Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005.

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Do you believe the Bible is sacred but the Koran not?

From a literary and creative perspective, I am offended by the Koran. Its a shitty work. The author didn't even come up with his own entirely new characters or plot. He just threw together a shitty sequel to the Old and New Testaments. of one to the other, or claim one is divine while the other not?

Come on Sebby, give old Mohammed a break, he was busy with the booze and his blushing 5 year old bride.

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
. As far as religions go, Judaism is Star wars, Christianity is the Empire Strikes Back and Islam... well, its Return of the Jedi. Yep, Ewoks and all...

More like the little known independent film, the Autobiography of JarJar Blinks.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
In 2000 maybe, but the last I checked there was a 3 million plus margin between those necks. I'm not a christian from the heartland but I'm not so arrogant or so naive as to ignore the fact that a sizeable plurality/majority of the electorate are. Like it or hate it the secular humanist moral relativist platform of the Dems is putting them further and further out of touch with the majority of the American electorate.

Don't believe me, run Hillary, we dare you!

Don't dare me. I'm a registered Libertarian. If the GOP runs Chuck Hagel or some other fiscally conservative, socially liberal candidate, I'll vote GOP (as I did in 2000, which I now kick myself for incessantly).

If they run Hillary, they deserve to lose every election for the next 100 years. To do something that stupid would prove that they are absolutely clueless. She is unelectable (and should never be elected because she's a goddamned fool), and to suggest otherwise is an amazing suspension of disbelief (a heroic Kool Aid bender).

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Don't dare me. ).

I double-dog dare you, punk!

If they run Hillary, they deserve to lose every election for the next 100 years. To do something that stupid would prove that they are absolutely clueless. She is unelectable (and should never be elected because she's a goddamned fool), and to suggest otherwise is an amazing suspension of disbelief (a heroic Kool Aid bender

While I will probably starve to death before Joe Sanguine and Plated pay off the last bet I made on a GreedyPolitics Board, what stake are we wagering? I am ready to put it up that the Dems are stupid enough to jump off that cliff.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
I double-dog dare you, punk!





While I will probably starve to death before Joe Sanguine and Plated pay off the last bet I made on a GreedyPolitics Board, what stake are we wagering? I am ready to put it up that the Dems are stupid enough to jump off that cliff.

What do you drink?

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
What do you drink?

Disdain me as you will (and I expect that you will), notwithstanding a storied past with most of the branches of the distilled spirits family tree, for betting purposes, these days, I only drink of the nectar of the grape. But my tastes run to the expensive side (Hi Ty!)

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
The order of your sentences is off.

This should have been the first sentence:

"The question is, like last year, will the Dems offer a body who can be there to take over? Or will they run another tired corpse like Kerry?"

This should have the conclusory sentence:

"I don't think the nation will suffer a presidency by a party so obviously out of touch with reality."

I felt better about my body image back when I was in better shape than the President. If Hillary gets elected that might help Fringey get more self-confident.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I felt better about my body image back when I was in better shape than the President. If Hillary gets elected that might help Fringey get more self-confident.

So, in my best NFH impression, I read on CNN that the Royals cost each british taxpayer about $1, which the royals assert is good value for the money. Looked at that way, I personally think that the Clintons provide far more entertainment for the taxpayers' money than does W. Hillary 2008!

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
Sidd,

when is he going to apologize for his attempt to deny black americans their civil rights?

Oh, please. You are a fucking Republican. If it had been up to your party, there would be no civil rights act. That's why your party rose to power -- the Dems lost the south for generations (LBJ was optimistic in thinking it would only be one) because Dems supported civil rights.

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Oh, please. You are a fucking Republican. If it had been up to your party, there would be no civil rights act. .

First I am a libertarian (small "L") minded independent who generally (but not always) finds more common cause that is relevant to my day to day life with Republican candidates. Frankly, if I think the concept of a two party system for a myriad of not necessarily congruent issues is absurd, but there are more accessible windmills to tilt at than that one.

Second, oh please to you. You are a fucking democrat, and if it had been up to your party, the civils rights act would never have been an issue because the Confederacy would have never felt the need to address it. The democrats who led that march liked slavery.

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I felt better about my body image back when I was in better shape than the President. If Hillary gets elected that might help Fringey get more self-confident.

My PRs are better than any of them.

[ltl/fb]

Funding
Pension Reform Unlikely to Restore
PBGC Solvency, Financial Model Shows


Proposed pension reform legislation alone is unlikely to restore the solvency of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, according to the Washington, D.C.-based Center on Federal Financial Institution's revised and expanded cash flow model of the agency's finances released June 20.
"Without legislation, COFFI's base case shows PBGC needing an eventual rescue costing $92 billion, in today's dollars, considerably higher than the existing $23.3 billion deficit," according to a COFFI news release.

H.R. 2830 and the original administration proposal both appear likely to bring the rescue requirement down to $45 billion to $50 billion, in the base case, COFFI said. Although all models of the long-term future are subject to error, the analysis suggests only extraordinarily favorable circumstances would completely eliminate the deficit, even under the proposed legislation.

