just STFU.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:06 pmWho do you think is putting more money back into circulation, some rich ass bitch like Paris Hilton, -Mr Pres.
As if we need more bad behaving celebs for our children to mimic?
I can’t believe you would put what she spent on a car or into the economy above the power she has, thru media, to encourage others.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:07 pmit amazes me that neocons think they are the “conservative” spenders. they have sunk us into the biggest debt ever and the largest govt. ever. I don’t get it. they can’t even honor their OWN ideals! Bush has slashed services SO SEVERELY that people are literally starving to death in this country. How can they not see the benefits of programs to help the disenfranchised? Can’t they see what a DRAIN on the coffers it is to NOT do the right thing? That ending poverty and educating those less fortunate is a GOOD investment?
History shows us Liberals are far and away better at managing the people’s money. Liberals have LOTS of do re mi, how do these myths get going? They can’t even keep their phone banks open to raise funds for the upcoming election!
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:07 pmKevin
How long do you think you are going to keep your holy bank balance once the cops stop working because they haven’t been paid?
Oh, and what are you going to spend that money on, when due to the roads no longer being maintained, goods stop coming to your third world little shanty, which doesn’t get running water, trash collected or even electricity, because nobody is paying to maintain all of that?
You “Conservatives” seem to have this astounding belief in getting a free lunch. The books must be balanced, and as you operating within America, in a situation where the government of America makes it possible for you to operate at a profit, you are going to have to buck up, quit whining and pay your taxes.
In this world, nothing is free and you pay your way. That is life, get used to it or go to jail for tax evasion.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:07 pmI do, and we have a responsibility to take care of them. However, this can be accomplished by restrictions on the welfare checks that are handed out. We should not have to take care of a woman’s children so that she can go out to get her nails done (this is an actual phenomena that I observed when doing community service for my Philosophy of Law and Social Issues class).
Comment by Mr. President
So all of the poor and disabled have to suffer because a few abuse the system? You do realize that the majority of the poor do not behave this way, don’t you?
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:07 pmRich families may spend a lot of cash, but they also lock up a lot of their money in those trust funds, investments, etc.
Lower class families usually spend all of their money, because they have to — save money for their kids’ college? C’mon…..
Comment by Zooey — June 2, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
Yes, but (and I should say that I myself am not rich) those investments go back into the economy. That money goes to work and employs people who may not have had jobs.
I am not saying that the lower class families are at fault, I am just saying that wealth redistribution is dangerous.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:08 pmBecause that is the historical path to maintaining dynastic control over a geographical area.
It just took longer for dynasties to reassert themselves in America since the founding fathers had this crazy notion of equality.
Kevin misses the argument. Liberals/Progressives don’t want to punish anyone for doing well. They just want a level playing field for everyone. Being rich shouldn’t be an accident of birth, but should be dependent upon one’s own efforts.
By eliminating the estate/dynasty/death tax, we ensure that a few dynastic families will control the American economy and government forever (or at least until armed rebellion).
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:09 pmJesus warned you of the perils of usury.
Comment by O’Really — June 2, 2007 @ 5:57 pm
What are talking about. Do you know what usury is?
Comment by Mr. President
No, I just made it up and posted it//// Sheesh.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:09 pmthis is an actual phenomena that I observed when doing community service for my Philosophy of Law and Social Issues class).
Comment by Mr. President
Wow, the class hatred simply drips from your post. You know little or nothing about this woman’s life, yet feel qualified to dispense advice to her.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:09 pmHow ignorant are you? They don’t pay into the SSI fund on every dollar earned – getting a free pass that the rest of us don’t get.
Comment by barfly — June 2, 2007 @ 6:05 pm
Well, the money didn’t just appear out of thin air. Unless it was under the table, somebody had to earn it. Thus, the money HAS been taxed.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:10 pmRemember that government is supposed to be Of The People, By The People, and For The People?
Yes and did you know that the Constitution is all about limiting government and empowering the individual?
Taxes pay for your civilization. Cut them, and you have less of it. Shift what you’ve got into the military-industrial complex, and all you’ve got is a poor country with big bombs.
Wrong. Taxes pay for things laid out by the government mandate (the Constitution) the free market will take care of everything else the individual needs via opportunity.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:11 pmBush has already shown us the path: Cut taxes, and balance the budget at the same time. If we continue, and expand upon the Bush economic doctrine, we should be able to show budget surpluses as soon as the tax rate drops to zero for the wealthiest 1%.
What is that path? It’s simple: shift all government spending to off-budget, emergency supplemental bills.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:12 pmMany thanks, Zooey, and especially appreciated coming from you.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:12 pm“But they didn’t work for it, so your point about working for a living was bogus. You didn’t really mean it.” Comment by barfly — June 2, 2007 @ 6:05 pm
No, I meant it. The money *was* worked for and is being recirculated in the economy.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:13 pmthe free market will take care of everything else the individual needs via opportunity.
Comment by Kevin — June 2, 2007 @ 6:11 pm
Two problems with this, Kevin.
1. the free market isn’t free, and when it does, companies inevitably become monopolies, eliminating opportunity.
2. opportunity, even in a regulated market, is largely controlled by social status at birth.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:15 pm“She wants to go back to the 1990s…”
Heck! So do I!
I would even accept Giuliani all over again as mayor of my city. Well, maybe not. He is truly a nasty piece of work. Imagine Bush on steroids, with a functioning brain in his head, afflicted with a raging paranoia, a very thin skin, a vindictiveness towards his critics the like of which is rarely seen, and very disturbing dictatorial tendencies. That was Mayor Giuliani. That could be President Giuliani.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:15 pmComment by O’Really — June 2, 2007 @ 6:04 pm
You are right, that is not ALL that they do. But we are talking about their spending habits here. I do not suggest that Paris Hilton is an up-standing citizen or a role-model.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:16 pmWe all work hard for our money, moron. We should work equally hard at our humanity.
If you don’t like paying taxes, buy yourself a nice little island and go live there — you and your money should be very happy together.
Comment by Zooey — June 2, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
OK Miss Moron. How is taking money from people that work hard and take risk and employ people and make advancements in every industry and giving it to people that make poor personal choices and suck the live out of everything they touch?
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:16 pmNo, I meant it. The money *was* worked for and is being recirculated in the economy.
Comment by Mr. President
I don’t think you understand the stockmarket. Money often does no *work*. It has become usury and that goes against the universal principle of conservation of energy.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:18 pmNo, I meant it. The money *was* worked for and is being recirculated in the economy.
Comment by Mr. President
Try and follow me: the rich haven’t ever paid their fair share – because they don’t pay on every dollar earned into SSI, but only to the SSI cap of $90,000 (approx.). The money they inherited also has never been taxed for SSI, as some fortunes predate the founding of SSI. Elimination of the estate tax ensured that this money will never be taxed, giving the heirs a free ride as well.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:18 pmYes, but (and I should say that I myself am not rich) those investments go back into the economy. That money goes to work and employs people who may not have had jobs.
I am not saying that the lower class families are at fault, I am just saying that wealth redistribution is dangerous.
Comment by Mr. President
Tinkle down economics does not work. Open your eyes.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:19 pm> #14. Go ahead, dumba$$. explain away.
1) Government decides to do Big Project. Like, a fleet of nuclear submarines. Dig?
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:20 pm2) Guy X comes up who volunteers to do Big Project for a reasonable fee.
3) Government pulls in money to pay for Big Project
4) Once coffers are empty, Government goes out and borrows money, either by emitting “government bonds”, by borrowing money at banking institutions at home or abroad (if they have stashes of national currency), or by printing money. The two first “at a fee” since no-one does Islamic Banking, the last one is a Bad Idea as it fuels inflation.
5) Big Project has moved money from coffers to Guy X! Guy likes that! Economy goes up, because Guy X can buy his swimming pool.
6) Unfortunately money for Other Reasonable Projects is now missing and worse, banking institutions demand payment of “fee”, so more money is sucked out of the coffers. Governement is slowly going non-functional. Public hospitals are in a bad way, etc… Inflation goes up, so banks demand higher fees, sucking all the oxygen out of the room.
7) Goverment has to raise taxes to pay interest, re-fill its coffers, pay back its bonds, but generally has no space to manoeuver in cause something unexpected happens. Increasing taxes slow the economy, causing more problems. Then companies and banks begin to go bust…
http://ccoaler.blogspot.com
violence erupts at g8 summit
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:20 pmYou are right, that is not ALL that they do. But we are talking about their spending habits here
I feel that there spending habits are not worthy of consideration. It is the middle classes spending habits that regulate the disparity of a free market economy.
This is my opinion.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:21 pmIf you don’t actually have a heart to care about the plight of the poor, then I will appeal to your greed. Think of the taxes taken to fund poor relief as an investment. This will actually allow those who have trouble affording everyday necessities, the ability to actually purchase something extra. This something extra will obviously lead to extra profit for a company that otherwise would not have had that extra profit, and thus growth in stock value and dividends, thus alleviating the plight of the wealthy.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:22 pmYou “Conservatives†seem to have this astounding belief in getting a free lunch. The books must be balanced, and as you operating within America, in a situation where the government of America makes it possible for you to operate at a profit, you are going to have to buck up, quit whining and pay your taxes.
In this world, nothing is free and you pay your way. That is life, get used to it or go to jail for tax evasion.
Comment by Bruce Gorton — June 2, 2007 @ 6:07 pm
I’m not about no tax at all. I’m for the fair tax. I don’t want people punished for achievement.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:22 pmMany thanks, Zooey, and especially appreciated coming from you.
Comment by filkertom
**blush**
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:23 pm> I don’t think you understand the stockmarket. Money often does no
> *work*. It has become usury and that goes against the universal
> principle of conservation of energy.
It is bad style to use physics and stockmarket ideas together in the same phrase.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:23 pm“Wrong. Taxes pay for things laid out by the government mandate (the Constitution) the free market will take care of everything else the individual needs via opportunity.”
Comment by Kevin
Except when unfunded mandates force municipalities to raise taxes on low and middle income people.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:24 pmI’m not about no tax at all. I’m for the fair tax. I don’t want people punished for achievement.
Comment by Kevin
Yet we punish them for being poor by war?
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:24 pmThis is my opinion.
Comment by O’Really — June 2, 2007 @ 6:21 pm
But do you see no dangers in the redistribution of wealth?
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:25 pmOK Miss Moron. How is taking money from people that work hard and take risk and employ people and make advancements in every industry and giving it to people that make poor personal choices and suck the live out of everything they touch?
Comment by Kevin
You’re buying into the “blame the poor” game, and I’m not buying.
For shame, Kevin. How dead are you inside?
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:25 pmIt is bad style to use physics and stockmarket ideas together in the same phrase.
Comment by El Tonno —
Is it? What do you eat that allows you the energy to think?
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:26 pmComment by Ashen Shard — June 2, 2007 @ 6:22 pm
F*ck you!
If you really cared about the poor why don’t you ACTUALLY do something about, bitch:
http://www.catholiccharitiesusa.org/
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:27 pmI am not saying that the lower class families are at fault, I am just saying that wealth redistribution is dangerous.
Comment by Mr. President — June 2, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
It all depends on how it is accomplished. Wealth redistribution is inevitable. Historically, it has been accomplished through violent overthrow of the ruling class.
For awhile, we had a progressive tax system and an estate tax to accomplish that purpose peacefully.
With the peaceful mechanisms gone, the consolidation of wealth will eventually lead to social unrest, then civil unrest, then violence. For awhile, the ruling class will be able to maintain their source of power through oppression alone. Their hope will lie in creating the Utopian world of Oceania. Even that utopia is doomed to fail, as the stifling of education will leave them vulnerable to pandemics.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:27 pmviolence erupts at g8 summit
Comment by ccokz
Thanks, ccoaler. Amazing pictures.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:28 pmIt is bad style to use physics and stockmarket ideas together in the same phrase.
Comment by El Tonno —
Are you or are you not a form of energy? Does or does not our vehicles operate on energy? And is not our economy based on energy? What are you paid by the hour for? Production of what?
You sell your energy for?
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:28 pmif the wealth would be redistributed i have no problem but the repukes never redistribute money…that just ISN’T done my dear.
tellya what…you give guiliani your money…ALL of it, don’t worry it’s only for 4 years.
i’ll keep my money to use and spend as i see fit.
at the end of four years we compare how much i have left to how much guiliani is willing to return to you
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:29 pmComment by Briseadh na Faire — June 2, 2007 @ 6:27 pm
Ummm… looks like someone’s been reading a bit to much Marx and Sartre.
What’s all this nonsense about Oceania about?
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:30 pmLet me clue y’all in to what should be the main topic, or at least a daily topic, on TP:
We are being robbed.
This isn’t about a cultural clash, or a political philosophy, or terrorism, or religious belief (as easy as it is to argue about those things).
This is about how much money Bush and his cronies can stuff into their bank accounts before the curtain comes down on this administration (and how to avoid jail afterward).
That fact alone (and I assure you, it is a fact), should be thrown into the faces of the trolls, 28 percenters, and riech winger’s at every opportunity. These fu(knuts want to hold the door for the theives while the family treasure is loaded into the moving van.
Mark my words: all of us (trolls and assorted other low brow types included) who aren’t rich and getting richer will foot the bill for Bushco’s crimes.
Raise taxes? You’re goddamn right we should raise taxes. We have bills to pay! Who should we tax? That’s easy: The people who have benefitted from the oil war, globalization, recipients of faith-based initiatives, and assorted other folks who haven’t necessarily “pulled themselves up by their boot straps.” That’s who.
Get this: the Great American Middle Class was created by liberal Democratic policies, based on liberal Democratic principles, and executed by liberal Democratic Presidents. The Great American Middle Class is the largest number of people who have ever benefitted from reasonable government regulation of business and industry. The Great American Middle Class is what all of the coal miners, share croppers, and other manual laborers of the late 1800’s turned into during the mid 1900’s.
The Great American Middle Class is being strangled by the “Conservative Elite.” Cheap labor comes in, good jobs and industrial capacity and investment go overseas; oil companies jack the price of gas (look at the profit numbers), which is paid for by The Great American Middle Class directly; and the war profiteers line up to collect the billions (Christ! BILLIONS!) of dollars leaking from the The Great American Middle Class taxpayer’s pockets like water through a strainer.
My god, the lack of street smarts in this country is apalling.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:31 pmF*ck you!
If you really cared about the poor why don’t you ACTUALLY do something about, bitch:
Comment by Mr. President
That was over the top, and completely unnecessary, Mr P.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:32 pmBriseadh na Faire
Actually, you are all missing the boat. The fact is that there are basic services for which it is cheaper over-all for government to perform and coordinate.
These services tend to be of such a scale and such a nature that it would be impractical, or just point blank undesireable to privatise them. You wouldn’t privatise your police force for example.
Unfortunately these services cost money. Not enough people are willing or able to do the work involved on a volunteer basis. Thus you have to pay them to do it. Not enough people are willing to donate the basic materials some government work requires (For example, tar for all of those roads your government pays for) and so your government has to pay for those materials.
This adds up, and is charged to you in taxes. Taxes aren’t there to level any sort of a playing field, they are there to pay the bills society collectively incurs. Obviously, the very rich can afford to pay more towards dealing with these expenses then the very poor, and the very rich have more to lose should the country go bankrupt.
Taxes are not a vehicle of wealth redistribution, they are simply a vehicle for paying off government’s expenses, and government projects to improve the lot of society.
Now, if I was a rich American, the view I would take is this:
I can take pleasure in the good which my money, in the form of taxes, does for others. I can fight to make sure that money does the maximum amount of good.
Or I can bitch about taxes and broadcast my sorry, poor, impoverished plight, from my private Jet as I head off to holiday on my own island.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:34 pmCompletely OT, the dump trucks have backed up to our house, the series of tubes has been set up, so Wayne and I are ON THE INTERNETS!
And there was much rejoicing…
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:35 pmComment by Zooey — June 2, 2007 @ 6:32 pm
What?
The language, or the link?
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:35 pm“OK Miss Moron. How is taking money from people that work hard and take risk and employ people and make advancements in every industry and giving it to people that make poor personal choices and suck the live out of everything they touch?”
Comment by Kevin
I once worked for one of these folk. He took risks, and rewarded himself very well for his success – but on payday, we would all race to the bank to cash our checks, because he rarely covered payroll completely. He applied for a big business loan, and bought a new semi-trailer truck, to transport product. He also bought himself a new Porsche, and started wearing expensive suits. Needless to say, his business folded in less than a year, and he left town still owing employees money.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:35 pmUmmm… looks like someone’s been reading a bit to much Marx and Sartre.
What’s all this nonsense about Oceania about?
Comment by Mr. President
The fact of the matter is we cannot incorporate marx and sartre into todays society with technology as it is. The great magnetic poet spaghetti monster is but the internet =)
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:36 pmOK Miss Moron. How is taking money from people that work hard and take risk and employ people and make advancements in every industry and giving it to people that make poor personal choices and suck the live out of everything they touch?
Comment by Kevin — June 2, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
O.K. Mr Stupid. Entrepreneurs who are successful earn a return on their investment. Included in that investment is a risk premium.
Same entrepreneurs, however, drive on roads that need maintenance, use public libraries that someone has to fund, enjoy the protection of law enforcement, the benefit of having firefighters and trained EMS, enjoy the benefits of fundamental research in medicine, chemistry, electronics, etc… that is publicly funded. Why should they not pay for these services?
Entrepreneurs also benefit — through productivity –from having a workforce that is healthy and properly educated. That is why they should pay taxes to insure that people have access to health care and education.
I could go on and on but your brain could not follow. You are stuck on the stupid one-track “meme” of “taxes are bad”.
What you, Kevin the Troll, really want is to be a free-loader on services that are essential to a modern, civilized, country. In other words, you are a parasite.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:36 pmAnd there was much rejoicing…
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
I’m doing the happy dance!! Woo hoo, Wayne & Jane!
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:38 pmWhy feed the troll’s? Just state fact. This is what is destroying the middle-class. While the rich are waiving the flag and sucking me dry like a crack whore looling for the next rock. I’m getting screwed by this administration and republican policy as a whole. So the $1500.00 I received in Tax cuts is offset by a policy that benefits the rich. So for that $1500 I get:
Bush Republicans, addicted to borrowing, increased the national debt by $3 trillion. President Bush is the most fiscally irresponsible American president, having presided over the largest explosion of debt in our nation’s history. Every year since taking office, President Bush asked Congress to increase the statutory debt limit, resulting in a $3 trillion, or 51 percent, increase. At the end of 2006, the federal debt totaled $8.68 trillion. By 2012, the President’s budget would increase the public debt to 12.2 trillion.
Debt owed to foreigners climbs to record levels. In order to finance record budget deficits, the United States has had to borrow at unprecedented rates from foreigners. As of February 2007, the United States had accumulated $1.1 trillion more in debt to foreigners than this country had accumulated in its first 224 years. By contrast, during the last three years of the Clinton Administration, the United States paid off more than $200 billion in debt to foreigners.
Health care premiums have increased by over 80 percent. The cost of family health insurance has skyrocketed 80.8 percent since 2000. Premiums are rising twice as fast as wages and inflation. The typical family health insurance premium is now $11,480 a year
College education costs have risen by 44 percent. Average tuition, fees, room, and board costs at four-year private universities have increased by $6,786 from $22,240 in the 2000-2001 academic year to $29,026 in the 2005-2006 academic year
Housing affordability has reached a 15-year low. In 2006, housing affordability reached its lowest level since 1991
While families work harder, their wages continue to decline. Middle-class families are working harder and earning less today than they were at the start of the Bush Administration. According to the Wall Street Journal, “Since the end of the recession of 2001, a lot of the growth in GDP per person – that is, productivity – has gone to profits, not wages.â€
Meanwhile, employment compensation has lagged behind productivity gains. While the productivity of the American worker rose by 17.5 percent between the first quarter of 2001 and the fourth quarter of 2006, real compensation per hour increased by only 8.7 percent.
Earnings for workers with college degrees declining. The LA Times has reported that: “Wage stagnation, long the bane of blue-collar workers, is now hitting people with bachelor’s degrees for the first time in 30 years. Earnings for workers with four-year degrees fell 5.2 percent from 2000 to 2004 when adjusted for inflation, according to White House economists…Not since the 1970s have workers with bachelor’s degrees seen a prolonged slump in earnings during a time of economic growth…trends for people with master’s and other advanced degrees…have found that their inflation-adjusted wages
Worst job creation record since Hoover Administration. A growing economy should be good news for those seeking jobs. But over the course of President Bush’s term in office, his Administration has the worst overall job creation record since Herbert Hoover more than 70 years ago. Overall non-farm payroll employment has increased by just 5.2 million since President Bush took office in January 2001 compared with 22.7 million during the Clinton presidency. Overall employment growth has averaged just 70,000 per month under President Bush – much lower than the approximately 150,000 jobs needed each month to keep up with population growth. It was not uncommon to see monthly job gains of 300,000 and even 400,000 during economic expansions under previous Administrations.
Unemployment has increased 7.1 percent and long-term joblessness has nearly doubled. In part because of this failure to create a sufficient number of jobs, the national unemployment rate stands at 4.5 percent, which is 7.1 percent higher than the 4.2 percent rate when President Bush took office. Unfortunately, once unemployed, America’s workers also are staying unemployed longer. In 2006, over one in six of the unemployed had been out of work for more than 26 weeks. The number of long-term unemployed has increased by 61 percent since President Bush took office.
Bush Republicans turned record budget surpluses into record deficits. President Bush inherited a unified budget surplus of $236 billion from President Clinton, the largest surplus in American history. Budget surpluses were expected to continue for another ten years when President Bush took office in January 2001. By 2002, however, the unified federal budget had returned to a deficit of $158 billion and has reached historic highs. Last year, the budget deficit was $248 billion, or 1.9 percent of GDP.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:39 pmWhat’s all this nonsense about Oceania about?
Comment by Mr. President
Funny that you seem to be following the Bushco implementation of orwellian concepts yet remain ignorant of the source.
read 1984, by George Orwell, once you finally finish My Pet Goat.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:39 pmComment by O’Really — June 2, 2007 @ 6:36 pm
Remember, “Nothingness is always right there with Being”
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:40 pmZooey, Wayne said to tell you that he’s booking reservations at Milliways!
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:40 pmWhat?
The language, or the link?
Comment by Mr. President
I don’t give a shit about naughty words, and I’m all for charity.
I object to your attack on Ashen Shard. It was uncalled for.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:41 pmZooey, Wayne said to tell you that he’s booking reservations at Milliways!
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
I’m so there. :)
He’s buying!
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:41 pm“Included in that investment is a risk premium.” Oops! I meant “return”, not “investment”.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:44 pmComment by JTitor — June 2, 2007 @ 6:39 pm
Thank you for the reality check.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:48 pmMr. President
I like how to attacked Ashenshard and then linked to a religious run charity.
Particularly seen as that religion, which that charity belongs to, declared all criticism of its policies to be “terrorism”, recently set about trying to rewrite its WWII history, sparking a showdown with Israel, and is in the process of sainting a man who made it that religion’s policy to be neutral towards Nazi Germany.
I wouldn’t give to Catholic charity if you paid me to. Not under this pope.
I do give to charity, but not religious ones.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:49 pmRemember, “Nothingness is always right there with Beingâ€
Comment by Mr. President
I quite agree. =)
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:50 pmRemember that government is supposed to be Of The People, By The People, and For The People?
Yes and did you know that the Constitution is all about limiting government and empowering the individual?
Taxes pay for your civilization. Cut them, and you have less of it. Shift what you’ve got into the military-industrial complex, and all you’ve got is a poor country with big bombs.
Wrong. Taxes pay for things laid out by the government mandate (the Constitution) the free market will take care of everything else the individual needs via opportunity.
Comment by Kevin — June 2, 2007 @ 6:11 pm
Ah, now, see, you’ve bought into the “empowerment” b.s. that Dubya was spouting during his attempt to gut Social Security. And you invoke the Magical Mystical Whimsical Free Market.
I even said precisely what the problem was, and you don’t get it: Businesses these days are, at core, about bottom-line profit. They will do everything they can to get everything they can. And individuals don’t really have any negotiating power — not even on a simple bulk-discount level — to pay anything besides whatever the market will bear.
Government, on the other hand, not being for profit and purchasing for millions of people at a time, usually gets a better cut.
As to the “free market”, yeah, there are lots of private services out there doing governmental jobs. We can invoke stories of many ludicrous failures, such as private prisons, various school “systems” (along with how regular schools are doing so poorly, because, guess what, their funds have been cut by Repubs in office). We could blather on all day about the horrors of the modern health care set up… but let’s look at an example where the “free market” more-or-less works: UPS, FedEx, etc., versus the US Postal Service.
It’s a little late in the day for me to actually ship something, but the web sites wll still do the calculations. To send a two-pound book, $30 value, from Ann Arbor, MI to Phoenix, AZ overnight costs between $43 and $46 with UPS, and from $54 to $87 with FedEx… and $16.25 with USPS. If you’re willing to wait another day, it goes down to $4.60 in a flat-rate envelope.
The “free market” only works when it doesn’t have free rein. But you will never understand this, because all you see is the bottom line, which is likely the worst way of determining success, as it focuses on profit uber alles.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:50 pmComment by Bruce Gorton — June 2, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
I’m aware of the services function of taxation, but the fact of the matter is, for awhile a progressive income tax and the estate tax were created to address the imbalance of wealth in the country.
Another justification for a progressive tax was the argument that the wealthy were reaping more of the benefits this society had to offer, and thus it was morally proper to pay a greater share.
Unfortunately, most people lack the analytical and reasoning capacity (thank you standardized tests) to comprehend the complex interrelationships between taxation, government and private spending.
Thus the simple argument prevails. And the simple argument appeals to the sense of selfishness present the moment a child understands the concept of possessions.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:52 pmI object to your attack on Ashen Shard. It was uncalled for.
Comment by Zooey — June 2, 2007 @ 6:41 pm
Why?
He was insinuating that those against Hillary’s mumbo-jumbo did not care about the poor.
I was offended, he was out of line. Nobody was saying, f- the poor.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:54 pmMr. President, you are standing up firmly for what you believe!
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:55 pmComment by JTitor — June 2, 2007 @ 6:39 pm
Amazing rundown, JTitor. You should post that on every thread where the trolls are screaming about taxes, etc.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:55 pmZooey,
I just escaped from mini-blue’s clutches of “watch this”.
Can you give me a quick synopsis of the crazy-assed attack by Mr. Pres (who I thought was being a parody at times) and the Wayne/Jayne celebration?
It’s just that I might at any moment be sucked back into that vortex, and I’d like to have a head’s up before leaping into a 100+ thread when next I’m able to extricate myself from her clutches….
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:56 pmComment by Bruce Gorton — June 2, 2007 @ 6:49 pm
I know, I’m not Catholic myself. But whatshisname was insulting, and the fact of the matter is that many religious organizations have a rep. base, and they run charitible organizations. Not because they are forced, but because they choose to. what’shis/hername was being facetious, so was I.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:58 pmWhy?
He was insinuating that those against Hillary’s mumbo-jumbo did not care about the poor.
I was offended, he was out of line. Nobody was saying, f- the poor.
Comment by Mr. President
Whatever. Grow up.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:58 pmMr. President, you are standing up firmly for what you believe!
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1 — June 2, 2007 @ 6:55 pm
Well thanks, CT!
It’s so good to hear from ya!
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:59 pm> Are you or are you not a form of energy? Does or does not our
> vehicles operate on energy? And is not our economy based on
> energy? What are you paid by the hour for? Production of what?
> You sell your energy for?
> Comment by O’Really
What? Alternate realities are inflitrating our universe! Bizarro attacks!
Here are your answers:
1) No, I am in no way “a form of energy”
2) No, Our vehicles operate on gas. Which when oxidized provides thermal energy which is then converted into mechanical energy.
3) No, our economy is based on the concept of: Property, Resources, Contracts (which includes money, which is a contract) and Scarcity of said Resources (the scarcier the merrier)
4) Contract includes finding a satisfycing solution to an ill-posed problem, aka. “puzzle solving”
5) I do not sell energy because that’s a non-saleable good except if you are an electricity-generating company. You cannot sell the stuff that makes a bullet go fast.
That’s why you should in no case mix stockmarketspeak with physics. In no case!
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:00 pmIt’s just that I might at any moment be sucked back into that vortex, and I’d like to have a head’s up before leaping into a 100+ thread when next I’m able to extricate myself from her clutches….
Comment by trueblue
I feel your pain. I’m about to be drawn into a viewing of “Chicken Run.”
:D
Mr P attacked Ashen Shard over a comment, and I objected. Mr P defends his childishness, and I no longer give a shit.
Wayne and Jane are online!! The tube were dropped off at their house earlier, and Wayne and I are off to Milliways, with Jane’s blessing. :-D
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:02 pmWhatever. Grow up.
Comment by Zooey — June 2, 2007 @ 6:58 pm
Dude your the one talking about sniffing codpieces and shit.
Fine, fine, fine
Ashenshard… I am sorry if my remarks hurt your feelings.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:03 pm> Mr. President, you are standing up firmly for what you believe!
> Comment by CompTROLLER V-1 — June 2, 2007 @ 6:55 pm
> Well thanks, CT!
> It’s so good to hear from ya!
> Comment by Mr. President
Circlejerking or Sockpuppeting?
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:03 pm** El Tonno, we are kinda sorta energy forms. Just sayin’ **
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:03 pmComment by filkertom — June 2, 2007 @ 6:50 pm
That’s exactly right. Once childcare, healthcare, savings (yeah, right “savings”, he says – crack me up), transportation, food, clothing, energy and shelter are figured in, the guy mowing your lawn should be charging $80/hr.
Where would the average American needing his lawn mowed get that kind of money? From his employer – that’s where. You know – the one with all of the toys, the big house, too many spoiled-rotten children, and stock portfolios. But your employer is “entitled” to his income and wealth, so you hire a firm who uses undocumented, illegal aliens todo the Job for half that rate, and the owne of that firm gets the toys, the big house, too many spoiled-rotten children, and stock portfolio.
The middle class is so screwed.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:04 pmComment by Zooey — In this day and age any person that will sit here and support the policies of this administration are stabbing themselves in the back. It is either a lack of understanding and education, or they are being paid to troll here. All this information is freely availible.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:04 pmthe Wayne/Jayne celebration? Comment by trueblue — June 2, 2007 @ 6:56 pm
Or the Wane/Jane celebration! Yes, we have one of three new computers hooked up, and I got the first chance to go online. But I can’t hang out long, so I’ll catch up later on tonight.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:06 pmYea Wayne and Jayne!
What the heck are the Milliways?
“Chicken Run”? The claymation flick? Run Away!
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:06 pmMr. President,
It can be hard to portray yourself as “down the middle” to some of these people. Some of them will continue outcasting you even if you’re willing to learn more, even if you’ve made clear to them that you actually “get it.”
Nobody should think that you’re against the poor, but that you’re for strategic giving and maintaining good economic controls while doing so.
Your right, wealth redistribution (when out of control, primarily) can hurt productivity.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:09 pm> ** El Tonno, we are kinda sorta energy forms. Just sayin’ **
> Comment by trueblue — June 2, 2007 @ 7:03 pm
Only in the sense that all those particles are most probably knotted-up spacetime, which when unknotted blows up into the fastest-moving signal that spacetime can support, according to E=mc^2
You may however consider the concept of information: how many bits does it take to describe an “I” – if optimally compressed, this is a number Z aka. “Kolomogorov Complexity” of something. I have no idea how large that is for an “I”.
Now, if you are talking religious aspects, there’s some wiggle room but I don’t want to go there.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:11 pmComment by Mr. President — June 2, 2007 @ 7:03 pm
Dude, I’m not a dude.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:11 pmComment by El Tonno
Go make yourself a sandwich.
I on the other hand – LOS PAPAS FRITAS, EL HAMBURGUESA!
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:11 pmOops.
Sorry Jane.
Have the different spelling stuck in my head.
I apologize.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:12 pmWhat the heck are the Milliways?
Heh. It’s the restaurant at the end of the universe in the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. :)
“Chicken Run� The claymation flick? Run Away!
Comment by trueblue
We love Chicken Run! And Wallace & Grommet! Why do you hate claymation chickens with outlandishly large teeth? And why do they have teeth anyway…?
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:14 pmNo way, El Tonno. I don’t want to go there, either.
I was simply pointing out that the troll had a small half of a fact right.
:)
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:15 pmYour right, wealth redistribution (when out of control, primarily) can hurt productivity.
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1 — June 2, 2007 @ 7:09 pm
Well, as of now, either they get it or they don’t. I’ma say what I’ma say, and I’ma do what I’ma do. If they let their emotions or presuppositions cloud their minds, then it is sad thing, but at least I made an effort.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:20 pmtrueblue,
Milliways, as Zooey could tell you, is also known as The Restaurant at the End of the Universe. It’s from The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. And Jane told me to tell you, “No offense taken.”
Zooey,
Since I’m broke now, we’ll have to charge dinner to Hotblack Desoto’s account. But he shouldn’t mind what with him playing dead for tax purposes and all. :)
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:21 pmZooey, thank you for defending me.
Mr. President … Thanks for apologizing.
Please make no mistake that just because someone is poor, does not mean they are lazy. Some of the poorest people are the hardest workers. The investors, as I see it, are the ones who tend to be the laziest. Sure, they had to work to research and risk putting there money on a certain stock, but it is the poor who do the work for the company, gathering resources, refining those resources, and creating those resources into product. It is on their backs that the economy is built, and they enjoy very little of its benefits. They deserve something, and even though the sum they get from the government is meager, it is something and it should be defended against all attempts to abolish it.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:22 pmI sense you haven’t thought your cunning economic policies all the way through. Oh well, feel free to pee on the poverty-stricken and tell them its raining. There’s plenty more room for you here with me, Nicky II, and everyone else who discovered rather rudely what happens when you screw the poor.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:23 pmComment by Wayne A. Schneider
Thanks Wayne, my response to true never made the cut. *sigh*
HI, WAYNE!! :-)
What’s Desoto gonna do about it, right? We should invite the whole gang for dinner and drinks.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:24 pmDude, I’m not a dude.
Comment by Zooey — June 2, 2007 @ 7:11 pm
Dude, what would you prefer, “Mea Domina”?
I thought “dude” was unisex. Where’s jimbo, he’ll settle this?
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:24 pmI love Wallace and Grommet!
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on the merits of “Chicken Run”
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:28 pmComment by Ashen Shard — June 2, 2007 @ 7:22 pm
We are not talking about abolishing it. Hillary is talking about some “shared prosperity” nonsense.
I took offense because you implied that those against the tax increase did not care about the poor, then you appealled to a sense of greed which you assumed was at the heart of the matter. When in fact, many conservative organizations (e.g. the Catholic Church) have a variety of programs that give to the poor.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:29 pmHi, Zooey,
I missed all of you guys. But I finally got the tubes hooked up to my house so I can go on the internets! Now I have to figure out how to get into my blog from here so I can start posting there again. Then I’ll be as happy as the proverbial Republican operative in manure.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:31 pmMr President,
Here in America, “Dude” means dude. A guy.
Even in “Finding Nemo” they were able to distinguish between “dudes” and “dudettes”.
You cannot? How Mr. Pres. of you.
(BTW: Not a compliment)
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:32 pmI thought “dude†was unisex. Where’s jimbo, he’ll settle this?
Comment by Mr. President
Mistress Z is always an option. :P
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:34 pmI thought “dude†was unisex.
Comment by Mr. President
If you’re twelve.
Meanwhile, the Yankees are suffering a meltdown in Fenway. Life is good.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:36 pmThen I’ll be as happy as the proverbial Republican operative in manure.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
Then you will be extremely happy, Wayne. :D
Will get to hear the story of your banishment from the tubes on your blog?
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:36 pmMeanwhile, the Yankees are suffering a meltdown in Fenway. Life is good.
Comment by gummitch
I have a feeling you’re about to find friends in our Wayne & Jane. :-)
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:39 pmgummitch,
A Red Sox fan? Are you around Boston?
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:40 pmBTW:
Wayne and Jane,
I bought a beach sticker this year!
(hint – hint!)
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:43 pmfor the best exploration of the term “Dude”, I suggest a quick review of the Big Lebowski. As to Zooey I am figuring that “the dude looks like a lady”
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:44 pmJTitor @ 92
I just wanted to thank you for your concise, well written compilation of facs of the economic fallout from this administration. I always enjoy your posts, but this one is particularly worth saving.
Sort of gives me nausea to read it all laid out like that, the facts are sobering indeed.
thanks again.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:49 pmComment by Mr. President — Why do you write in this wannabe poser ima thug-repug from Compton? That’s an oxymoran, and you look like a fool doing it. I doubt you have any understanding of what it’s like living in a place where the murder rate is twice your IQ.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:50 pmLess Dogma, more simulation!
http://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpco/0503002.html
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:53 pmfor the best exploration of the term “Dudeâ€, I suggest a quick review of the Big Lebowski. As to Zooey I am figuring that “the dude looks like a ladyâ€
Comment by dbadass
The Dude — cool.
No, I look nothing like The Dude, and I avoid acting like a lady. :)
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:55 pmThat’s why you should in no case mix stockmarketspeak with physics. In no case!
Comment by El Tonno
be that as it may such is why we have ergonomics (cost to motion/human economics). Humans work or fish or program or manage to survive. Thus they expend energy and thats what we are paid for today.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:55 pmI bought a beach sticker this year!
(hint – hint!)
Comment by trueblue
What’s a beach sticker?
Is that like a pot sticker? Or a bumpersticker?
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:57 pmZooey,
Not much to tell (in my version, which may differ from my supervisor’s.) I was out sick for about a week back in January and they couldn’t handle things during my absence and did not want to bother calling me at home for help. They decided that this had something to do with me going online and posting here (and my blog), so they banned me from going online at my desk. Since I didn’t have internets access at home, I was left with the occasional post from my mechanic’s, or during the brief visits to my mother in Tennessee. Now she’s moved in with me, I’m typing this on her new computer, and when we can make sure the cats won’t destroy the other new ones, I’ll hook them up and all three of us (me, Jane and my Mom) can simultaneously surf the web.
