southsider2k5 Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 23, 2010 -> 02:25 PM) perhaps one side believes we shouldn't vilify muslims for merely being muslim. Not for being Muslim, but to win re-election. There is a huge difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 progressive base wouldn't stand for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Compassionate conservatism... Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer has compared giving people government assistance to "feeding stray animals." Bauer, who is running for the Republican nomination for governor, made his remarks during a town hall meeting in Fountain Inn that included state lawmakers and about 115 residents. "My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed. You're facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don't think too much further than that. And so what you've got to do is you've got to curtail that type of behavior. They don't know any better," Bauer said. In South Carolina, 58 percent of students participate in the free and reduced-price lunch program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 God that's despicable. However I would like to get into the free lunch program. I don't understand why we don't make it healthy foods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 23, 2010 -> 10:31 AM) Honestly it is much easier to manipulate peoples xenophobia's and racism than anything. If you start screaming about non-white, non-American's being behind something, there will be enough of the population who will be upset by it. Besides, it is not like foreign powers trying to manipulate our politics would even be new. as compared to countries that like it when other countries meddle in their affairs? By your definition the vast majority of the global population are xenophobes. But that is probably true. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 "I'm sorry your honor, I'm afraid I can't serve this year, the Constitution requires me to address Congress on the State of the Union." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 typical elitist liberal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 I'm still waiting for a single Republican to articulate a clear vision for the country. It's quite easy to say no and be obstructionist, it worked in 1994 and 1995 for the GOP as well, but eventually the newly-elected representatives and Senators and governors will be expected to accomplish something that actually improves the lives of a majority of Americans. Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Waxman, Frank, Baucus, Nelson, etc., have obviously failed that test so far. However, I would love to hear a GOP platform of new/creative ideas that doesn't involve simply lowering taxes for the richest Americans and for corporations, getting rid of the Department of Education, stopping "judicial activism" and supporting traditional marriage, etc. Do Republicans really believe there isn't a health care problem in the US and/or that nothing should be done about it? Do Republicans really have no concern about the environment, global warming or the future over-polluted world their grandchildren and great-grandchildren will inherit? Do Republicans have any ideas for ending our dependence on foreign oil? For funding Medicare and Social Security for the next 50 years? It's easy to say "no" or complain or say what's wrong with the other side, but at some point, there needs to be a leg for them to stand on. Because I think we tried that approach (cutting taxes, capital gains, estate taxes, business taxes) for eight years and it didn't work very well....trickle down became more like a "drip, drip." With the new election financial contribution rules coming into play, I can just see a re-run of the Gore/Bush election in 2000, with the Democrats deciding to fight a do-or-die "populist" war against the GOP. By the way, for all those who don't believe Obama is a US citizen or that he was born out of wedlock, what's your strategy for getting us out of Iran/Iraq and Afghanistan/Pakistan? How is it any different than the current strategy of the administration? I'll be laughing in 2012 when the Tea Party is running someone like Sarah Palin or their new darling, the Penthouse Senator of the Month from Massachusetts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2010 -> 10:16 AM) So, if someone were to point out that Prince Bin-Talal owns 8% of newscorp, you think that'd make people stop watching, or question why that network's official policy is that there's no such thing as climate change? Somehow, I doubt it. I also don't think that nifty documentary about battery operated/electric cars will be making it onto the schedule of any Fox affiliates, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Love this quote Sullivan just put up: ""Do not depend on the hope of results. When you are doing the sort of work you have taken on, essentially an apostolic work, you may have to face the fact that your work will be apparently worthless and even achieve no result at all, if not perhaps results opposite to what you expect. As you get used to this idea, you start more and more to concentrate not on the results but on the value, the rightness, the truth of the work itself," - Thomas Merton, "Letter To A Young Activist"" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 For once, I finally agree with Rush Limbaugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 25, 2010 -> 11:15 AM) For once, I finally agree with Rush Limbaugh. Wow, harsh. Well-deserved, but harsh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 This could easily be from the Onion... Sarah Palin to be interviewed by Sarah Palin Radio, and "independent" radio program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Gotta love the hypocrisy of Fox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 25, 2010 -> 06:47 AM) I'm still waiting for a single Republican to articulate a clear vision for the country. It's quite easy to say no and be obstructionist, it worked in 1994 and 1995 for the GOP as well, but eventually the newly-elected representatives and Senators and governors will be expected to accomplish something that actually improves the lives of a majority of Americans. Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Waxman, Frank, Baucus, Nelson, etc., have obviously failed that test so far. However, I would love to hear a GOP platform of new/creative ideas that doesn't involve simply lowering taxes for the richest Americans and for corporations, getting rid of the Department of Education, stopping "judicial activism" and supporting traditional marriage, etc. Do Republicans really believe there isn't a health care problem in the US and/or that nothing should be done about it? Do Republicans really have no concern about the environment, global warming or the future over-polluted world their grandchildren and great-grandchildren will inherit? Do Republicans have any ideas for ending our dependence on foreign oil? For funding Medicare and Social Security for the next 50 years? It's easy to say "no" or complain or say what's wrong with the other side, but at some point, there needs to be a leg for them to stand on. Because I think we tried that approach (cutting taxes, capital gains, estate taxes, business taxes) for eight years and it didn't work very well....trickle down became more like a "drip, drip." With the new election financial contribution rules coming into play, I can just see a re-run of the Gore/Bush election in 2000, with the Democrats deciding to fight a do-or-die "populist" war against the GOP. By the way, for all those who don't believe Obama is a US citizen or that he was born out of wedlock, what's your strategy for getting us out of Iran/Iraq and Afghanistan/Pakistan? How is it any different than the current strategy of the administration? I'll be laughing in 2012 when the Tea Party is running someone like Sarah Palin or their new darling, the Penthouse Senator of the Month from Massachusetts. The republicans are just as stupid as the democrats. I leave you with one of the greatest explanations of our political system...ever. "The only thing dumber than a Democrat or a Republican is when those pricks work together. You see, in our two-party system, the Democrats are the party of no ideas and the Republicans are the party of bad ideas. It usually goes something like this: A Republican will stand up in Congress and say, "I've got a really bad idea." And a Democrat will immediately jump to his feet and declare, 'And I can make it s***tier!'" - Lewis Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 Since this is more my thread and since blogs are forbidden in the other thread, I'll post this here, best "Spending freeze" commentary I've read. There are two ways to look at this. The first is that this is simply another game of Dingbat Kabuki. Non-security discretionary spending is some $500 billion a year. It ought to be growing at 5% per year in nominal terms (more because we are in a deep recession and should be pulling discretionary spending forward from the future as fast as we can)--that's only $25 billion a year in a $3 trillion budget and a $15 trillion economy. But in a country as big as this one even this is large stakes. What we are talking about is $25 billion of fiscal drag in 2011, $50 billion in 2012, and $75 billion in 2013. By 2013 things will hopefully be better enough that the Federal Reserve will be raising interest rates and will be able to offset the damage to employment and output. But in 2011 GDP will be lower by $35 billion--employment lower by 350,000 or so--and in 2012 GDP will be lower by $70 billion--employment lower by 700,000 or so--than it would have been had non-defense discretionary grown at its normal rate. (And if you think, as I do, that the federal government really ought to be filling state budget deficit gaps over the next two years to the tune of $200 billion per year...) And what do we get for these larger output gaps and higher unemployment rates in 2011 and 2012? Obama "signal his seriousness about cutting the budget deficit," Jackie Calmes reports. As one deficit-hawk journalist of my acquaintance says this evening, this is a perfect example of fundamental unseriousness: rather than make proposals that will actually tackle the long-term deficit--either through future tax increases triggered by excessive deficits or through future entitlement spending caps triggered by excessive deficits--come up with a proposal that does short-term harm to the economy without tackling the deficit in any serious and significant way. As Jackie Calmes writes, this isn't a real plan to control the deficit but a "symbolic" one. ... As another deficit-hawk points out: it would be one thing to offer a short-term discretionary spending freeze (or long-run entitlement caps) in return for fifteen Republican senators signing on to revenue enhancement triggers. It's quite another to negotiate against yourself and in addition attack employment in the short term. The fact that the unemployment rate is projected to remain stable over the next year means that there is a 30% chance it will go down, a 40% chance it will stay about the same, and a 30% chance that it will go up--and whatever it turns out to do, the administration's budget has just given it an extra bump upwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 "revenue enhancement triggers" I love PC terms... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 26, 2010 -> 10:19 AM) "revenue enhancement triggers" I love PC terms... Yeah, what we really need to do is on one hand pass another $2.5 trillion in tax cuts and then on the other hand complain about the deficit some more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 26, 2010 -> 09:29 AM) Yeah, what we really need to do is on one hand pass another $2.5 trillion in tax cuts and then on the other hand complain about the deficit some more. Or we could use the Simpsons as inspiration for terminology on tax increase... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 26, 2010 -> 10:38 AM) Or we could use the Simpsons as inspiration for terminology on tax increase... "Taxes are bad. The finger thing means the taxes!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 The economist nails this one too. Through bad times and good times for the president, there was one word I never associated with him and his approach to the challenges facing the country: gimmick. But this is a bright shining gimmick that advertises a lack of seriousness to both near-term economic weakness and long-run budget problems. This is decidedly not what is needed right now. If this is the best the president can do, Democrats, and the country, are in for a very long few years. "Yeah, you remember when I said the time for putting off making hard choices was over? Well, that was before I found out that the Senate was mean". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 26, 2010 -> 09:43 AM) The economist nails this one too. "Yeah, you remember when I said the time for putting off making hard choices was over? Well, that was before I found out that the Senate was mean". Welcome to reality, folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 Um... Alleging a plot to wiretap Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu's office in the Hale Boggs Federal Building in downtown New Orleans, the FBI arrested four people Monday, including James O'Keefe, a conservative filmmaker whose undercover videos at ACORN field offices severely damaged the advocacy group's credibility. Also arrested were Joseph Basel, Stan Dai and Robert Flanagan, all 24. Flanagan is the son of William Flanagan, who is the acting U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Louisiana, the office confirmed. All four were charged with entering federal property under false pretenses with the intent of committing a felony. Based on previous standards, it is my guess that in 8 years, this man will be confirmed rapidly with a 91-4 vote in the Senate when President Palin appoints him to head the FCC. Update: Fox News goes into mourning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 "There's a lot of populism going on in this country right now, and I'm tired of it." Senator Judd Gregg, R-N.H. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 26, 2010 Author Share Posted January 26, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 26, 2010 -> 04:20 PM) Um... Based on previous standards, it is my guess that in 8 years, this man will be confirmed rapidly with a 91-4 vote in the Senate when President Palin appoints him to head the FCC. Update: Fox News goes into mourning. This is awesome. Hope they throw the book at these assholes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts