The "next big thing"
 

Is this where everyone is heading next?

I assumed the leading candidate was http://www.themonkeyscribe.com/msgboards/

The so called "experts".
 

It's not that the GOP is out to screw the poor. It's that they're out to help their (rich) supporters. Screwing the poor is the by-product of their political power, not the end.

Meanwhile, you are delusional if you think the GOP is trying to shrink government. They are not doing any such thing.

I'm sorry, but the DeLay/Abramoff/K St. Project thing goes far beyond what the Democrats ever did. If you think otherwise, you're not paying attention. The GOP has redefined political whoredom.

You can stop right there, because I haven't advocated any "cure." Like any real conservative, I'm not a fan of deficit spending. I don't think we should be borrowing to fund tax cuts, especially not tax cuts for the wealthiest. Relative to where we were, it's robbing the lower and middle classes to help the rich.

The so called "experts".
 

worse then selling military secrets and rocket technology to the Chinese? you really think so? btw that was rhetorical and I know you don't see why clinton selling technology was much worse- that's also why you don't see why your party is dead.

plus- isn't this on both sides?

The so called "experts".
 

Oh, shut it, Hank. I was going to go with a "agree/disagree/whatever" response to Ty's three-parter, but you are just ridiculous. Quit it.

("Team-building" = alcohol; off to the gym-type place-thing)

The so called "experts".
 

If Clinton had sold military secrets and rocket technology to the Chinese, that would have been bad.

The so called "experts".
 

Since Bush got elected these guys have accused the Reps of some incredible shit, and none of it ever sticks. This is already clearly a two-party scandal yet ty tries to leave it at the Rs door. fine. if he's right we started a war to increase our oil profits and we lied to do it, so this new scandal ain't shit anyway.


But I will folllow your wishes fringey I'm going to leave this board to its "high quality" its enjoyed these last few days. Bunch of subnormals arguing with Spanky. Enjoy!

The so called "experts".
 

I didn't mean stop posting. And Spanky's weird debt/deficit thing is definitely the product of brainwashing or warped thinking or something. It's just surreally bizarre.

The so called "experts".
 

shit. i thought it was "is" where Bill had that strained definition- it was "if?"

The so called "experts".
 

No. For the umpteenth time I am not saying "future generations will be able to afford it" I am saying they will never have to pay it back. Yes we leave them with some debt but if they don't have to pay it back are we really leaving them anything?

The so called "experts".
 

You'd think that it wouldn't be hard to make an accusation of deficit spending stick, but with you guys always leaping to the defense of Bush, darned if you're not right. He could blow an intern and lie about it under oath, and you'd find some reason to say that we're undermining the war on terrorism and by the way Clinton was worse.

The so called "experts".
 

You already said that they have to pay interest. I'm not really interested in the difference between repaying the principle and paying the interest in perpetuity.

The so called "experts".
 

Michael Jordon says he decided to retire the day he realized he was half a step slower. he didn't want people to realize he had slowed so he got out beforehand.

When I read this sort of Ty post i look back on that decision and wish I had similar maturity.

The so called "experts".
 

Shut it, old man.

The so called "experts".
 

Since Bush got elected these guys have accused the Reps of some incredible shit, and none of it ever sticks. This is already clearly a two-party scandal yet ty tries to leave it at the Rs door. fine. if he's right we started a war to increase our oil profits and we lied to do it, so this new scandal ain't shit anyway.


But I will folllow your wishes fringey I'm going to leave this board to its "high quality" its enjoyed these last few days. Bunch of subnormals arguing with Spanky. Enjoy!

The so called "experts".
 

If you wait long enough you don't have to pay the interest either. Considering you need to keep th debt at twenty percent GDP, then todays debt, fifty years from now, does not need to be paid back nor does the interest need to be paid back. If all you had in fifty years is todays debt, todays debt plus interest would not be enough to keep the debt at the twenty percent GDP level (I don't know what the optimum debt level is - but I am just throwing out twenty percent). As the economy grows you would actually have to borrow more money because todays debt plus interest in the long run is not enough money to keep the debt where it needs to be.

The debt from 1960 plus interest would not be enough to maintain the debt of today. That debt from 1960 plus its interest will forever remain in the national debt (and should not be paid back). So we will never have to pay back the debt prior to 1960 plus interest.