There, now you’re caught up. I’m going to try to go into my office tomorrow and get what I need to access my blog and then I’ll be set to go. Meanwhile, tonight we’re having fun talking with you guys. Later on I’ll actually read a thread and post a relevant comment.
BTW, if any of you Giuliani supporters out there want to know what you’re really getting with Rudy, talk to a New Yorker. Better yet, talk to a NYC cop or firefighter. Ask them how that radio interoperability came along after the WTC was bombed in 1993. And ask about the EPA. And Bernie Kerik. And his first wife. And his second wife.
Gummitch, Jane and I root for the Red Sox second after the Mets. We have a picture of the ball going past Buckner’s legs and it’s signed by both Buckner and Mookie Wilson!
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:00 pmI think, El Tonno, If the Earth did not resist you, you would not exist
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:03 pmgummitch,
A Red Sox fan? Are you around Boston?
Comment by trueblue
Mariners fan but I’ll always root for the Red Sox over the Evil Empire. This was a particularly satisfying game because the Yankees kept giving up the lead and made some astonishingly bad plays on the field. Pffft.
That said, it was a nasty collision at 1st. I hope Doug Mientkiewicz is ok.
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:05 pmI bought a beach sticker this year!
(hint – hint!)
Comment by trueblue
What’s a beach sticker?
Is that like a pot sticker? Or a bumpersticker?
Comment by Zooey — June 2, 2007 @ 7:57 pm
Wow, you can get a pot sticker!? Cool ;-D
Trueblue, I am definitely taking you up on the hint, even though I’ll probably have to leave Wayne behind (sorry, but NOBODY wants to fill in to feed 18+/- cats!)
Gotta go feed them, it’s way past their suppertime. Be back later.
Sorry, all, for derailing the thread! :-)
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:05 pmComment by Wayne A. Schneider — You forgot Giuliani’s kids. Their real supporters of him as well. There’s probably a law somewhere…If you don’t have the support of your own kids, and they hate you, you can’t run for office.
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:06 pmComment by Wayne A. Schneider — June 2, 2007 @ 8:00 pm
Thanks, Wayne. What a bunch of wankers.
**eyes rolling**
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:08 pmGummitch, Jane and I root for the Red Sox second after the Mets. We have a picture of the ball going past Buckner’s legs and it’s signed by both Buckner and Mookie Wilson!
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
My goal (too much to say “plan”) for 2008 is to gets to a Mets game and, since it’s there, a game at Yankee Stadium (where a friend has two pretty good seats) before the old parks go away. A perfect vacation, of course, would include a game at Fenway during the same week.
Knock wood.
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:09 pmWow, you can get a pot sticker!? Cool ;-D
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
Yeah, it’s a sideline. I sell them to kids at the university. They totally fall for it. :D
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:10 pmRudy’s affiliation with Purdue Frederick (maker of Oxycontin) will tank his campaign and paint him as the total hypocrite that he is. He sat on this board of directors (and still does I believe) knowing that this drug was addictive while he and his cohorts running the company were lying to the people. This is heinous and a horrendous “foreshadowing” of precisely the type of individual whom he is – couple that with his personal complicity in the Bernie Kerik debacle (Guiliani’s law firm typed the bogus application for Kerik’s homeland security job!) and you’ve got another typical “fraud” running for president. We’ve had 6 years of one already – we certainly do not need more of the same.
Check it out….Rudy sits on the board of Purdue Frederick, makers of Oxycontin who knew their drug was addictive and lied to the people about it’s addictability. Then google his underworld affiliations with his best bud, Bernie Kerik – you know the adage: if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck…..you’ve got a duck for sure!
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:10 pmBTW, aside from “God Pissed Over No-Kill Rule”, the Onion article that this thread links to is my favorite.
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:11 pmComment by Mr. President — Why do you write in this wannabe poser ima thug-repug from Compton? That’s an oxymoran, and you look like a fool doing it. I doubt you have any understanding of what it’s like living in a place where the murder rate is twice your IQ.
Comment by JTitor — June 2, 2007 @ 7:50 pm
Sure, I guess you could kinda look at me as a Shakespearean Fool.
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:15 pmComment by Mr. President — Nah. Just a fool.
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:25 pmSure, I guess you could kinda look at me as a Shakespearean Fool.
Comment by Mr. President
I have a question MP, what would Shakey think of Playstation?
Why did not Shakey think of that?
=)
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:25 pmPlaystation
Making a profit from your kids couch potatoness.
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:32 pmSure, I guess you could kinda look at me as a Shakespearean Fool.
Comment by Mr. President
Bloated self-importance much?
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:35 pmJTitor
Ain’t that the truth! Then man went to his daughter’s graduation and she never once even looked at him or spoke to him. Says alot about him as a man that his adult children don’t even speak to him.
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:38 pmIm no conspiracy theorist, but I remember, and watched him say that day that “we were told the building would collapse” that he now denies. What do NYkers say about that one?
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:40 pmI have a question MP, what would Shakey think of Playstation?
Why did not Shakey think of that?
=)
Comment by O’Really — June 2, 2007 @ 8:25 pm
Nah, Shakey loved Playstation. Him and Francis of Verulam were playing (- insert popular playstation game here -) when old Bacon spilled Pepsi on the game, this caused an electrical fire that got out of control, and the next thing you know, the Globe is up in flames.
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:43 pmBloated self-importance much?
Comment by gummitch — June 2, 2007 @ 8:35 pm
Very much so indeed. You have noticed my panache!
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:45 pm“Please…If you don’t work, you don’t eat. Simple, fair, just. What good does it do to hand lazy mofos free money?”
Well, Mr. President, let me tell you. I am a 60 year old woman who was laid off of a high-paying good job almost three years ago. They then hired my assistant to do the job for half the salary. Being a 60 year old woman in a high tech industry made it practically impossible for me to get a job. No one would even talk to me about an office job because I was “overqualified” and no one would talk to me about tech jobs since they were all either going to the young kids right out of college or they were taken by people on H1 visas from India for half the normal salary.
I didn’t work for almost three years. After my unemployment (I’m sure you are against unemployment too, after all it’s “free” money) ran out the only thing that kept me going was my retirement plan. I essentially lived on my retirement money for three years. And now I have that much less to retire on when I can no longer work.
So, don’t give me any of that crap about “don’t work, don’t eat”. There are millions of people in this country who have given up on even looking for a job and they are not counted in the unemployment numbers. If the government ever issued the true unemployment numbers the public would be astonished. Those people, like me, want to work, there just isn’t a job for them to work at.
That’s why I hate most Republics. They attitude is “I got mine and the hell with the rest of you”. That kind of an attitude makes me very sad but it also makes me want something awful to befall those people so they can see what it is like to not have a job and not know where the next meal is coming from.
I would love to go back to the peace and prosperity of the 90’s, thank you very much!
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:53 pmI would love to go back to the peace and prosperity of the 90’s, thank you very much!
Comment by Kate Henry
Well said, Kate. I wish you well.
June 2nd, 2007 at 9:16 pmSo, don’t give me any of that crap about “don’t work, don’t eatâ€. There are millions of people in this country who have given up on even looking for a job and they are not counted in the unemployment numbers. If the government ever issued the true unemployment numbers the public would be astonished. Those people, like me, want to work, there just isn’t a job for them to work at.
Comment by Kate Henry
Well said. I have nothing to add except to agree that people who blame the poor for being poor should burn in Hell if there is one.
June 2nd, 2007 at 9:17 pmKate, your position isn’t unfamiliar to us in the Northwest.
June 2nd, 2007 at 9:23 pmDuring the dot com bust, thousands of senior programmers were laid off, to have their jobs outsourced to India, Pakistan, and then the remainder filled with 20 somethings willing to work 75+ hrs a week for $25,000 a year.
Most businesses took advantage of the bust to clear out the experienced professionals, you know the ones with communications and logic skills.
I was luckier that shit to get my job with my current company and keep it. I love what I do, but I think of myself as the 58 year old exception.
Think Progres: Waiting for an announcement about the Terror plot that was thwarted today. You’ve churned out useless articles while ignoring the biggets story of the day. What a worthless piece of crap website. You’re probably busy trying to find holes in the story. No Bush didn’t stage this one either.
June 2nd, 2007 at 9:42 pmOK, Eric,
You want us all to talk about something that DIDN’T HAPPEN?
What a scoop!
June 2nd, 2007 at 9:49 pm… it’s kinda scary jumping in at 170 comments, but here goes…
just read this from an earlier thread (i’m catching up on today’s reading),
and it seemed profound enough, and certainly relavent to this thread:
Iraq has proven to us that the rich would rather kill than pay taxes. The national debt is not going to be paid back. We’re going to have to live with the consequences, period.
June 2nd, 2007 at 9:50 pmComment by Pitchforks & Torches — June 2, 2007 @ 5:31 pm
…
Sounds to me like a “flip flop” in progress. Funny how in the days before our country went completely batsh*t crazy, the capacity to re-evaluate a situation, to consider new developments and make new assessments of future directions would have been considered a positive quality, especially desirable in those who lead others, potentially to their deaths. But not now; now there’s a cute little phrase thrown out there by the Rovians to demonize virtually every quality that typify a rational, reasonable person who is not dogmatic boot-licker.
June 2nd, 2007 at 9:50 pmComment by Bruce Gorton — June 2, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
looks like the TP filters ate my reply. sigh….
June 2nd, 2007 at 9:51 pmThink Progres: Waiting for an announcement about the Terror plot that was thwarted today. You’ve churned out useless articles while ignoring the biggets story of the day. What a worthless piece of crap website. You’re probably busy trying to find holes in the story. No Bush didn’t stage this one either.
Comment by Eric
Details from the AP, Eric
Despite their efforts, the men never obtained any explosives, authorities said.
“Pulling off any bombing of this magnitude would not be easy in today’s environment,” former U.S. State Department counterterrorism expert Fred Burton said, but added it was difficult to determine without knowing all the facts of the case.
Richard Kuprewicz, a pipeline expert and president of Accufacts Inc., an energy consulting firm that focuses on pipelines and tank farms, said the force of explosion would depend on the amount of fuel under pressure, but it would not travel up and down the line.
“That doesn’t mean wackos out there can’t do damage and cause a fire, but those explosions and fires are going to be fairly restricted,” he said.
Since Defreitas retired from his job at the airport, security has significantly tightened and his knowledge of the operation was severely outdated.
Damn, that was a close one… no explosives, badly outdated information… this one was about as deadly and dangerous as the “Fort Dix Pizza Deliveryman Caper”.
June 2nd, 2007 at 9:53 pmComment by Eric
Oh, good. Eric’s here. Just in time to apologize to TP for claiming they’d failed to cover Cindy Sheehan’s announcement the other day — hours after they’d posted it in the morning.
HEY ERIC: how about that apology?
June 2nd, 2007 at 9:55 pmWayne & Jane
Welcome to the threads
Once again!
:-D
June 2nd, 2007 at 9:59 pmI always thought the female equivalent of “dude” was “dude-ah.”
As in, “Camptown ladies sing this song, dude-ah, dude-ah…”
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:01 pmBesides, if this country were to return to peace & prosperity, the war profiteering would have to stop, along with the superiority of the people. When people are not prosperous, they are more capable of being subjugated.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:06 pm#170 So how does it feel, dear Eric? How do you like the taste of trivialization of what you purport to be “big news”?? We’ve put up with it for 6 very long years and now the tide of public disgust is turning on the sychophantic whoring mainstream media with a vengeance. It’s time you reichwing lockstep neonazis get a taste of your own medicine. You can dish it out but you surely can’t take it.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:08 pmIn the coming days, parallels will be drawn and Rovian will become synonymous with Hitlerian.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:09 pmI always thought the female equivalent of “dude†was “dude-ah.â€
As in, “Camptown ladies sing this song, dude-ah, dude-ah…â€
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
Damn, I’ve been asking people for YEARS what the hell “dude-ah” means. Finally an answer. But isn’t the female of “dude” actually “dudette”?
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:12 pmRegarding the “terrorist plot,” for all of our loss of privacy via warrentless wiretaps and monitoring of the internet, I find this disturbing:
Yet these guys had been communicating about thier plot for months:
The Justice statement said the men began planning the assault on January 6. A complaint alleges that the plot tapped into an international network of Muslim extremists from the United States, Guyana and Trinidad.
And apparently they have been “following us over here for decades:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/06/02/jfk.terror.plot/index.html
Every premise we have been given in support of the loss of civil liberties has proven false with this and the Fort Dix Pizza Deliveryman Plot.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:13 pmActually, veritas, I think Rove will be compared to Goebbels.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:14 pmHey, BnF, nice to see you, too!
