Are there some topics you wish we covered? Have some questions you want EagleOne and me to ruminate on?
We have plenty of topics we want to discuss, but this week we'll take yours first.
Well, now is your chance. This Sunday from 5-6pm EST. Join the show chat, or dial in and ask your questions in person.
6 hours ago
76 comments:
Nothing for Midrats perse, but you may want to check if Skippy's blog has been hacked. If not consider removing him as he is calling for the murder of US Congressman and seems to be quite serious about it, based on his latest blog post and subsequent replies in comments.
http://fareastcynic.com/2011/07/22/deserving-of-death/
Well, I was going to ask you and Eagle1 to discuss the current situation in the South China Sea concerning China's 'Cow's Tongue' approach to the South Chia Sea. Just noticed Eagle1 has a link to a former Midrats concerning this subject. Wish I onwned a sea!
Well implications of Norway's incident for general security business are interesting. especially since next time it could be AQ going against soft targets in similar fashion... and it underscores the capabilities of lonewolf/small cell terror operations.
Re; South CHINA Sea, it is time to acknowledge the middle part of the name. Once a territorial waters were defined by range of coastal artillery. Now with ASCMs in play we could as well make 200 miles EEC de-facto territorial waters. There are 2 ways to approach this problem, go big - but will the US have the muscle after 2020 to operate in the area freely against PLAN? - , or move out and urge local players to accomodate to new local power. Miscalculation leads to Korea - style "involvement-while-unready".
If he was hacked, they also hacked in and made comments that sound an awful lot like Skippy. His entire violent far-left screed on that post is shameful. I bet Craig Hooper, he of the unjust criticism of B5 and here, won't utter a peep about Skippy's call for murder.
My blog was not hacked. I wrote the words in question-and I stand by them. The Congress of the United States is failing in its primary obligation to the American people. I'm angry about the lack of a deal on the debt ceiling and the intransigence of the radical Republicans in dragging this out is what is shameful. Did I over state? Possibly-but I am more than a little angry. As Nickolas Kristof pointed out, they are engaging in a direct threat to our national security through economic terrorism<span><span>. </span></span>
Craig Hooper is right too, about B5. They have done exactly the same thing that you accuse me of doing-only its about different people.
I want the debt ceiling issue resolved. The solution is out there and it is easy. Congress can pass a clean bill to raise the debt ceiling tomorrow-but it won't do it. Because the GOP is so wedded to its so called "base" that they would rather tank the economy than do the right thing. That should make any serious person angry.
Guest, if you have a beef with me-then follow the e-mail link on my site, and I will be happy to discuss further.
Skippy, you are the one who addressed me directly in a number of your posts. So, if you don't like being countered, don't do that.
How's that? Simple enough.
I addressed you directly for a reason. To repudiate your argument. One is not a communist-just because he believes in a different vision of government. You made points -I simply answered them. I will continue to do so. I used you as a foil to get my point across-it evidently worked because I got a lot of mail about your post. That's good and its what I want. But make sure you understand-the economic issues are personal to me and I will continue to speak out about them. And you should also note that I ahev acknowledged that I went to far and have apologized for it. What Hooper wrote is 100% correct and it applies to me just as much as it applies to Uncle Jimbo.
Skippy... we wouldn't need to be talking about increasing the debt ceiling if The Community Organizer in Chief hadn't gone on a spending spree with everyone else's money once again in his professional life. Why are we arguing this? Because the democrats in the last congress had NO budget submitted. They kicked the can down the road for over a year and we're talking about... which fiscal year budget now? It's a JOKE!!! He didn't control his own party and then got up there with pursed lips and deep sighs and fingerpointing at the people who said we don't have the money to shovel trillions and kazillions at all his voter base to get him reelected in 2012 so he has free rein to completely ruin everything else.
Just stop. This isn't the Republican's fault. I'm just really glad nanny pelosi isn't speaker pushing through some fiscal disaster in a back room with him before the country has a chance to read it so they know what they voted for.
