Keeping it civil instead of returning to our dark ways

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I don't think Redland wants this and I know there has been some grumblings lately by back and middle benchers to do something about it.

I think everyone wants more stuff -- for them (help for their farms, repairs to their roads/bridges/dams, better maintenance in the parks/forests they use, better security at airports, help for the people they know who have fallen on hard times through no fault of their own, better information from the IRS or any other government agency they have actually interacted with). And when they see others getting stuff, they want "their share." If the feds are going to pay for (or help pay for) job retraining, it's not fair if they don't also help out Uncle Mo when his tomato crops fail because of the weather.

No one wants to tell anyone "no" anymore. I think the two-year election cycle for Congress encourages this.

It's nice to see the Rs not having deniability on their own strong tendencies to spend like this, and be unwilling to ask their own constituents to exercise "personal responsibility" or whatever the buzzword these days is.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
What Amity Shlaes quaintly identified in today's Financial Times as the "southern culture of tax cutting" has been married to the southern culture of failing to generate wealth and the southern culture of depending on federal largesse. [Hi Burger!] The offspring is an unsightly deficit monster.[/list]

All I know is, the finest state in the nation is running a surplus this year. And it happens to be in the South. Than again, Fairfax Co. supposedly tilted towards Kerry, goldurnit.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Let me repeat:

• In decades past, increasing Republican dominance of the House and Senate would have meant more fiscal discipline. But Republicans increasingly dominate the states that are net drains on Federal taxes—the Southern and Great Plains states—while fading in the coastal states that produce a disproportionate share of federal revenue. (It's Republicans, not Democrats, who are sucking on the federal teat.) What Amity Shlaes quaintly identified in today's Financial Times as the "southern culture of tax cutting" has been married to the southern culture of failing to generate wealth and the southern culture of depending on federal largesse. [Hi Burger!] The offspring is an unsightly deficit monster.

more

You voted for it.

Not to get all math-ish on you, but if you break the blue states into blue/red counties is it true that the blue counties pay more than they get? I know its not true in Michigan.

I mean I'm happy to let you guys keep doing your bs here, but I am interested in knowing the truth.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I don't think Redland wants this and I know there has been some grumblings lately by back and middle benchers to do something about it.

Who? Christopher Shays, that noted deficit hawk?

• Establishmentarians have long wondered when the grown-ups will asserts themselves in the Republican party. The stark truth today is that there are no grown-ups. The day before the election, I saw my congressman, Republican Chris Shays of Connecticut, greeting potential voters on Platform 19 at Grand Central Station, the launching point for the 5:01 to New Haven, the Bushenfreude express. When I thanked him for cutting my taxes, Shays smiled broadly. But when I suggested that he had raised taxes on my children, he looked at me quizzically. "You have to know all these tax cuts aren't really tax cuts. They're just tax shifts," I said. "All this debt has to be paid back."
  
  Shays acknowledged that there had been a massive increase in debt. "But 40 percent of that is due to spending." That was the moment I realized my sober, moderate representative may have slipped the surly bonds of reality. Like virtually every other Republican in Congress, Shays had voted for each of Bush's revenue-reducing tax cuts and every spending-increasing budget. And yet he seemed blissfully, willfully unaware of the role he—and his party—played in controlling, originating, and approving all that spending. "And did you vote for the Medicare bill?" I asked. "I did," he smiled. As I scurried off to get a seat before the doors closed, I heard a plaintive cry from one of the last remaining Republican moderates in Congress: "But I voted against the farm bill!"
  
  If this is what passes for a deficit hawk, we're in big trouble. The Republicans have suffered no political consequences for destroying the nation's balance sheet, after all. Why should they take the painful efforts needed to fix the mess they created? No one is holding them accountable.

ETA: Untill we see back benchers trying to shove spending bills back up GWB's butt, I really don't want to hear it. You guys elected a President and empowered a party that controls every goddamned lever in the federal government. You didn't just elect a Chief Executive Delta Force Terrorist Ass Kicker and get a free ride on everything else.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Let me repeat: I voted almost exclusively on foreign policy grounds.

At all levels of government? Including the congressional representative?

And, you were willing to sacrifice your economic principles for foreign policy reasons. Well, some of your economic principles. I'm sure you are just fine with the tax cuts, and you are willing to put up with the inevitable huge increase in the deficit to get your tax cuts and have what you consider to be the correct foreign policy, even though at this point I don't think that Bush and Kerry were all that far apart on foreign policy (though they tried to make it sound like they were).

Gridlock would have been better, IMHO.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Let me repeat: I voted almost exclusively on foreign policy grounds.

Hey, why you pulled the lever or punched the chad is between you and your conscience. Leave me out of that fight, 'cause it's going to get ugly in the next few years, without any checks and balances left.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Right Wing Conspiracy.

The cartoons, the lack of hoopla for the first femal/black SOS (especially as compared to Albright), the parrot talk, etc.

Well, club, we've had a female Sec State before. We've had a black Sec. State before.

Rice has been in a prominent position in the Administration for 4 years, but has not (I dare say) particularly distinguished herself in the minds of the public because: (a) Bush's foreign policy has been so controversial, and (b) she is viewed as being not nearly as prominent as Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. in shaping that policy.

So, this is a nice appointment from a racer/gender standpoint (a plus for the administration), and Rice has the resume for the job, but I understand why there isn't more wild celebration.

I'll tell you, though, between Powell, Rice, Gonzales, Paige, West, etc., Bush is clearly working to make the GOP more minority-friendly at the highest levels, so that the Dems will have to disntiguish themselves on policy and not just argue to minorities that the GOP is (as it was for decades post 1960's) the party of Old White Men. That is a good thing.

S_A_M

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Let me repeat: I voted almost exclusively on foreign policy grounds.

I'm sure that they got your note attached to the ballot.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Let me repeat: I voted almost exclusively on foreign policy grounds.

Sorry, but it's not a Chinese menu. It's a prix fixe dinner.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Not to get all math-ish on you, but if you break the blue states into blue/red counties is it true that the blue counties pay more than they get? I know its not true in Michigan.

I mean I'm happy to let you guys keep doing your bs here, but I am interested in knowing the truth.

Some old-skool type* asked that question a few weeks back when we were talking about how the blue states subsidize the red states. At the time, I responded that I wasn't aware that kind of math has been done, and that it might be hard to disaggregate on the county level. I have posted previously, however, data showing that in the recent years, Republicans have boosted spending in red congressional districts, creating a significant discrepancy between red and blue congressional districts. Unless blue districts are even more significantly wealthier, the subsidy point holds at the congressional-district level.

If you're interested in knowing the truth, try your Google Fu. I found some interesting stuff without a whole lot of work.


* pony trekker? Taltos? I can't recall, alas.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
All I know is, the finest state in the nation is running a surplus this year. And it happens to be in the South. Than again, Fairfax Co. supposedly tilted towards Kerry, goldurnit.

And the governor is a fiscally conservative Democrat.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
All I know is, the finest state in the nation is running a surplus this year. And it happens to be in the South. Than again, Fairfax Co. supposedly tilted towards Kerry, goldurnit.

No, no. You're mistaken. The finest state in the nation is still $2 billion in the hole. We're quick to note that after the last legislative session, $2 billion doesn't look so bad.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
At all levels of government? Including the congressional representative?

This is an excellent point - so just how red was that ticket, clubby? Did you vote for the whole gang of spendthrifts?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Some old-skool type* asked that question a few weeks back when we were talking about how the blue states subsidize the red states. At the time, I responded that I wasn't aware that kind of math has been done, and that it might be hard to disaggregate on the county level. I have posted previously, however, data showing that in the recent years, Republicans have boosted spending in red congressional districts, creating a significant discrepancy between red and blue congressional districts. Unless blue districts are even more significantly wealthier, the subsidy point holds at the congressional-district level.

If you're interested in knowing the truth, try your Google Fu. I found some interesting stuff without a whole lot of work.


* pony trekker? Taltos? I can't recall, alas.

Well if you want a double or nothing bet on whether Detroit takes out more than it puts in, let me know. As to looking at it on the county level, the old Hank would try and Google, but Adder had taught me well.
I'll just say I can imagine that I'm right.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
And the governor is a fiscally conservative Democrat.

Who I may very well be backing in '08. If you talk to him, tell him State's Rights on abortion, I'm the freakin Governor of Virginia on crime, and we need to spend the money better -- not just more on all Federal social programs. He'll lock it up.

The Rs better start doing some pretty heavy digging on this guy soon, because I'm getting the feeling he's one of the 2 or 3 best shots the Ds have anytime soon (next 8 years).

Hello