As soon as we heard that today’s “terrorist plot” was only in the “planning stages”, we figured that it was just another distraction from all of the administration’s most recent scandals (they’re so hard to keep track of, aren’t they?)
Wayne adds: Hi, Bris! And where does the vice president get off claiming an “executive privilege” even the president doesn’t constitutionally have? Good to see you, too!
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:23 pmWayne adds: Hi, Bris! And where does the vice president get off claiming an “executive privilege†even the president doesn’t constitutionally have? Good to see you, too!
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
Cheney sincerely believes he is the Chancellor and that laws only apply to lesser beings.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:29 pmGummitch,
If the Wilson lawsuit is allowed to go forward, Cheney won’t be able to hide behind any claim of executive privilege because theirs is a civil suit. And if they could force Bill Clinton to testify in a civil suit, they can sure make Cheny do it, too. And Rove!
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:42 pmWhat good does it do to hand lazy mofos free money?
Comment by Mr. President
Indeed, Mr. President. Time to kick Halliburton off the payroll!
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:50 pmComment by Kate Henry — Hi Kate, as a fellow techno-geek I found your blog very interesting, so started doing a little research. You are exactly right. The US has a “real” unemployment rate of 13.3%, and not 5.6% thats portrayed. BLS U3 and BLS U5 are only taken into consideration. But if you factor in BLS U6, EP, EM, ED as shown in the below graph you will get the “real” unemployment rate of 13.3%. There are many articles talking about real unemployment rates by googling as such.
http://homepage.mac.com/careilly/.Public/defacto%20US%20unemployment.jpg
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:08 pmIndeed, Mr. President. Time to kick Halliburton off the payroll!
Comment by the republic of stupidity
Ohhhhh, SNAP!!
:-D
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:13 pmWhat good does it do to hand lazy mofos free money?
Comment by Mr. President
I won’t defend or condemn why Democrats might do it, but maybe the Republicans allow it to continue because they know that eventually, that money is going to make its way into the pockets of a lot of small businessmen. And they believe that to be a good thing.
Just speculatin’. That’s all.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:25 pmWayne,
Executive privilege stems from the President’s authority to conduct foreign relations, as well as his position as Commander-in-Chief. In both such functions, secrecy is sometimes necessary to protect our troops. Thus the doctrine of State Secrets, which is a very powerful defense against all kinds of litigation against a head of state.
The civil suit against Clinton was allowed to proceed because Clinton’s actions allegedly occured before he was President. The court also noted that the civil suit would not be a distraction from his duties as President. We all know how that turned out, which means it is far less likely a court will be willing to go down that path again (no pun intended).
Cheney has extended the “executive privilege” doctrine to the office of the Vice President. Remember, Cheney was successful in preventing disclosure of his Energy Task Force.
However, Courts have been reluctant to grant the State Secrets sheild when it has been raised merely to block investigations into crimes committed by members of the Executive Branch.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:28 pm“Maybe the Republicans allow it to continue because they know that eventually, that money is going to make its way into the pockets of a lot of small businessmen…”
Wayne A. Schneider
Sorry, Wayne, but not a chance. Not to be rude, but Repub greedheads could care less about the small fry. As Mr. Burns once said it so well on the Simpsons, I’m sure all the SOBs currently getting richer, richer, and richest helping BuschCo loot the public coffers would gladly give it all up “for just a little bit more.”
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:42 pmOk. Joke time: What Is Politics?
A little boy goes to his dad and asks, “What is politics?”
Dad says, “Well son, let me try to explain it this way: I’m the breadwinner of the family, so let’s call me capitalism. Your Mom, she’s the administrator of the money, so we’ll call her the Government. We’re here to take care of your needs, so we’ll call you the people. The nanny, we’ll consider her the Working Class. And your baby brother, we’ll call him the Future. Now, think about that and see if that makes sense,”
So the little boy goes off to bed thinking about what dad had said.
Later that night, he hears his baby brother crying, so he gets up to check on him. He finds that the baby has severely soiled his diaper. So the little boy goes to his parents’ room and finds his mother sound asleep. Not wanting to wake her, he goes to the nanny’s room. Finding the door locked, he peeks in the keyhole and sees his father in bed with the nanny. He gives up and goes back to bed. The next morning, the little boy says to his father, “Dad, I think I understand the concept of politics now.”
The father says, “Good son, tell me in your own words what you think politics is all about.”
The little boy replies, “Well, while Capitalism is screwing the Working Class, the Government is sound asleep, the People are being ignored and the Future is in deep poo.”
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:44 pmDid any of you catch Valerie Plame Wilson (along with Paul Krugman, Russell Simmons, and MC Alan Alda) this morning at the NY Book Festival/Expo? I thought that she was very well-spoken and, well, human-sounding. I wish her and Joe all the (good) luck in the world with their civil suit. If they succeed, it could start a break in the dam, because for damn sure other people would start thinking more seriously about bringing these people to account for so many other crimes.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:45 pmGiuliani is a pro-homosexual RINO and a fool. He is running for the wrong nomination.
Rudy, class warfare is behind the D door.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:46 pmDomestic spending has already been cut to the bone, except of course Defense, thanks to your Assrocket President’s little war of choice.
Funny. Defense spending is far smaller than when John Kennedy was President.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:47 pmThe reason why so many Republicans and Libertarians are against taxes, and are therefore against “big governmentâ€, is that the government can, if the people choose, provide a number of services — police and fire protection, military, diplomacy, National Guard, safety inspection, pollution regulation, street maintenance, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. — that the private sector would otherwise have sway over. And the private sector is, at this point in this country, all about bottom-line profit. Period.
All fine. Healthcare, retirement planning, and educating my children are all not part of this list.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:49 pmAll fine. Healthcare, retirement planning, and educating my children are all not part of this list.
Comment by m12
Fortunately, smarter people have realized that the entire community benefits with a healthy educated population.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:59 pmFortunately, smarter people have realized that the entire community benefits with a healthy educated population.
Unfortunately, those “smarter” authoritarians have realized they cannot pay for a healthy educated population themselves and instead force others to do so.
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:07 amFunny. Defense spending is far smaller than when John Kennedy was President.
Comment by m12
Actually, if you look at the graphs linked below this is an inheritance from the Eisenhower administration. The spending your talking about is based on Gross Demestic Product. The GDP was ccomputed differently in 1963 and was much lower. Don’t come in here spewing limbalisms and not think that facts are not going to be checked.
http://www.truthandpolitics.org/military-relative-size.php#gdp-graph
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:08 amUnfortunately, those “smarter†authoritarians have realized they cannot pay for a healthy educated population themselves and instead force others to do so.
Comment by m12
No, the smarter ones realize that there is no “others”. Humans have succeeded because they learned that the community was stronger than individuals. That’s what “civilization” means.
Feel free to move to an island somewhere and look out only for number one.
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:10 amRudy, class warfare is behind the D door.
Comment by m12
F*#k you, M12.
Repubs are the ones engaging in voter caging, gutting the social servies net, running up huge deficits, and shredding the Constitution, all, as Dild O’Reilly said so clearly, to protect the supremacy of the White Christian Patriarchy.
Let me repeat myself, in case you didn’t hear the first time (you might have had your head stuck up your rear end at the time).
F*#k you.
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:12 amBack to the 1990s would be bad? Going back to when our economy was BOOMING. Not in a war. Inflation was low. We had a bloody surplus! And the number of americans on welfare hit their lowest number in 35 years. Now, we’re at an all-time high.
The rich need to take their greedy selfish heads out of their asses.
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:15 am#201
Try to distort the truth as much as you like. You can take any year in the Kennedy/Johnson years, compare it to now, and see that military spending has fallen by any measure you choose to use.
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:16 amNo, the smarter ones realize that there is no “othersâ€. Humans have succeeded because they learned that the community was stronger than individuals. That’s what “civilization†means.
Nonsense. Humans have succeeded because of innovation and effort of the best and brighest of us knowing they will be rewarded for their individual work.
Your utopia collapsed in the late 80s. Sorry!
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:18 amTry to distort the truth as much as you like. You can take any year in the Kennedy/Johnson years, compare it to now, and see that military spending has fallen by any measure you choose to use.
Comment by m12
You’re totally full of crap.
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:20 am#207
If at first you don’t succeed, call someone names again!
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:21 amComment by m12 — So you believe in Ron Paul? Good to see that the trolls are getting back to their paleo-conservative roots and casting away the neo-conservative lies. So your against the war in Iraq? Good. Terrorism is a myth, and the real reasons we are being attacked is due to blowback based on years of oppressive imperealism? Good, I agree. You believe that this administrations billigerent foriegn policy should be dismantled as soon as possible? Good. Agreed there as well. You agree that we should pull all corporate interests from foriegn countries as a way to impede further blowback? Good agreed. See if you were not a Ron Paul supporter, and you were a neo-conservative then anything you say would just be ignored out of idiocy. No one takes neo-conservatives seriously anymore.
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:23 am#209
Why didn’t you mention Ron Paul’s opposition to the Medicare and Social Security pyramid programs, the Department of Education, the Federal Reserve, the Environmental Protection Agency and government ownership of land including ANWR?
Certainly they are as critical to his platform as anything you mentioned.
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:32 amNonsense. Humans have succeeded because of innovation and effort of the best and brighest of us knowing they will be rewarded for their individual work.
Your utopia collapsed in the late 80s. Sorry!
Comment by m12
Nonsense. Humans have succeeded because they banded together, starting with the tribe. Your school of thought, that individual self-interest drives innovation, has been discredited by history itself. It’s just another way of trying to justify selfishness.
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:32 amBriseadh,
You know that I would never claim to understand the law or the constitution as well as you do. But I have read Article II several times now, and nowhere do I see anything even remotely allowing the president to keep the work he does secret. He is, after all, the ultimate public servant. He does not occupy that office for personal gain. (He’s not supposed to, any way.) His first responsibility is to the constitution, and nothing in that document gives him the authority to ignore the will of the Congress and the constitution. I just do not accept that the concept of “executive privilege”, as used and understood today to mean that the president can keep the advice he gets secret from the public, even though advice on matters of public policy is supposed to be inthe public’s best interests, so why shouldn’t we get to hear it?, has any foundation in our constitution. Perhaps as some kind of “carryover” from “common law”, but I don’t see it in our constitution. But I freely admit that I do not have the extensive study, training, and experience that you have. It’s just something I’ve always wanted to understand. Exactly what gives them the right to tell us we have no business knowing what the people talking to them are telling them they should do on our behalf? That’s all I’m saying. I mean, not every single thing discussed with the president involves national security, so that excuse doesn’t hold.
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:32 amTry to distort the truth as much as you like. You can take any year in the Kennedy/Johnson years, compare it to now, and see that military spending has fallen by any measure you choose to use.
Comment by m12
Well we wouldn’t know for 2006 and 2007 because those numbers have been made a National Security Secret.
In Billions:
1961 – 291.1
1962 – 300.0
1963 – 293.3
2004 – 435.6 B
2005 – 429.7 B
http://www.truthandpolitics.org/budget-numbers.php
This is defense spending costs with overlays. 2006 and 2007 not included because we don’t know. The projected increase was projected at 15.1% each year. You do the math. But these numbers aslo do not include the cost of the war. The Iraq war unlike the vietnam war is not included in military spebnding, but is a separate bill. Again you freak of nature keep believing what you want to believe? Stupid is as stupid does.
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:37 am210. Comment by m12 — Actually, Ron Paul wants to do away over a period of time, and that best meets the middle-class means, the Federal government period. He believes in turning all federally controlled programs back to the states with some exceptions (purly constitutional functions). I don’t have an issue with Ron Paul. There are a few things that he needs to ellaborate on. One issue is his a pro-life stance. What he has said publically, is that while he is pro-life he doesn’t believe that the federal government has the right to tell the people of this country what they can, or cannot do. That this is a states rights issues and should be sorted out on a state level. Again, I don’t have an issue. At least I know what I’m getting and not a parody of a president and a party that is imploding before my eyes.
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:51 am212. Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — You are correct. Many presidential signing orders and patriot act I/II later we have Coronel Klink in the Whitehouse, bunkering down, asking himself why everyones so pissed off?
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:58 amNo, the smarter ones realize that there is no “othersâ€. Humans have succeeded because they learned that the community was stronger than individuals. That’s what “civilization†means. Comment by gummitch — June 3, 2007 @ 12:10 am
Nonsense. Humans have succeeded because of innovation and effort of the best and brighest of us knowing they will be rewarded for their individual work. Comment by m12 — June 3, 2007 @ 12:18 am
You both have valid points. Humanity has developed with the synoecism of different peoples of time who shared common values. Aristotle called this a “koinonia” which means something like “a common bond/agreement/understanding” or “shared beliefs” however we translate the koinonia as community. The community is an important aspect of humanity.