The adults in the room are saying Junior can't keep increasing his credit limit on his gold card. Time for the tantrum, junior. Eat your peas indeed.
well, I think Skippy has the same right to hate Tea Party as others here have right to hate Obama... and voice it in accordance to the 1st amendment :P
OTOH hand if US electorate wants to return to XIX century , no-unions, no-social-security 16-hours-workday, free-for-all capitalism, it is free to go... it will solve the immigration problems at least :P
on the other hand the real limit to borrowing is the willingness of markets to lend... so keep the politico's antics in the perspective.
Whether Skippy has a right to his hatred of the Tea Party (and anyone else who disagrees with him) isn't the point. His voice was among the knee-jerk simps that blamed the shooting of 12 people in Tucson on Sarah Palin, and pointed to the "uncivil discourse" from the "right" as the reason a leftist lunatic murdered people and shot a Congresswoman.
Suddenly, he seems to not lament the loss of civil discourse quite so much. Which makes him a hypocrite of the first order. And when he addresses someone personally, he can expect a personal response. That is how grown-ups conduct themselves.
As for your take on US economic forces, ewok, you have some more homework to do.
Youu do whatever the hell you want, Skippy. You have zero credibility. You are a communist apologist who uses the language of class warfare. Then you threaten murder on those who disagree with you and call them terrorists.
Don't be surprised if people who know better tell you to get bent.
"OTOH hand if US electorate wants to return to XIX century , no-unions, no-social-security 16-hours-workday, free-for-all capitalism, it is free to go... it will solve the immigration problems at least :P "
Ewok, here the unions used to have a benefit. Back when urchins were falling into the meat-packing slop and being sold as sausage.
America in 2011 is a different creature. Many unions have negotiated their workers out of jobs and sent their industries overseas where work is cheaper. They also have turned themselves into the bully arm of the Democratic Party.
Americans are asking only to be given a choice... the right for workers to decide to join... not to be strong-armed into the decision. Americans are asking for the right to build factories that workers can freely seek employment at depending on whether they want to be unionized or not. This administration has halted jobs in our airline industry by trying to refuse a state bringing a Boeing plant into its borders. All about unions.
Our Social Security is broken. It is due to run out of money the year I get to retire with full benefits. We need to fix it. The Republicans have been trying to do that for years and at every step have been prevented from doing so. It's the untouchable program that the president then uses to scare old people that they won't be getting their checks because of the EEEVVVVILLLL Republicans who won't raise the taxes on the job producers and raise the benefits for the moochers.
Continued...
No one is trying to shove Americans into 16-hour workdays. But I'll tell you many self-employed Americans do work those hours. More than 5 days a week. And many have 2 jobs to pay the bills in this economy. But it's voluntary. Then there are people who want jobs and don't have any because employers are afraid to expand given the threats and uncertainty over their future growth. Why work harder and grow your business if Obama is like a hungry bear standing over the cradle waiting to devour the newborn? In that respect your experience with Communism would let you see the self-limitations of an economy and a worker when they pretend to work and the government pretends to pay them. It all becomes economic Kabuki theater. There is no incentive when you're working for the State. THAT is what is at the base of all of this. How much we should shovel to the State. And the State wants to drive the worker further into debt so there is no possibility of ever reemerging. The American worker owes his soul (and his children's and grandchildren's souls) to the company store now. Remember the good ol' days when the left ranted about a (gasp!) $4 trillion deficit??? EEEEVVVILLLL BOOOOOOSH! (eye roll inserted here.)
16 hour workdays are common place at sea! :) Do more w/ less they say.
Guess we'll just have to wait to see how long it takes the FBI to come knocking on Skippy's door....
Skippy, I'm very said to hear you making comments like this. You wore the uniform. You were a serving officer in the United States Navy, sworn to uphold the Constitution. I'm on the other end of the political spectrum as yourself, and I would never think about such drastic measures as this. We have a Constitution...the answer is not murder of elected members of Congress, but instead, exercising the right to vote their stupid asses out of office.
Very dissapointed to hear this from a retired senior officer of the US Navy, very, very sad.
I would be careful with your use of the word hypocrite- it is pretty clear that you are one too. Your ignorance of the facts of this debate and your willingness to engage in personal attacks on me pretty much prove it.