For our country, that needs to keep a certain amount of debt, with an infinite life span, and infinite growth, todays debt, if it remains in the debt long enough will never have to be paid back.

Do you get it now?

The "next big thing"
 

If Flinty gets his own site, I want mine!

Worse than when Spanky had his own board!

NUTS!

The so called "experts".
 

Wow, so I can eat all the nuts, all of them, everywhere, and trees will still keep growing! The little nut cases will be pleased!

NutS! NUTS!

The so called "experts".
 

The solution is to shrink dramatically the thing necessitating the taxes or borrowing.

I agree with you that the GOP has been appallingly hypocritical in saying it wants small govt while growing the govt.

But I don't think the solution is to start taxing us instead of borrowing. The solution is to unpopularly level with the American people and tell them the benefits they demand have to be scaled back.

If we don't have the money to pay for something, we shouldn't have it, right?

There need to be term limits imposed on all elected officials and anti-pork measures. Its obscene that Ted Stevens could defend a half billion dollar bridge to nowhere in the present economic situations.

The so called "experts".
 

Are you resigning again?

The so called "experts".
 

How do you propose to shrink the elderly dramatically?

The so called "experts".
 

You have to start the pain somewhere.

The so called "experts".
 

For a start, get Wilford Brimley and his "lifeline" to stop sending them "care packages"

The so called "experts".
 

I thought they pretty much did that on their own. I understand Hank's down to 6'10".

With enemies likes these who needs friends?
 

Doing their utmost to insure a victory for the GOP in 2006. With the Abrahamoff scandal things are looking dicey, but with the help from these dedicated volunteers the GOP will retain control of the House.


Sacramento's Out Of Iraq Forum Rocks The Capital City
By Nancy Tronaas

On Saturday, January 7, anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan, author David Dionisi, 4th Congressional District candidate Charles Brown, and surprise guests--academy-award winning Sean Penn and author Norm Solomon spoke to a packed SEIU hall in Sacramento, California. With nearly 200 people inside and a large overflow crowd gathered out on the sidewalk, Sacramentans are demonstrating their impatience and frustration with U.S. involvement in Iraq.

Dave Dionisi, author of American Hiroshima and former U.S. military intelligence officer, provided insight on pre-9-11 intelligence. This information should have been utilized to prevent the attacks on the World Trade Center. He also discussed U.S. foreign policy driven by the combination of controlling oil reserves in the Middle East in league with the U.S. military-industrial machine that has promoted war to support corporate profits.

The next speaker was Charles Brown, USAF Retired Lt. Colonel, and Democratic candidate for the 4th Congressional District in California. He is running against incumbent Republican John Doolittle. Charles expressed concerns about George W. Bush's efforts to erode the Constitution and the administration's usurpation of Congressional power. Brown stressed as voters, we must continue to support candidates who will effect changes in Congress in order to take back our country and restore the rule of law

Welcomed with a standing ovation, Cindy Sheehan and co-founder of Gold Star Families for Peace gave a rousing talk. She stressed the need to impeach this administration as war criminals who continue to lie to the American public about pre-war Iraq intelligence. She also contends that Pres. Bush's assertions about pulling the U.S. troops out of Iraq would lead to chaos are a part of a calculated strategy to mislead the American public. Cindy reminded the audience that we all need to take responsibility for Iraq—as we elected the officials who ultimately allowed the invasion and occupation. We have the power to remove them from office. Cindy emphasized we must exit Iraq now to save precious lives. After expressing her support for a Dept. of Peace, Cindy concluded that she'd like to create a U.S. Dept. of History, with herself as the first secretary.

Actor Sean Penn added to the enthusiasm of the day by stressing that all of the nation's anti-war activism was taking hold and was starting to work—while admitting that the stress of living under the current administration was making it tough for him to quit smoking. Stating that he "was not a pacifist on the inside", he was moved to be one on the outside for the sake of his children and grandchildren's future. He said we have to fight for everything we have.

A Q & A session followed a brief summary of current pending legislation authored by Bush opponents. The invited speakers deftly fielded questions on the economics of war, the politics of foreign policy, and the power of resistance.