Yet some are naturally gifted, and the works of art, philosophy, literature, science, et cetera, which these individuals give to mankind are the driving force of progress.
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:00 amIt’s imperative that we keep the Bush tax cuts, because otherwise we might create disincentives for productive Americans like Paris Hilton to continue creating jobs for nurses in sham rehab clinics.
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:04 amYet some are naturally gifted, and the works of art, philosophy, literature, science, et cetera, which these individuals give to mankind are the driving force of progress.
Comment by Mr. President
Even the naturally gifted can only contribute if the community is healthy, and has the luxury of indulging them in their work.
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:09 amComment by Kate Henry — June 2, 2007 @ 8:53 pm
I am sorry to hear that, however my comment was not directed at those in your situation.
I am saying that those who are lazy expect a free meal-ticket on the govt’s (our) tab. In fact, you legitimate misfortune may not receive the attention you deserve due to abuses in the system. I am sure that you would agree that folks should have to earn their pay?
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:12 amEven the naturally gifted can only contribute if the community is healthy, and has the luxury of indulging them in their work.
Comment by gummitch — June 3, 2007 @ 1:09 am
Very true, they need time for contemplation.
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:13 amWell? That didn’t take long to clear the trolls out. My job is done. Mr. President wishes he could say in his thug-repug unintelligent way.
America, hahaha, we love you, how many people are proud to be citizens of this beautiful country of our’s, the stripes and the stars for the rights that men have died for to protect, the women and men who have broke their neck’s for the freedom of speech the United States government has sworn to uphold, or so we’re told…
Verse 1
Yo’, I want everybody to listen to the words of this song, I never would’ve dreamed in a million years i’d see, so many motherfu@kin’ people who feel like me, who share the same views and the same exact beliefs, it’s like a fu@kin’ army marchin’ in back of me, so many lives I touch, so much anger aimed, in no particular direction, just sprays and sprays, and straight
through your radio waves it plays and plays, ’till it stays stuck in your head for days and days, who would of thought, standing in this mirror bleachin’ my hair, with some peroxide, reachin for a t-shirt to wear, that I would catapult to the forefront of rap like this, how could I predict my words would have an impact like this, I must’ve struck a chord, with somebody
up in the office, cause congress keeps telling me I ain’t causin’ nuthin’ but problems, and now they’re sayin’ i’m in trouble with the government, i’m lovin’ it, I shoveled shit all my life, and now I’m dumping it on…
[CHORUS]
White America, I could be one of your kids, white America, little Eric looks just like this, white America, Erica loves my shit, I go to TRL, look how many hugs I get, white America, I could be one of your kids, white America, little Eric looks just like this, white America, Erica loves my shit, I go to TRL, look how many hugs I get…
Eminem – White America
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:17 amMr. President wishes he could say in his thug-repug unintelligent way.
Comment by JTitor — June 3, 2007 @ 1:17 am
I’m tickled!
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:20 amAnd a cheery goodnight to y’all. I leave you to whatever troll-bashing needs to be done. Baseball was good to me today, even though palms got a little sweaty over the last half hour. It must be bedtime.
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:22 amThe wife and I make 165K + a year, and the fact that someone making more that 200K pays less than us, is just wrong
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:31 amBuck Fush,
I don’t know how far the Republicans got with it, but I know they wanted to eliminate all taxation on unearned income, leaving income taxes to be paid by working people like us. People who get their income purely from investments and dividends and interest on bank and savings accounts would be free from taxation if they had their way. I just hope they didn’t get their way when they had the chance.
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:43 amRudy’s nickname is now “Scoop & Dump.”
Hey, there goes old “Soop & Dump.”
Did you hear what “Scoop & Dump” said?
Good old Rudy “Scoop & Dump” Guiliani.
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:48 amComment by Wayne A. Schneider — June 3, 2007 @ 12:32 am
It’s delineated in a series of supreme court cases…email me, and I can look them up for you out of my Con. Law casebook.
Another interesting read is the Federalist Papers. you can find them online. Congress was seen as the stronger branch of government; a powerful check on the powers of a King.
Washington’s Farewell address cautioned against the rise of political parties….
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:51 amOy, what a discussion.
Look.
Obviously the government needs money to pay for certain things. But which government are you talking about? Police? That’s the state and local govts, except the FBI. Anyway, yes, of course the federal govt has to pay for infrastructure, but does it? Hell no. Railroads and bridges in this country are in shambles. The military sucks up huge amounts of money, but what does it buy? Contractors way overcharge for crap like bombers and fancy equipment that may or may not work. If they get a $200 million contract to develop some fancy weapon or something and it doesn’t work, o well, they get another $200 million to try again.
Please, people who call yourselves progressive and people who call yourselves libertarian, lets get past these misconceptions about how govt is actually run. I think you both want the same thing. Honest and sound governance, but all we have is corruption and theft.
There’s no way to just “cut spending” because the permanent private government can’t just be shut off or voted out. The money firehose feeding these corrupt contractors (most of which are defense) and industries (like pharma) with 1000 lobbyists per congressmen has to be shut off at the source, taxes.
Get rid of the IRS (if you can or dare) and replace it with nothing. No fraud, I mean fair tax. Nothing.
That’s the only way to BEGIN to fix our vastly corrupt system.
June 3rd, 2007 at 2:04 amComment by Alejandro — Agreed. Too long “Party” has been used as a way to pit two suppossed diametric ideologies against each other. The discussion above regarding Ron Paul may be a bridge to start getting people to see that most want the same things in life. And that Ron Paul while being one of the most conservative people on the hill, have very simular views as anyone in this blog (still exceptions). This has been a goal of mine for some time to “preach” that there really isn’t a two party system, only entrenched politicing.
June 3rd, 2007 at 2:21 amMore on Neo-conservatism.
Neo-Conservatism is a product of Leo Strauss, and Leo Strauss was a product of GWF Hegel and Machiavelli. Educated politicians from both parties see things in political philosophies as opposed to real world situations, thus solutions. The Clinton’s have a more Hobbsian view of society, where as securing the individual freedoms, and leaving the achievement of positive freedom or autonomy to the realm of morality and ethics. Where as Hegel from Strauss’s view: “One we realize that out of principles of action having no other support than our blind choice, we really do not beleive in them anymore. We cannot live any more as responsible beings…The more we cultivate reason the more we cultivate nihilism …The inescapable practical consequence of nihilism is fanatical obscurantism.â€
What Strauss is saying is that an independent free society (liberal society) will eventually reject all distinctions in moral or religious value and a willingness to repudiate all previous theories of morality or religious belief, thus a society that cannot be controlled and is destined to fail. Further, as “responsible beings†(The Wise) a “noble lie†can be used to control society for the greater good of the wise few. That the governing body has a duty to do whatever it takes to assure that any information towards this end is held from society. That any means justifies this end. This is critical to understanding neo-conservative belligerence towards national and world policy. Example, Straussian’s would view the 78% of Americans that want to end the war in Iraq as a faction of society not knowing what is in it’s own best interest. So, what is viewed as a belligerent foriegn policy by society, is from a Straussian’s view not important; “a relatively unimportant feature of the systemâ€. Understanding this gives greater insight into why Alberto Gonzales won’t step down. Why invading Iran is imperative to controlling the worlds resources. Straussian’s believe in perpetual war, because through war, and fear, society can be more easily managed.
This has been your Straussian moment. Brought to you by the makers of Colt .45 Malt Liquor: “You’ll Be Sorry For All The Time You Wasted”, “Salem Cigarettes: You Can Take Salem Out Of The Country But… You Might Get Arrested?”, and Alka-Seltzer Antacids: Plop, Plop, Fizz, Fizz…Oh What A Prick He Is…George Bush”. Peace.
June 3rd, 2007 at 2:36 amJTitor, I agree. I don’t agree with everything on Ron Paul’s platform. But I do think he’s honest and would actually DO something to try to fix things. But there’s one thing I’m sure of, and that he’s pretty much the only candidate that both has a chance of winning AND would immediately start to draw down troops in Iraq. Kucinich and Gravel are pretty good too, but I think their chances of winning their party’s nomination are much lower than Paul’s. I love Gravel’s National Initiative idea. I really wish more people would pick up on that.
June 3rd, 2007 at 2:38 amI think the current neocons are actually just plain cons, as in conmen and hopefully, one day convicts, that try to hide their corruption and greed in a cloak of ideology. I don’t think they are really ideologues at all, just poseurs. It’s all about money and power to them, and nothing about the good of society. Leo Strauss would actually hate these people if he could see them in action.
June 3rd, 2007 at 2:45 amComment by Alejandro — Totally agree. Gravel is my candidate of choice. From the political tactician standpoint though, Ron Paul is rock’n the Republican party. Neo-Conservatives tried to hammer him and the polls came back that he won both debates according to likely republican voters. His message is resonating to a ground swell that Democrats are failing to see or choose not to see, and that is the 28 million + 9/11 Truth Movement, and anti-NWO types. Why I bring this up is because both of these “conspiracy” groups have been writen off by the mainstream. The mainstream do not even understand the numbers behind these groups, and Ron Paul is starting too. Well both of these groups are starting to merge and with it, Libertarian, disgruntled, thus converted neo-conservatives and a huge number of liberals. The common motivating factor is Goerge Bush. Here’s another interesting factor in this “fringe movement in politics”. The Evangelical moderates are moving towards the anti-New World Order camp, this is due to their believe that they are living in the end times now. My point is that these fringe groups numbers are huge. The only politician addressing these groups is Ron Paul. The only issue he has right now is the “can he be elected factor”? Thats why his national polling nubers are low, but growing.
June 3rd, 2007 at 3:13 amGiuliani is a typical low-life lying GOPer, and is into wearing women’s undies and bras, so he is a cross-dressing freak too.
June 3rd, 2007 at 5:56 amComment by Alejandro — June 3, 2007 @ 2:04 am
That is why you have to fight to make sure your taxes are spent productively. It is why you do not put up with a do-nothing congress, why you don’t put up with governors who are all show, it is why you vote, and why you don’t always vote one of two parties.
If services aren’t being delivered vote out your current government and get a new one. If the basics aren’t getting done well by either party, vote for another one.
If money is being wasted, vote for someone who will stop it getting wasted.
This is not an issue of shrinking government, or even really of reducing taxes. This is an issue of getting capable administration, which should be apolitical, but in the end, is anti-conservative, as conservatives really do believe in gutting government as a whole, rather then trying to optimise it.
And the optimal government isn’t always the cheapest.
June 3rd, 2007 at 6:58 amDid you know that the Reagan “boom” occurred only after they raised taxes? Apparently, raising taxes causes the economy to boom!
June 3rd, 2007 at 7:18 amThe 90’s aren’t far enough back for the GOP. They want to go back to the 1090’s. As far as the real source of the “plots”, look at the Oil/Weapons/Nuclear/Military/Industrial/Prison/Surveillance/Political/Control complex and Cheney, Bush, Rove, Libby, Cunningham, Gonzales, Griffin, etcetcetcetc. Global Warming? Yes, spraying tons of polymer particulate chemtrails mixed with all sorts of other garbage, and activated with HAARP is raising the temperature, so the “new” “problem” can be “fixed” with trillions of dollars of our red ink. No one is fooled by these sociopathic criminals. The war on terror is a war OF terror by the government for the government on you.
June 3rd, 2007 at 7:54 amExcellent “debate” (I use the word loosely because it’s really the Progressives educating the trolls…), until the trolls ran out of ammunition and began name-calling again… Sheesh. It’s exactly these types of “debates” that caused me to switch sides. Keep it up!
I now understand why the public education system (legislated by politicians who no longer represent We The People, but now Corporate America) fails to teach critical thinking skills – so that the Average American CAN’T connect the dots to see the hypocrisy and contradictions either in the bible that keeps them humble or the politicians that keep them slaves.
June 3rd, 2007 at 9:03 amAnd the optimal government isn’t always the cheapest.
Comment by Bruce Gorton — June 3, 2007 @ 6:58 am
Here’s an analogy the trolls might understand…
Would you rather buy your shoes at Wal-Mart or at Macy’s? Why? Because the cheap pair of shoes give you blisters, make you cranky, is just uncomfortable and you actually wind up spending more money to keep replacing them more often.
Morale of the story: Quality over Quantity is preferable when it comes to shoes and politicians…
June 3rd, 2007 at 9:08 amWe cannot afford these Tax cuts with Democrat hide in the dark earmarks WASHINGTON (AP) – After promising unprecedented openness regarding Congress’ pork barrel practices, House Democrats are moving in the opposite direction as they draw up spending bills for the upcoming budget year.
Democrats are sidestepping rules approved their first day in power in January to clearly identify “earmarks” – lawmakers’ requests for specific projects and contracts for their states.