The facts are these: during the period 2001-2008 the US doubled it's debt. Then in 2009 the US spent even more money while at the same time suffering a disastrous loss of tax revenues due to heavy unemployment. That is what increased the debt. Just cutting spending is not going to solve this problem-especially while average people are suffering a decline in their buying power. We have to have revenue enhancements of some sort. The deficit commission said it, most reasonable economists say it, and the polls show that the majority of Americans are ok with it provided there are also spending cuts. Which has been offerred repeatedly.
I'm sorry that bothers you URR- but the income inequality in this country is ridiculous. And as for terrorism- people who deliberately want to tank t he economy are just as evil as Muslim extremists. If you will notice the guy in Norway spouted a lot of the same ideas you do.
As I said before , the debt ceiling has to be raised. Congress can pass a budget later if it wishes- but at some point someone somewherebhas to face down the evil that is represented in the Tea Party's point of view. I will continue to point out the folly of their ideas. I have just as mich right to be angry as you do.
During 2001 to 2008 the US doubled its debt.
How about being a little more specific about those dates, Skippy. Nice sleight of hand trick there.
When did MOST of that doubling come along? Who had gained control of the nation's purse strings? Hmmm?
And then when the predictable economic downturn came to anti-business legislation enacted after 2005/6 you blame it on whom?????
None are so blind as those who fail to see.
I am damned careful when I use that word. I make sure it fits.
I am also careful when I use the word "arrogant". I reserve that for people who constantly tell me how much they know and I don't. Ignorance of the facts, indeed.
Then you compare me to a mass murderer. Yet you are the one who threatened murder. And you wonder why you are labeled as a hypocrite?
This is enough of this on Salamander's blog. You make me sick. You are without honor.
Here are the numbers Skippy doesn't want you to see. He stops counting the national debt in 2008. Why? It's embarrassing.
Note how relatively little it grew despite 2 wars during the Bush years. Until Nanny Pelosi grabbed that oversize gavel and banged into place all sorts of porkulation. Watch the spending snowball. Then he wants you to ignore completely what goes on behind the curtain in the fiscal years ending in 2009 and 2010. And it all becomes magically BOOOOSHHHE's fault.
Skippy, hate to say it but whatever white lightning you're drinking overseas and whatever you're eating, you've jumped the shark completely. I had thought you were smarter than you are.
Byron,
I am still a citizen of this country. And one side of our politics wants to destroy this country just to settle a partisan score. The debt ceiling issue is serious. It should have been resolved weeks ago. That it is not what is happening. And as I pointed out at my blog - and here I went too far in my comments. But I am angry with our leadership and it's stupidity. The easy way would be to say nothing- I think that is just as reprehensible as what you accuse me of. I've been outspoken all my life. I am not going to stop now. Congress needs to what is right- and it won't as long as the GOP is under the sway of the tea party. I've been very consistent in my criticisms of them- and it really does not matter if I was senior officer or not. I took care of my Sailors and my conscience is clear. We need a change in DC and I do not know how we will get- at least as long as the spoiled children think they call the shots.
I'm sad you cannot see that.
In 2001 the US debt was 5.7 trillion dollars. When Obama came into office it was 10.4 trillion dollars. The wars and the tax cuts were the primary driving factors. By objective standards that is a doubling of the debt.
Stop it, Skippy. No one who lived here and watched the Pelosi congress in action is buying your slop.
Between 2007 and 2009 the Democrats shoved all kinds of pork in there and the President was forced to sign things in order to keep the government going. Have you been gone so long (physically and mentally) that you forget how the gummint REALLY works?
Look closer at the timeline. Stop playing games.
Look at the numbers. After the Iraq war started in Sept 03 the debt was roughloy 6.8 billion. Over the next 6 years till the mid-term election in Sept 06 the debt climbed a staggering (smirk) 1.8 billion. To a gargantuan 8.5 billion.
Then after Nanny Pelosi and her band of thieves grabbed the purse strings, three years later, (and after 9 months of the obama starting in 09, the debt was....(ready?) 11.9 billion. A 3.4 billion increase in 3 years. Twice the rate of increase back when Pres. Bush and the Republicans were in charge. Now it's at 14 billion. And climbing.
Some of us see something else at work beside Bush wars and Bush tax cuts.