On June 15 before the Senate Budget Committee, PBGC Executive Director Bradley D. Belt said the reconciliation instructions associated with the concurrent budget resolution for fiscal 2006 regarding PBGC premium increases are insufficient to fill the hole the agency is in, "let alone the future hole" (115 PBD, 6/16/05; 32 BPR 1351, 6/21/05). Belt was responding to a question from Committee Chairman Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) as to how the budget reconciliation instructions would impact PBGC.

The Senate approved April 28 a $2.6 trillion budget resolution (H. Con. Res. 95) that protects $70 billion in tax cuts under the reconciliation process and includes just under $35 billion in mandatory program savings (83 PBD, 5/2/05; 32 BPR 991, 5/3/05). The resolution was passed earlier by the House. The resolution calls for $6.6 billion in savings from PBGC, including some premium increases. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) said at the time that the savings were structured to "energize policy," progressing down a road of resolving the $25 billion to $30 billion in PBGC contingent liabilities.


Core Problem

The core problem is a long-standing structural gap between the level of premiums PBGC is allowed by Congress to charge and the level of risk placed on PBGC by the pension laws passed by Congress, COFFI said.
The pension reform proposals on the table now should eventually eliminate this imbalance going forward, partly through premium increases, but mostly by imposing stricter pension funding requirements on plan sponsors, it said. However, the medium-term appears to have such high losses "baked in" that PBGC's legacy costs should be expected to mount considerably from today's $23.3 billion deficit, it added.

If the numbers are alarming, they should be compared to preliminary results recently released from a Congressional Budget Office study, COFFI said. CBO concluded that, without legislation, PBGC's economic deficit would grow to $73 billion after the next decade of claims and $91 billion after 20 years.

This compares to the COFFI model's prediction of $51 billion after a decade and $63 billion after 20 years, assuming both new claims and new premiums ceased at those points in time, the COFFI said. These figures would be lowered by new legislation, but the COFFI analysis demonstrates the improbability of fully restoring solvency.


Variable Premium Rates

It may be tempting to dismiss the findings of COFFI's model by focusing on the administration's proposal that PBGC's board be allowed to set variable premium rates at whatever level is necessary to restore solvency over time, COFFI said. Unfortunately, there are strong limits to how much can be raised through variable premiums, since these revenues depend on the level of pension underfunding in the system, it added.
The great bulk of underfunding is at plans sponsored by quite creditworthy companies, who could choose to contribute enough to eliminate their underfunding if the variable premium becomes an appreciable cost, COFFI said. PBGC's finances likely would not benefit much from this sharp increase in systemwide funding levels, since the contributions would be coming from healthy companies that represent the least risk, it said.

The remaining weak companies that might have trouble funding more than the minimum do not have the collective financial resources to bear the full burden of paying for PBGC's legacy deficits, without themselves being driven into bankruptcy, COFFI said.

Unlike variable premiums, fixed premiums could probably bring in sufficient revenue if they were raised dramatically, but no such legislative proposal has been offered, COFFI said. While the administration has proposed raising the fixed premium from $19 per participant to $30 per participant, its not nearly enough. "The cost increase is less than companies spend on free coffee," COFFI's Douglas Elliot told BNA June 21.

COFFI said it does not endorse or oppose any specific legislative proposal. It concentrates on providing policymakers and the public with analysis of the likely effects of possible reforms, it said.

http://pubs.bna.com/ip/BNA/pbd.nsf/is/a0b0z5x5x0

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Oh, please. You are a fucking Republican. If it had been up to your party, there would be no civil rights act. That's why your party rose to power -- the Dems lost the south for generations (LBJ was optimistic in thinking it would only be one) because Dems supported civil rights.

Okay, but this doesn't make Byrd any less reprehensible. I don't understand why Dems who would throw a Repub under the bus for Byrd-esque past activities and stances rush to the guy's defense because he now votes for stuff they like. Hypocritical and a good example of what is wrong with our two party system today. And (in case I don't post here enough for you to know) I'm a Dem. If I have to put up with these labels.

[Replaced_Texan]

Kay Bailey Hutchison announced she's gonna go for a third Senate term instead of the Governor's mansion.

Our current comptroller (and mother to Scott McClellan, but don't hold that against her) Carole Keeton McClellan Ryland Strayhorn (R)had announced that she will challenge Gov. Goodhair in the primary for Governor.

Chris Bell, the Democrat that filed the ethics complaint against Motherfucking Jackass Tom DeLay, is the only Dem thinking about running for Govenor so far.

Oh, yeah, and then there's Kinky Freedman.

Barbara Radnofsky, a partner at Vinson Elkins, has been raising money for her run on the Senate for a year and a half now.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
Certainly bar-b-queing 50 plus women and children who were just trying to practise their own version of a religion of peace and tolerance is almost as bad as an inadvertant splash of urine on a government owned Koran.

I figured you thought that shooting federal law enforcement officers is protected by the Second Amendment, but I didn't realize you think it's protected by the Free Exercise Clause as well.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I figured you thought that shooting federal law enforcement officers is protected by the Second Amendment, but I didn't realize you think it's protected by the Free Exercise Clause as well.

Ever get the feeling that penske is kind of like a hairier, funnier Ann Coulters?