Rather than including specific pet projects, grants and contracts in legislation as it is being written, Democrats are following an order by the House Appropriations Committee chairman to keep the bills free of such earmarks until it is too late for critics to effectively challenge them.
Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., says those requests for dams, community grants and research contracts for favored universities or hospitals will be added to spending measures in the fall. That is when House and Senate negotiators assemble final bills.
Such requests total billions of dollars.
As a result, most lawmakers will not get a chance to oppose specific projects as wasteful or questionable when the spending bills for various agencies get their first votes in the full House in June.
The House-Senate compromise bills due for final action in September cannot be amended and are subject to only one hour of debate, precluding challenges to individual projects.
Obey insists he is reluctantly taking the step because Appropriations Committee members and staff have not had enough time to fully review the 36,000 earmark requests that have flooded the committee.
What Obey is doing runs counter to new rules that Democrats promised would make such spending decisions more open.
June 3rd, 2007 at 9:12 amunbelievable I have a question , why do you Liberals now call yourself ” Progressive ” ? You are Liberal in thought and deed as I am Conservative. You Complain about name calling in the same posting that you call me a troll . why is that ?
June 3rd, 2007 at 9:18 amKevin
June 3rd, 2007 at 9:28 amI applaud you on your intellect , being that the unemployement indicators are showing a lower unemployment rate than when Clinton was in office . the stock market that fuels your or your Parents 401k has never been higher . Remember the ” Its the economy stupid ” campaign Slogan of Liberals in 96 ? But you are right we need another leader like Clinton to unite this country again like it was after 9-11. I think that an attacks on this country every 2 years as when Bill Clinton was in office may do the trick. Hard on Bush , Soft on Terror Democrats 08
unbelievable I have a question
So do I… What happened to my second post? There was no reason to delete it. I didn’t even swear… Jesus…
why do you Liberals now call yourself †Progressive †?
We’re not. Progressive is a term that included Moderates and forward thinking mild conservatives who oppose the neocons.
You are Liberal in thought and deed as I am Conservative.
Personally, yes I am. But, not everyone here considers themselves both Progressive and Liberal. Some Progressives are not liberals. Know Spudge Boy? He’s called himself a Progressive Moderate. Clear?
You Complain about name calling in the same posting that you call me a troll . why is that ?
Comment by Harry Truman — June 3, 2007 @ 9:18 am
Troll isn’t name calling, it’s an Internet slang for someone who visits sites of opposition with the purpose of flaming.
June 3rd, 2007 at 10:06 amComment by Harry Truman — June 3, 2007 @ 9:18 am
Calling us “You Liberals” is not name-calling?
Please don’t deny it, HT, “liberal” is the dirtiest word out there, according the the right.
June 3rd, 2007 at 10:07 amI applaud you on your intellect , being that the unemployement indicators are showing a lower unemployment rate than when Clinton was in office.
They aren’t lower if you use the same statistical data gathering that was used during the Clinton Presidency, that counted all teh unemployed, not just a selection of them. The statistical data gathering used by the Bush Regime ignores everyone but those within the 6 month window of collecting unemployment insurance. This includes those whose benefits have expired, those who were not eligible to receive them, and students.
the stock market that fuels your or your Parents 401k has never been higher .
The stock market only measures the wealth of those who have it. It is not the measure of our economy in general.
It is simply proof that the rich are getting richer, which we already knew.
Remember the †Its the economy stupid †campaign Slogan of Liberals in 96 ? But you are right we need another leader like Clinton to unite this country again like it was after 9-11.
The country was united after 9/11 for about a month – if that – when we recognized that the attack wasn’t against either party, but all of us collectively.
Since 9/11, when Bush invaded Iraq, the country has been divided more than it has since the Civil War. In fact, many cases have been made that another Civil War here is possible if things continue down this path.
I think that an attacks on this country every 2 years as when Bill Clinton was in office may do the trick. Hard on Bush , Soft on Terror Democrats 08
Comment by Harry Truman — June 3, 2007 @ 9:28 am
You’re so removed from reality, it’s no wonder that your post contained not a single reality-based fact.
Osama attacked on Bush’s watch, not Clinton’s. He wasn’t willing to attack during Clintons. Not that the Republican controlled Congress was supporting his plans for capturing Osama anyway. 9/11 was a Republican blunder. Deal with it.
June 3rd, 2007 at 10:16 amPlease don’t deny it, HT, “liberal†is the dirtiest word out there, according the the right.
Comment by Zooey
And since I don’t believe there’s any such thing as a “dirty word”, I’m proud to call myself a “Liberal.” When one thinks of all the advances that came about in our society thanks to the efforts of liberals (against the opposition of conservatives), one can’t help but feel those opposed to us just don’t care about people.
June 3rd, 2007 at 10:18 amPlease don’t deny it, HT, “liberal†is the dirtiest word out there, according the the right.
Comment by Zooey — June 3, 2007 @ 10:07 am
Not they are much of a reference source for facts… Sheesh.
June 3rd, 2007 at 10:18 amExcellent post Wayne!
I have been reading Geoge Latkof’s book “Don’t think of an Elephant”, and it explains the conservative mindset. You’re right – they don’t care about all people – just people they deem to be ‘good’ (who are those with $$$ because they erroneously believe that the only route to wealth is through hardwork, while ignoring trust-fund brats like Paris Hilton).
June 3rd, 2007 at 10:23 amHarry Truman
It is because you anti-science anti-truth anti-intellectual conservatives turned liberal, into a swear word. You smeared it with so much of your own shit that the word ceased to hold its dictionary meaning.
And after you guys accused us of being anti-values, anti-family, anti-American, anti-soldier and pro-big-government you then went on to:
Championed torture, sent America’s into an elective war and then slimed the families which objected to this, cut veterins benefits, and expanded America’s governments powers over its population by getting rid of habeas corpus.
Take a look at what Ann Coulter had to say about the widows of 9/11 and tell me that you are pro-family.
While you claimed to be the party of personal responsibility I have yet to see a rightwinger put any responsibility whatsoever for 9/11 on GW Bush the then sitting president – instead you give us a steady stream of blame laying on the previous administration that hadn’t been in power for 9 months.
While we honoured not politicising it at the outset you guys set about waving those corpses like they were your personal banner of success to pardon all of your sins. You want to know why so many Americans think GW Bush was behind 9/11? Look at how thoroughly he and his party celebrated those deaths like they were some kind of achievement.
Now years have gone past and we have to argue about it because you still wave those corpses around like a victorious banner. You talk about being the party for life when you talk about abortion, when you talk about anybody who has been born I only see hearse chasers.
While you claim to have a work ethic, we have seen your president take more leave then any president previous to him. We saw how little he knew during Katrina, so don’t lie to us about his ranch being a second Whitehouse.
We call ourselves progressives because the movement which was liberal was slimed so that you conservatives could take power and screw America up so thoroughly that what was once a world authority on moral behaviour is now used as an excuse by guys like Robert Mugabe when their thugs torture their opposition.
It is so bad that there is a serious movement away from having an American as head of the world bank. There is even talk of the third world forming an alternate bank and telling the first world where to get off.
June 3rd, 2007 at 10:30 amunbelievable
Also the stock market in America isn’t doing that well. Adjust for inflation and you will find it is actually lower then when Clinton was in charge.
June 3rd, 2007 at 10:35 am#213
Now kindly compare those numbers to the size of GDP and the size of entitlement spending.
June 3rd, 2007 at 11:14 amI don’t know how far the Republicans got with it, but I know they wanted to eliminate all taxation on unearned income, leaving income taxes to be paid by working people like us. People who get their income purely from investments and dividends and interest on bank and savings accounts would be free from taxation if they had their way. I just hope they didn’t get their way when they had the chance.
They arne’t free from taxation. The corporation pays taxes on its income before dividends are distributed.
June 3rd, 2007 at 11:16 amI tried, but the students complained to the administration, and my unit on persuasive essay was going beyond the adopted curriculum, so I had to discontinue it.
June 3rd, 2007 at 11:28 amLet’s please, go back to 1965 economic policy:
Government spending at 17.2% of GDP, compared to 19.9% in 2003.
Defense spending at 7.4% of GDP, compared to 3.7% in 2003, plus another 1% in Iraq Supplementals.
Medicare did not exist.
Medicaid did not exist.
Social Security at 2.5% of GDP, compared to 4.3% in 2003.
Can Hillary take us back to 1965? I might vote for her!
June 3rd, 2007 at 11:30 amthat is utter crap
idiots are running the WH and they have all these lobotomized followers who can’t think one independant thought. You remind me of an old horse I had who was barn sour. Stuck his nose up the ass of the horse ahead of him and headed home.
when are you all going to start with the raised hand salutes?
June 3rd, 2007 at 11:48 amclick your heels locksteppers
Also the stock market in America isn’t doing that well. Adjust for inflation and you will find it is actually lower then when Clinton was in charge.
Comment by Bruce Gorton — June 3, 2007 @ 10:35 am
Good point. I have a friend whose sn is graduating from college and moving home so he can afford to go to graduate school. In America, it’s no longer taboo for families to live together longer because they can’t afford not to…
I know I keep sounding like a broken record – but I love your posts. The one prior to this sounded like something someone historical (in a postive way) would say. Too bad you don’t like here – I’d vote for you. :D
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:23 pmI tried, but the students complained to the administration, and my unit on persuasive essay was going beyond the adopted curriculum, so I had to discontinue it.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — June 3, 2007 @ 11:28 am
And you live in California. WTF?
I’ve been more subversive about teaching them anything that isn’t ‘be obedient’, because I knew I was living in a red state that would freak out if I were obvious about it. But it doesn’t stop me from being a threat to Administration either. I’ve decided to go after power myself now and fight them from a different angle. But who knows. The education system has been so corrupted by the right that I don’t if we can do anything. But I’m planning to try.
Have you ever thought about running for the School Board, or local office so you can build a base, and then implement a different standard? Around here, it seems that if you are a bad at your job or sleep with a student you get promoted to a $100K job at the Taj Mahal (the BOE office)…
June 3rd, 2007 at 12:30 pmThey arne’t free from taxation. The corporation pays taxes on its income before dividends are distributed.
Comment by m12
Not really. Corporations, especially the big ones, don’t pay nearly the amount in taxes that they should. And if the opponents of liberals had their way, corporations would pay no taxes at all.
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:16 pmNot really. Corporations, especially the big ones, don’t pay nearly the amount in taxes that they should. And if the opponents of liberals had their way, corporations would pay no taxes at all.
That’s odd. Our 35% tax rate is one of the highest in the world, and that doesn’t even count the tax on dividends.
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:25 pmUnemployment is at 4.5%. For those who graduated from college, unemployment is 1.8%.
Wages are up.
Interest rates are low.
Inflation is low.
The SP500 closed last week at an all-time high.
Conclusion: The Bush tax cuts have obviously worked. Anyone who says otherwise must be very stupid.
June 3rd, 2007 at 1:37 pmExcellent “debate†(I use the word loosely because it’s really the Progressives educating the trolls…), until the trolls ran out of ammunition and began name-calling again… Sheesh. It’s exactly these types of “debates†that caused me to switch sides. Keep it up!
I now understand why the public education system (legislated by politicians who no longer represent We The People, but now Corporate America) fails to teach critical thinking skills – so that the Average American CAN’T connect the dots to see the hypocrisy and contradictions either in the bible that keeps them humble or the politicians that keep them slaves.
Comment by unbelievable — June 3, 2007 @ 9:03 am
What are talking about?
I was tellin’ it like it is, then people started talking about watching movies and “the tubes” and stupid shit. They cut and ran right out of the discussion, then some lady had an emotional breakdown, then Jtitor started babbling about The Owl of Minerva and shit, nuncle.
June 3rd, 2007 at 2:09 pmmuckdog
America’s foreign debt is up.
Its deficit with China is at historic levels.
Poverty rate amongst Americans is up.
Average American indebtedness is up.
Anyone who says that the Bush tax cuts have worked, is a total moron. Particularly if they try quoting unemployment figures which have already been mentioned as being based only on those gaining benefits, not on the total number of unemployed.
June 3rd, 2007 at 2:10 pmWhat’s astounding is the the RED STATES take more money from the federal government than they pay in, whereas the BLUE STATES put more into the federal government than they receive. Again, it’s the Liberals who have to bail out the conservatives. LOL!
June 3rd, 2007 at 3:27 pmI’ve thought about it. But implementing a different standard is not possible at the school board level. In my area, the schools are all at or getting close to State intervention.
I’ve been more subversive about teaching them anything that isn’t ‘be obedient’, because I knew I was living in a red state that would freak out if I were obvious about it. But it doesn’t stop me from being a threat to Administration either.
Just be careful, or you might need to call someone like me.
When my district denied my leave, causing me to miss on an opportunity to work for a law firm, I decided to open a solo practice part time, focusing on education, employment and labor law issues.
June 3rd, 2007 at 3:44 pmBruce Gorton, I’m sorry you’re unemployed and not making any money. I’m sorry you’re living in a cardboard box on the side of the road. Maybe if you didn’t drop out of high school, you’d have a better life. Your choices determined your outcome. Sorry if you made bad choices.
I don’t buy into the conspiracy crap about how the “numbers aren’t really the numbers.” It’s total hogwash, and if you had graduated from high school and went to college, you’d know it.
June 3rd, 2007 at 4:19 pmSorry, muckdog, but Bruce Gorton is right about the unemployment numbers. They only count people receiving benefits and not those who are still unemployed but not collecting benefits. It’s one of a thousand little deceptions this administration (along with previous ones) does to fool people into believeing they are competent. Yes, every administration does it some some degree, but not to the level that the Bushies have done it. In short, it has become virtually impossible to know if you should really believe any thing they say any more. I truly fear a genuine, earth-threatening crisis coming along while these people are in power, because I really wouldn’t know if I should believe them or not.
Like it or not, more people are unemployed than our government wants you to believe. They also want you to believe they are more competent thasn they really are.
June 3rd, 2007 at 4:29 pmmuckdog
You have lost the argument for yourself already by resorting to ad-hominem attacks.
Further, as I am happily employed, you might wish to take your sympathy elsewhere, perhaps to the man in your mirror.
June 3rd, 2007 at 4:42 pmLet me guess… You’re using the liberal talking points ratio of employment vs. population? That’s flawed because a lot of people choose not to work for various reasons. That’s why most go with the BLS numbers. They’re the most accurate.
I suspected you were “happily employed,” Bruce. Pretty much everyone is. I suppose you are worried about “other people who are unemployed” that nobody can seem to identify.
Same to you, Wayne.
Instead of memorizing liberal talking points, why not read the data and make up your own minds?
June 3rd, 2007 at 6:03 pmWhat’s astounding is the the RED STATES take more money from the federal government than they pay in, whereas the BLUE STATES put more into the federal government than they receive. Again, it’s the Liberals who have to bail out the conservatives. LOL!
That’s a result of your tax policy. What is so astounding about it?
June 3rd, 2007 at 6:08 pmYou rip Rudy while the Congress is raising taxes on kids!
June 3rd, 2007 at 8:03 pmI’ve thought about it. But implementing a different standard is not possible at the school board level. In my area, the schools are all at or getting close to State intervention.
So then DOE? Politics? Your own firm representing teacher’s unions?
Just be careful, or you might need to call someone like me.
Oh, I already do. I’m documenting everything, and have a friend who just left the school for being considered insubordinate and harrassed all of last year (she had a prior relationship with our direct supervisor who has a history in the county for being a tyrannical dictator). And my friend is a Conservative Republican Christian, so that’s saying a lot. At the end of next school year, after I’ve left too, we’re going to start attending board meetings and telling our story. By then, we the tax payers will have the upper hand, and hopefully be able to prevent such behavior against future students and teachers.
When my district denied my leave, causing me to miss on an opportunity to work for a law firm, I decided to open a solo practice part time, focusing on education, employment and labor law issues.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — June 3, 2007 @ 3:44 pm
Why wouldn’t they release you from your contract? I’m so glad I don’t have one.
Combined with the teacher’s unions in California, I bet you’ll have plenty of opportunity there to help inact a change in that platform as an attorney. Affordable council will help so many underpaid teachers stand up to the bully Administration. Good for you!
We had to fill out a Georgia BOE survey, because they want to know how to fix the teaching shortage problem. They can’t control parents, but I told them that if they fixed the Administration problem (support the TEACHERS), there wouldn’t be such a huge teacher shortage problem…
It’s just so blatant, and no one seems to care. Teachers just leave the profession quietly, and the ones remaining are the ones who can’t do anything else, or teach for that matter.
June 3rd, 2007 at 8:12 pmInstead of memorizing liberal talking points, why not read the data and make up your own minds?
Comment by muckdog — June 3, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
Let’s see, insults, lies and straw men… That all you have?
Yeah, we thought so.
You can do your own research (unless you are too lazy or too stupid) and discover what we know for yourself. Because, there are no liberal talking points, we just happen to all arrive at the same conclusion, after examining the facts, because we examined the facts. Reality has a liberal bias…
June 3rd, 2007 at 8:20 pmWhat’s astounding is the the RED STATES take more money from the federal government than they pay in, whereas the BLUE STATES put more into the federal government than they receive. Again, it’s the Liberals who have to bail out the conservatives. LOL!
That’s a result of your tax policy. What is so astounding about it?
Comment by m12
After 6 yrs, I’d think it safe to say it’s the result of BUSH’S tax policy.
June 3rd, 2007 at 8:40 pmAfter 6 yrs, I’d think it safe to say it’s the result of BUSH’S tax policy.
Actually, it isn’t. Bush didn’t change a whole lot about the tax scheme. Clinton’s Medicare tax, his AMT tax, Roosevelt’s Social Security tax, and the 16th amendment all still exist.
June 3rd, 2007 at 9:13 pmYou can do your own research (unless you are too lazy or too stupid) and discover what we know for yourself. Because, there are no liberal talking points, we just happen to all arrive at the same conclusion,
Comment by unbelievable
When you’ve memorized your opinion and that’s all you have, then you’re a Shallow Hal. I don’t really care what your first point is because like Rosie O’Donnell, it’s nothing original. It’s just memorized puke from Daily Kos. I want to hear your second point because that’s when you’re on your own and that’s when you find out that those talking points may have some pretty serious holes in them.
In addition to the BLS stats, which are real, I have real world anecdotal observances that confirm the tight information technology labor market. I remember folks being fired from 2000-2 during the dot com burst. Some were unemployed for awhile or took jobs doing something else. They took a pay hit for awhile.
But now, these folks are not only employed, but are now receiving offers with huge perks and salary bumps. They’ve been dollar-cost averaging into their stock funds and have more retirement and savings now than they did in late 1999 and early 2000. Their homes have appreciated. And this is the case for most Americans. Prosperity has been on the march.
If you want to focus on how conditions are for high school dropouts and illegal immigrants, I think that’s the wrong focus. We have to make sure opportunity exists for those who are seeking it. We can bend over backwards for those not seeking it, but we’ll never make any headway there.
June 3rd, 2007 at 9:38 pmMuckdog I have a question? How will we pay for the deficit? Because it’s not getting smaller… it’s getting bigger. Maybe I’m just simple, but it seems logical to me to pay for that with taxes… and yet again, maybe this is just me being simple, but wasn’t the economy doing okay BEFORE Bush came into office? Did he save us from himself?
More importantly, I think that America has always been about an equal opportunity for everyone. In the past that has mainly manifested itself in free education, which is important, so it can allow people to make money based on their efforts and not just who their parents are. Today, I think it is more than that. Look at healthcare, middle class Americans can’t pay for the medical practices needed to survive things like cancer. Whether they have worked hard or not it is just too expensive for individuals to bear… but collectively it isn’t that bad.
Also, I personally support trying to create better opportunities worldwide. With 19 billion dollars spent to give people food (advancing one of the Millennium Development Goals) everyone could eat. Better rates of nutrition leads to healthier people and more productivity in other countries. Why should other countries matter to us? For lots of reasons.
June 3rd, 2007 at 11:10 pm1. We rely on other countries to produce goods, and instability worldwide hurts us.
2. We are all humans, and it’s not a poor person in Africa (or Asia or wherever)’s fault they are starving. It is disgusting to me to believe that so many people just don’t care.
3. Instability can lead to wars and terrorism. If we can create better environments to live elsewhere, then people won’t look at us w/ red eyes of jealousy.
Comment by dave — June 3, 2007 @ 11:10 pm
Good post, dave. I like your humanist views, too. Much like my own.
I would simply add that it has long been my view that the problem with healthcare in this country is not that it costs so much, it’s that they charge so much. I believe strongly that healthcare is a field which should be driven by altruism, not capitalism. The idea of trying to maximize profits of the sick and dying backs of the sick and dying is inhuman. But that’s probably just me.
June 3rd, 2007 at 11:54 pmCorrection: The idea of trying to maximize profits off the sick and dying backs of the sick and dying is inhuman.
Perhaps if I wasn’t trying to be so fancy with my wordplay, I might have noticed I got it wrong. WIll I learn? I doubt it.
June 3rd, 2007 at 11:57 pmDave: wasn’t the economy doing okay BEFORE Bush came into office?
No, the stock market entered a bear market in early 2000 during Clinton’s last year as businesses began to collapse. Remember the pets.com sock puppet? Companies began to fire folks and this showed up in the first quarter 2001 GDP. And how do we pay for deficits? Economic growth. A growing economy produces growing tax revenues. Unfortunately, both Bush and Congress have been spending too much.
In your comments regarding controlling health care costs and making it “free,” do you support wage caps for doctors and nurses? In your view, would a company like Wal-Mart taking over the health care industry provide the lower costs that you seek?
My view is that if we provide free access to those who cannot afford it, existing costs will rise exponentially. The liberals argue that it would cost less because of preventative care. But I think this is wrong, because of simple economics 101: Supply and demand. The supply of doctors, nurses, and facilities would not rise. But demand for those services would.
June 4th, 2007 at 12:21 amThank you for the correction of the stock market muckdog.
June 4th, 2007 at 1:31 amOn the Bush and Congress spending too much, I’m not sure how that can be changed. The rules give and take rules that were re-implemented should help this year, but as long as we are a world hegemon, we will need a huge budget.
Why wouldn’t preventative care cost less? Much of preventative care doesn’t involve costly surgeries, but just taking the medicine necessary to prevent people from getting sick. For example, some hospitals have started giving poor patients with diabetes free medicine, because it is cheaper than waiting until that person is sick. It also would decrease the demand for emergency and in-patient care.
In the end though, I would rather have costs rise then have people die unnecessarily. I understand that there needs to be incentives for people to work, but I also think that there needs to be a safety net. And if you think that adults should pay for their actions, what about their kids? Should they pay for their parents mistakes?
I don’t know much about caps on wages for doctors and nurses, but I do know that the most vocal proponents of Universal health care that I know are doctors. Even healthcare companies want universal healthcare.
On caps, sure it has turned out badly for Canada… but that’s partially our fault. Canadian doctors can easily choose to come work in the US at much higher wages. Not sure exactly what the solution is, but our system as it is now has chased many doctors out of private practice because of rising insurance fees and such.
Wayne- thanks, and the wordplay was rather cleverly put together in my opinion.
June 4th, 2007 at 1:36 amDave, nobody knows what the solution is. If “free” health care is offered, then there will be a dramatic rise in costs. Especially if the illegal immigrant amnesty passes. Family and friends will be coming over and getting free health care, too. Could be at least 40 million undocumented additions to health care.
And somebody’s premiums will have to cover that.
(Not even including the costs of uninsured Americans. Add that to the total, too).
I think a ball park estimate for universal health care would be what we’re paying today multiplied by 500%.
June 4th, 2007 at 1:51 amand yet again, maybe this is just me being simple, but wasn’t the economy doing okay BEFORE Bush came into office?
3rd quarter GDP growth in 2000 was negative, so no.
June 4th, 2007 at 10:39 amI would simply add that it has long been my view that the problem with healthcare in this country is not that it costs so much, it’s that they charge so much. I believe strongly that healthcare is a field which should be driven by altruism, not capitalism. The idea of trying to maximize profits of the sick and dying backs of the sick and dying is inhuman. But that’s probably just me.
Well, that’s really damn easy to say when its not your money, your labor, your time, your efforts, and your patents all getting trampled on by forced ‘altruism’.
June 4th, 2007 at 10:41 ammuckdog
Give us a demonstration. Name a first world country, where you have public healthcare, where that healthcare costs more per capita then the US.
Also, you can’t fight the fact that even in a bull run your stockmarket isn’t in such a hot position. Your large-cap companies may be doing well but the market as a whole isn’t – when you consider the world is in a China sponsored bull run.
Further the market as a whole still hasn’t recovered to where Clinton left it, if you adjust for inflation. Taking the S&P500 which measures large-cap companies isn’t entirely representative.
m12
Except that dave likely pays taxes too, and as an American it is his money. It is what you conservatives don’t seem to realise – the government of America belongs to the American people.
June 4th, 2007 at 12:35 pm3rd quarter GDP growth in 2000 was negative, so no.
Comment by m12 — June 4, 2007 @ 10:39 am
Which is to be expected just before you go into a change in governments, when one of the candidates doesn’t even try to sound bright.
Also, the Republican party paralyzed America’s government with their basic fascination with Clinton’s dick over Clinton’s last two years. That sort of thing has an effect.
June 4th, 2007 at 12:39 pm