Your math is as off as your understanding of constitutional processes to get rid of legislators with whom you disagree.
Those are CBO numbers. Like it or not George W. Bush doubled the debt. And it did not all happen when the Democrats had control of Congress. The facts don't lie- this problem started long before now. Do we need to fix it? Yes. But we need to attack unemployment more- and NOONE is crying about that.
Seems to me the numbers you cite prove my point. The debt doubled between 2001 and 2008. It then went up by a third primarily due to TARP and the stimulus coupled with a dramatic drop in tax revenues in 2009. The debt was 5.7 in 2001 and 10 trillion in 2008. It is 14 trillion now. Percentage wise Bush's increases were bigger. And if you got the NYT debt calculator web site- you can see for yourself that most of the proposed fixes are moonshine. Hell, if we default and interest rates rise- that alone will add 1 trillion to our debt.
I would also point out that you are ignoring the revenue losses in 2007 when the housing slump began and in 2008 when financial firms started tanking.
Again' you ignore the effectsbof the recession-and energy prices which are much higher now than they were then. We were facing a financial armeggedon in 2008. Seems to me you forget that. I would strongly urge to read the book "Too big to fail" to get a sense of how bad it could have been. And furthermore- if the wars were so important, why not pay for them? A surcharge on gasoline would have been a way to do that . You cannot lay all of this on Obama- the mindset that GWB and Grove r Norquist put on place are just as much responsible.
Question for Midrats (Sunday afternoons are nealry always booked for me)...
Will the LCS survive the Gang of Six?
or
Will the LCS become the predominant combatant ship type in the wake of the Gang of Six?
Skippy, the Republicans are trying to explain to people who have never run a business that you don't get people to expand and hire more when you raise their taxes. It makes them afraid of being "rich" and ending up owing more than they can repay and so they don't hire someone because that new hire's salary will be needed to pay the IRS.
Just stop. The arguments you propose all ignore that the chaos in housing was caused by Barney Frank and Co. and the bad loans and the energy issues are exacerbated by the no-drill attitude the democrats have foisted on us since Pres Bush got up at the State of the Union in 2001 and said we need to have an energy policy. At every step the democrats and their blind refusal to see reality has impeded economic progress.
Who started the bad loans and ignored the repeated attempts to fix FannieMae and Freddie Mac before it blew up?
Skippy we needed a budget 2 years ago. And a budget a year ago.
Many of us adults have seen this cheap tactic. It's called "brinksmanship." You become passsive-aggressive and refuse months of offers and budget proposals till it's the 11th hour. Then you refuse more. You propose something so outrageous when the stakes are high that it becomes a choice between the devil and the deep blue sea. Then when the other side realizes you never bargained in good faith and walk out, you play the victim and say the other side wants to destroy the republic. Those who have been watching and keeping score know what's up.
The "spoiled children" you complain about are the people who cannot pay their taxes as it is, who are having to let long-term employees go because the economy is tanked. Your crowd wants to pick pockets, not create jobs.
The president didn't want this resolved weeks ago. He wanted the talks to fail so he could use it in 2012 as the campaign motto: The Republicans Ruined The Economy. Well, we see through him and his blame game. It's NEVER his fault... 3 years into his presidency and nothing is his fault.
DB-again it is clear that tyou don't have a good command of the facts. 1) Most of the subprimes were held by private entities. Not Fanne Mae and Freddie Mac. This has been documented repeatedly. 2) The US has an already low tax rate -especially when compared to previous years. And as Krugman pointed out : Between 1993 and 2001, federal debt held by the public fell from 49.2 percent of GDP to 32.5 percent of GDP. What stopped the paydown of debt wasn’t liberal big spending; it was demands from conservatives that the surplus be used to cut taxes. George Bush said that a surplus means that the government is collecting too much money; Alan Greenspan warned that we were paying off our debt too fast.
Furthermore-the Republicans added a demand that is nothing short of blackmail-a demand to eliminate the individual mandate for health care. Obama had to reject that. The GOP wanted a trigger that would end up eliminating the individual mandate in health care reform. The health care mandate has nothing to do with debt and deficits. So this is naked blackmail: the GOP is trying to use the threat of financial catastrophe to impose its policy vision, even in areas that have nothing to do with the issue at hand, a vision that it lacks the votes to enact through normal legislation.
And finally-Boehner has tried to spook the markets by saying a deal must be complete before Asia opens. That is 5 hours away. That is a terrible way to negotiate and hurts you and your retirement investements-whether you like it or not. Personally I think the embrace of default goes deeper than that, though—even if default is cataclysmic, that cataclysm could be percieved as an opportunity to put the country back on the right track. Many conservatives are truly revolutionary and would embrace a Franco-style dictatorship as long as it promoted a commodity-backed currency, low taxes, and the proper reverence for Reagan/Rand/Burke/Jeebus/Founding Fathers,. That the world will exploit it to our detriement is lost on them.
The world has changed and the current GOP does not recognize that.
Unfortunately Skippy just illustrates what is a strong trend in current the current sociological evolution of this country. We have reached the point where many folks simply cannot ascribe humanity to those they disagree with. This is a path that inevitably lead to civil strife, and thence to civil war. We are increasingly Balkanized not jut in those areas illustrated by the DivThu posts, but also in our very politics and outlooks.
As both Skippy and this shooter in Norway illustrate, it is a very short jump from "those I differ with are wrong-headed/stupid" to "those I differ with are malfeasant" and thence to "those I differ with need to die".
I don't know if it is a few yer or a few decades, but the blow-up is coming, and it will be led by those (from either side) who want to "save us for our own good". I've mentioned before that my historical specialty is actually the transition from Roman Republic to Empire, and this path is well laid out for us...and we do not seem to be able to devote t this point.
*DONT_KNOW*
Ewok, I give you full marks for your understanding of general American society, but you have a long way to go if you actually want to understand our politics or our culture. You are just repeating the headlines that are spoon fed to you, do yourself the favor and spend the time to dig deeper and actually learn the facts, then pick a side and run with it. Don't rely on others to do your analysis for you.
For the last words of the above point, please read "deviate at this point" (dang iPad)
Aubrey it seems to me that you kind of miss the point-any discussion of bipartisanship has to assume that both sides are ready to compromise. So far-in the debt ceiling negotiations only one side has done so. I really don’t understand how bipartisanship is ever going to work when one of the parties is insane. Imagine trying to negotiate an agreement on dinner plans with your date, and you suggest Italian and she states her preference would be a meal of tire rims and anthrax. If you can figure out a way to split the difference there you can probably figure out how bipartisanship is going to work the next few years. It is not my doing that has created this-it is the ignorance of the average American. We live in a country where 50% don't even bother to vote and of those who do-a good 27% want to side with the lunatics.
The debt ceiling is easy. Raise it and let the world move on-instead our Galtian overlords want to create a crisis where none should exist. And now you demand that they should have no accountability for it.
The problem with the idea of a civil war is there are no clearly defined regions of one side or another. This lunancy exists in every state and the rational people are being ignored to appeas the likes of idiots like Grover Norquist.
Actually the big investment banks like Lehman and Goldman started the bad loans. They were the ones who grouped them into collaterized debt obligations and sold them as an investment. Furthermore-for your average real estate agent, who gets a 7.5 percent commision on each and every house he sells-the idea of getting people into houses they could not afford was extremely tempting. Having exhausted the supply of people with good credit -the major banks pushed hard to get more people to have loans so they could clean up on loan swaps. This too-is documented in at least three books.
The health care mandate has nothing to do with debt and deficits. ....
Hahahaha. No... it just added another straw to the camel's back and made employers afraid to hire new employees because many of the effects of this mandate (MANDATE... NOT VOLUNTARY) go into effect after the 2012 elections.
I know what happened to MY premiums after Obama started meddling in health care.
Anything that cuts business and employment cuts revenues, makes people have to sell their homes at a loss, cuts the housing market and the car market and every other market.
Raise the debt ceiling and watch the democrats expand debt to fill every available nook and cranny. (Oh... we won't get started on that miraculous 1993-2001 period you love so much... when the peace dividend gave us the army we had not the army we needed in 2002.)
Skippy, I am not talking about bi-partisanship. I am talking about the mentality of "those who disagree with me are evil", which is all too common now. And very, very evident in the posts that you have made not just now but in the past as well.