Perhaps the most unforgettable moment occurred when Jesse Dyen, Camp Casey's beloved sound guy and songwriter, played his guitar and sang "Sons and Daughters", the beautiful and plaintive anthem that was born in Crawford during those hot August nights. Before he sang, Jesse asked the audience which direction southeast was. He explained that when the song was sung every night at Camp Casey, they always faced Bush's ranch. The emotion in his song was reflected and magnified by the packed hall. It was aching and palpable.

The program was moderated by Bill Durston, President of the Sacramento Chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility. Bill wrapped up the meeting by telling the audience ideas for how they can get involved in resisting the war. He encouraged everyone to take part in the National Call In Day for January 9th. We can't imagine anyone in attendance wasn't motivated to keep the energy going!

This Sacramento Out of Iraq Town Hall meeting was sponsored by the Sacramento Coalition to End the War, Sacramento for Democracy, Progressive Democrats of America and Peace in the Precincts

The so called "experts".
 

(a) You forgot the part about selling cocaine and murdering Vince Foster.

(b) It is much more GOP than DEM both because Abramoff is a committed Republican and because the money bought access to or favors from _power_, and the Dems haven't run much in this town since 2000.

S_A_M

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

But then again the Republicans will do their utmost to lose the house in 2006.

Leadership: When Darwinian stirrings replace moral epiphanies

There was a three-ton dinosaur, the stegosaurus, so neurologically sluggish that when its tail was injured, significant time elapsed before news of the trauma meandered up its long spine to its walnut-size brain. This primitive beast, not the dignified elephant, should be the symbol of House Republicans.


Why, perhaps half a dozen of the 231 Republican representatives authored none of the transportation bill's 6,371 earmarks — pork projects. And now among House Republicans there are Darwinian stirrings, prompted by concerns about survival.


In Washington, such concerns often are confused with and substitute for moral epiphanies. Tom DeLay will not return as leader of House Republicans, whose new fastidiousness is not yet so severe that they are impatient with Ohio Rep. Bob Ney's continuing chairmanship of the Committee on House Administration, in spite of services he rendered to Jack Abramoff. Ney has explained, by way of extenuation — yes, extenuation — that he did not know what he was doing.


Anyway, catalyzed by DeLay's decision to recede, House Republicans, perhaps emboldened by the examples of Afghanistan and Iraq, are going to risk elections. When they elect their leaders, they should consider the following:


The national pastime is no longer baseball, it is rent-seeking — bending public power for private advantage. There are two reasons why rent-seeking has become so lurid, but those reasons for today's dystopian politics are reasons why most suggested cures seem utopian.


The first reason is big government — the regulatory state. This year Washington will disperse $2.6 trillion, which is a small portion of Washington's economic consequences, considering the costs and benefits distributed by incessant fiddling with the tax code, and by government's regulatory fidgets.


Second, House Republicans, after 40 years in the minority, have, since 1994, wallowed in the pleasures of power. They have practiced DeLayism, or "K Street conservatism.'' This involves exuberantly serving rent-seekers, who hire K Street lobbyists as helpers. For House Republicans the aim of the game is to build political support. But Republicans shed their conservatism in the process of securing their seats in the service, they say, of conservatism.



Liberals practice "K Street liberalism'' with an easy conscience because they believe government should do as much as possible for as many interests as possible. But "K Street conservatism'' compounds unseemliness with hypocrisy. Until the Bush administration, with its incontinent spending, unleashed an especially conscienceless Republican control of both political branches, conservatives pretended to believe in limited government. The last five years, during which the number of registered lobbyists more than doubled, have proved that, for some Republicans, conservative virtue was merely the absence of opportunity for vice.


The way to reduce rent-seeking is to reduce the government's role in the allocation of wealth and opportunity. People serious about reducing the role of money in politics should be serious about reducing the role of politics in distributing money. But those most eager to do the former — liberals, generally — are the least eager to do the latter.


A surgical reform would be congressional term limits, which would end careerism, thereby changing the incentives for entering politics and for becoming, when in office, an enabler of rent-seekers in exchange for their help in retaining office forever. The movement for limits — a Madisonian reform to alter the dynamic of interestedness that inevitably animates politics — was surging until four months after Republicans took control of the House. In May 1995 the Supreme Court ruled, 5-4, that congressional terms could not be limited by states' statutes. Hence a constitutional amendment is necessary. Hence Congress must initiate limits on itself. That will never happen.


