Politics: A new beginning

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
O'Neill said what he thought, and did not think through the effect it would have. He now regrets the effect. The rest of us can be appreciative of the glimpse of what was going on in the White House.

As for these "explanations," if I'm missing some other correction, spit it out.

1. O'Neill speaks.

2. Press trumpets "OMIGAWD, BUSH PLANNED IRAQ INVASION FROM DAY 1!!"

3. O'Neill says "no, that's not what I said or meant."

4. Ty says "BILMORE'S SPIN!!"

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
We GAs are going to paying when the GPs retire, and I would rather get started on fixing the mess now. Preferably by making them work longer before they kick back, but that's a different debate.

Yes, and separate from the deficit debate. Because that's just spending like a drunk sailor on shore leave--you can always make it up later. The SS program is like the herpes he catches--with us for life.

But how long would you keep the coal miner in the cave, or the steel worker stamping? Age 75?

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Preferably by making them work longer before they kick back, but that's a different debate.

Not an option, son. We are tired, and would rather just suck off of your paycheck for twenty years or so.

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I also think that we need to plan for when the Baby Boomers retire.

Yes, by cutting them the fuck off.

Right at the knees! Cut them all off!!

Thanks, I feel better now.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
1. O'Neill speaks.

2. Press trumpets "OMIGAWD, BUSH PLANNED IRAQ INVASION FROM DAY 1!!"

3. O'Neill says "no, that's not what I said or meant."

4. Ty says "BILMORE'S SPIN!!"

Since you profess to be unfamiliar with what a "red herring" looks like, you should look at your point 2. I will not engage in a blanket defense of the (unspecified) press coverage of O'Neill's comments, but what he actually said is damning stuff. By talking about (some) reaction to it, you are Changing The Subject, which is always a good ploy when your side is confronted with stuff like this.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
But how long would you keep the coal miner in the cave, or the steel worker stamping? Age 75?

Originally posted by the Aging Hobbit
Not an option, son. We are tired, and would rather just suck off of your paycheck for twenty years or so.

Can I vote about how long to keep bilmore in a cave?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
Yes, by cutting them the fuck off.

Right at the knees! Cut them all off!!

Thanks, I feel better now.

or tying all of your interests, mass slasher movies, but with real snuff scences.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Since you profess to be unfamiliar with what a "red herring" looks like, you should look at your point 2. I will not engage in a blanket defense of the (unspecified) press coverage of O'Neill's comments, but what he actually said is damning stuff. By talking about (some) reaction to it, you are Changing The Subject, which is always a good ploy when your side is confronted with stuff like this.

Ah, I get what you're saying. O'Neill, He Who Cannot But Misspeak, tells us that he misspoke, and you are saying "no backs!".

In the face of your logic, I am rendered speechless, and will now simply concede your mastery of the issues.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
Yes, by cutting them the fuck off.

Right at the knees! Cut them all off!!

Thanks, I feel better now.

Good. Now send us your money.

[Watchtower]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
We GAs are going to paying when the GPs retire, and I would rather get started on fixing the mess now. Preferably by making them work longer before they kick back, but that's a different debate.

Second thoughts.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
Ah, I get what you're saying. O'Neill, He Who Cannot But Misspeak, tells us that he misspoke, and you are saying "no backs!".

I am pointing out that he regrets what he said, but has not said it was wrong. Nor have you. You've only said that (some unnamed, unlinked-to) press are over-hyping it.

In the face of your logic, I am rendered speechless, and will now simply concede your mastery of the issues.

Using AltaVista, I translated this into Dutch and back, and it came out: "I have nothing to say and I am saying it."

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I am pointing out that he regrets what he said, but has not said it was wrong.

I would decry further comment with a "I don't piss into the wind", but my last four attempts with you would prove that wrong.

Plus, my posting frenzy ends. Da plane! Da plane!

[Watchtower]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
Yes, by cutting them the fuck off.

Right at the knees! Cut them all off!!

Thanks, I feel better now.

You seem quite adamant on this. I share some of your concerns, but also don't think the cost of putting everyone on social security is so great that moving from an entitlement to a welfare program is worth the loss of support.

And I need to keep social security around because otherwise I'll have to support my parents, and if I am supporting them, they'll feel like they need to "help" me by moving in. Oi Vey!

What I really can't stand, however, is the way social security is supported. Why cap social security income? If we lowered the percentage tax but applied it to all income, the rich folks who are going to get the social security check will pay much more into it. The folks who really need it will pay much less because of the lowering of the percentage. The middle class (e.g., from $50,000 to $150,000) will save on the margins.

But the idea that someone making $30,000 pays a higher percentage of income than me, but I get significantly more out of it, strikes me as odd.

[Atticus Grinch]

The next purportedly liberal organization to rush to Rush Limbaugh's aid will be:
[list=a][*]NORML[*]MoveOn.org[*]ABA[*]Alan Dershowitz and his Harvard lackeys[*]Amnesty International[/list=a]

Bonus question: Will he have the decency to thank them?

I'm hoping it's "E" (post-conviction), but "D" seems more likely. If he gets a gig on NPR, I'm tuning out and going iPod 24/7.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Watchtower


What I really can't stand, however, is the way social security is supported. Why cap social security income? If we lowered the percentage tax but applied it to all income, the rich folks who are going to get the social security check will pay much more into it. T

Fine with that, so long as the benefit amount, to me, is not capped either. It goes both ways: you are taxed only so much, but your benefit is based only on a salary up to that amount. Unlike most government programs, it strikes me as logically coherent.