Although bribery already is a crime and lobbying is constitutionally protected (the First Amendment right "to petition the government for a redress of grievances'') a few institutional reforms milder than term limits might be useful. But none will be more than marginally important, absent the philosophical renewal of conservatism. To which end, who should Republicans elect?


Roy Blunt of Missouri, the man who was selected, not elected, to replace DeLay, is a champion of earmarks as a form of constituent service. If, as one member says, "the problem is not just DeLay but 'DeLay, Inc.,''' Blunt is not the solution. So far — the field may expand — the choice for majority leader is between Blunt and John Boehner of Ohio. A salient fact: In 15 years in the House, Boehner has never put an earmark in an appropriations bill.

With enemies likes these who needs friends?
 

I was going to attend myself, but instead decided on hanging with Cytherea and Felecia at the AVN Awards that day.

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

Your earlier post today was about the fringe left, whereas this one is about the Republican political establishment. Bad for you, good for them.

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

2 quick questions:

1) i know mikey M. isn't someone you support and Teddy isn't and Dean isn't and etc. Which Dem can we look at as being someone you guys think isn't a complete Space-fuck?

2) Is Teddy getting alzheimered? did you catch his statemanship today?

With enemies likes these who needs friends?
 

You went to Yale, I mean, the porno awards? No way! Who knew?

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

John McCain.

Barrack Obama?

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

"you guys"? I can only speak for me - it's a big tent. You know what I'm talking about? How about the next Senator from Pennsylvania, Bob Casey Jr.

Do all you guys think Ted Nugent would make a great governor of Michigan? What statements made by Pat Robertson do you guys reject, if any?

I'm sure you missed it when Teddy introduced Specter's letter replying to Teddy's letter that Arlen never got.

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

Mark Warner
Barack Obama
Probably some others that don't occur to me at the moment.

As usual, Teddy's not doing himself any favors in these hearings.

From periodic listening and watching, I've made the following observations and conclusions:

* I'm pleased to see that Jeff Sessions is as much the drooling idiot as he was for the Roberts hearings.

* Leahy is the only one on the Democratic side who seems to have something approaching a thoughtful set of questions.

* God, Senators can bloviate. How can anyone stand to listen to them for any extended period?

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

so you look at the t as a solid Dem?

And it seemed to me Arlen was saying "let me consider it, I don't know if I got the letter" and the Fatster was starting to go into cry mode. loved him in the PBS-shown Reagan bio- Ted was making speaches and warning everybody Reagan was going to end up blowing up the World- Wise man!

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

If he were running against anyone but a lunatic as unpopular and politically suicidal as Santorum he'd be 20 pts behind. Lightweight is a unwarranted compliment for BC, Jr.

And you'd better hope BC, Jr. doesn't have to open his mouth or flesh out any of his contradictory positions. Every sentence out of his mouth in a debate against Santosum is a point off his "lead."

Stiff, stuffed shirt. Charisma of oatmeal. Couldn't sell bullets in Baghdad.

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

This cat could be Bubba II. But he's got a long road to convince the idiots running the party to dump Hill and give him the wheel.

I watched Paul Begala whimper about how wonderful Hill would be on TV yesterday morning. He gives me this uncontrollable urge to slap him in the lips. how a Casper Milquetoast sycphant like that can reach the exec branch of any party is beyond me, and shows just how fucked the Dems are. Unless they find a sack, they're fucked. Hill ain't "it."

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

If they weren't senators no one would listen to them.

NY Times had a fun chart today comparing the number of words used by each senator during "questioning" compared with the number used by Alito. All but Kohl and one other spoke more words than Alito during their 30 mins. Biden had a 4:1 ratio or more, IIRC.

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

Didn't say that, now did I.

That was what he was saying. Since Teddy introduced Specter's letter replying to Teddy's letter that Arlen never got, which of them needs the 10-word recall test?

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

Warner's probably a better choice than Casey. I didn't think of him, but I should have.

Obama - too early to tell.

With friends like these who needs enemies?
 

In many respects yes. But even at this early stage, I think Obama clears Hank's bar of not being "a complete Space-fuck."