I supported both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, however I know that those of different opinion have basis and passion for their beliefs. We disagree, that is all. I do not despise them, I do not wish to shut them up, nor do I wish them harm. There is no bi-partisanship there as they and I will never agree, but there is an understanding of the humanity of those with differing views.
Hopefully you thought through the insanity of your position of "differ from my point of view and you should die" as you apologized for calling for executions this time, but what happens next time? There is ALWAYS a crisis in national and international politics/economics - next do you say "They've gone too far THIS time!" and fail to walk your words back? Push someone on your porch to act on them?
When does political disagreement (and that is ALL this debt debate is) become so dangerous and vile that the other side must de facto be evil and degenerate? Where does it stop Skippy? And please don't say words to the effect of "when they see things my way" because then you have to also add the answer of what you personally will do when they do not - and given your attitude I fear that answer.
Interesting how the leftists blame George W Bush for the deficits during the years that the Democrats held both houses of congress. If only the president has the power of the purse I wonder why they even vote in off year elections.
It's similar to hearing them give credit to Clinton for bringing the deficit down after a Republican congress forced it down Clintons throat. Clinton and his fellow Democrats had ballooning deficits planned, just like Obama does, until the Republicans reined them in. Now they claim credit for the very thing they bitterly opposed. The same thing is true with welfare reform.
Now they want to cut the military again, just like they did under Clinton. Then when it was needed, and many weapons were old and the force too small, they were up in arms when it was said "You go to war with the force you have." If, after gutting the military again, we need to send them off to war we can expect them to again cry their typical liberal crocodile tears.
I went on active duty during the Ford administration and called it quits near the end of Clintons. I went from being a conservative Democrat to being a Reagan Republican based largely on watching the Democrats starve the military to spend money buying the votes of the parasite class.
I've always wondered, why do those too stupid, lazy, ignorant or uneducated to make a good living for themselves think they are entitled to live off the labor and wealth of others? Why do some supposedly intelligent people continue buy into socialism? Lastly, and perhaps Skippy can answer this, why do people who advocate every item in the Communist Manifesto deny they are Communists?
Aubrey,
You have not answered the critical question-when does the other side finally accept reality? That is the main problem here as I see it- and they are willing to mess with my savings and my livelihood to prove the rightness of their position. This is personal-if the markets tank-it has a direct affect on the savings I have built up over a period of over ten years. That is more than passing interest-it is real involvement. I need my savings as I am sure you need yours. I'm sick and tired of being told I have to cave in to their stupid beliefs. It is their turn to compromise. They are the ones in the wrong not me. <span>As I recall, two things happened last year: voters were angry about the weak economy, and older voters believed that Obama was going to take away their Medicare and send them to the death panels. And so the way to win those voters back is to cut Medicare and weaken the economy? The current tone of the debate in Washington is stupid-and it is aided and abetted by those who are so selfish as not to see another path. So how do you get their attention? The conventional ways don't seem to be working and if the government stops paying military retirement and social security-I will be one of those out in the street protesting and throwing Molotov cocktails. The people of Greece are right in that regard-if you go back on a promise -you should be made to pay for it. Plus, in our case-the money is out there to solve this, we just lack the resolve to go after it. This is more than a political debate, it is an organized effort to screw me and millions of other Americans out of their financial reserves . That is more than a simple political dispute-it is a direct attack on the well being of me and my family. I have a right to oppose that. </span>
Because they are not communists. They simply have a better vision for society than you do. I voted Republican for every election from 1976 to 2000. It was only when I saw the party go so far off the rails that I changed my beliefs-in part because of the slavish devotion to the wars, which I find professionally and morally offensive. I have voted Democratic since 2004 for that reason alone-I want the wars over with sooner rather than later.
You didn't answer the question. I'll try it again.
W<span>hy do people who advocate every item in the Communist Manifesto deny they are Communists?</span>
Simple enough question.
The "people" in Greece, like the government unions in Wisconsin, elected politicians to take from others and give it to them. Now that they have taken everything there is to take they are demanding that taxes be raised on others so they can continue to live beyond their means. As a sovereign government Greece went into debt buying the votes to get elected. Now they expect the rest of Europe to tax themselves and pony up to pay for the promises made by corrupt Greek politicians.
In Wisconsin the unions bought politicians with campaign cash and are now upset that the rest of the state doesn't want to go broke keeping them living in the style to which they have become accustomed. How DARE those lowly peasants in the private sector object to paying more and more so the "public servants" can work less, retire earlier with better pensions and better benefits than the private sector.
I'm waiting for California to go bust as the unions demand more and more, the Democrats promise to give it to them and the productive members of society move out of state. It promises to be quite a show. Perhaps a 100% tax on Hollywood liberals?
Hey Skippy, who was the Speaker of the House from 2007 to 2011? Did she and her party have any impact on the budget? Or were they just innocent bystanders?
Wow... threaten to take away Skippy's piggy bank and he's all throwing molotov cocktails and shootin' up congressmen.
Which proves that the next circle outside of rabid democratic liberalism is complete anarchism.
Skippy, hide your piggybank before your political Messiah and his merry men take from Rich Skippy and give it all to the "pooooorrrrr."
(And if you had such trouble with war, what the hell did you join the Navy for? Flight hours?)
I have to ask...DB, URR, Aubrey, OldNFO: Why bother arguing with Skippy? It's like screaming at a tree for not completing its quantum mechanics homework. He's never going to see the right side of things. And to be honest, this is not normally a blog that is visited by uninformed boobs...its folks either fall in line with Anon and Skippy or URR and DB. Precious few fall in between. I used to try to argue facts with Skippy, but the left doesn't respond to those. They are hurtful, mean little bits of hate that are used to try and dismantle the wonderful world of Mr. Rogers Make Believe that the left has dreamed up for us all to live in while that pesky little thing called Reality implodes all around us. So, let him live in his world, we live in ours. And just do what I do when any of my ex girlfriends call: Press the ignore button!
On an unrelated note, I wish that Sal would have taken my call today. I wanted to talk about OCO money going away this year and the coming burden that will result in trying to fund Maintenance / Modernization and Training to AT LEAST current levels. Because it ain't going to happen, folks. the Obama administration lied to you liberals when they said that the "wars aren't going to be paid for with the credit card." Indeed they have been. The DoD had to place it on their balance sheet, however, THE US GOVERNMENT TOOK OUT MORE LOANS. Taxes didn't go up. Tax Revenues didn't go up. So the only way you can cover that in a "zero sum" environment is to take out more loans (t bonds). US Navy has used OCO account to pay for Maintenance/Modernization/Training since 2001. And we all know that that has been severely skimped, considering all of the double and triple pump deployments. So, OCO is going away. SCN isn't likely to suffer because of all the constituents who are employed by that. So, the reality is that more Maintenance/Modernization/Training will suffer and the ships will be iron welded to the pier. Discuss!
Because once in a while Skippy shows flashes of lucidity and... well... hope springs eternal.
I was in the Navy long before we even thought about going to war in Iraq. I had this idea of flying and seeing the world. The Navy made good on both promises.
But the current wars have done a lot of damage to the country and to the military. It will take years to overcome the loss of equipment-the ships and aircraft we didn't buy because we too busy just dealing with current operations. Whatever benefit we got out of it has more than been offset by the cost.
I think there is a deeper question-this not politics as usual. It is a deliberate decision to pull the house down around us-just to make a political point. A system built on compromise has to have reasonable actors. The current Republican party does not-in any way shape or form-meet that definition. They are so opposed to Obama that they reject reasonable offers that give them most of what they have asked for. These folks have rejected potential deals designed to cater to their stated fantasies and wish lists. The President has agreed to cuts that will do great harm and that put him at odds with many activists, leaders and members of his Party. And yet, he keeps advocating the idea of compromise as an American virtue and a goal worth pursuing. And they keep rejecting him. That's more than just a simple disagreement-its a real problem for us.
Billion or Trillion?
Finished with the man, Salty. He is a hateful, closed-minded, anti-capitalist hypocrite and idealogue who believes himself my moral and intellectual superior. He is without honor.
Obama has not put forward any plan or proposed any cuts. To say that he has is simply untrue. He has waited for the Republicans in the House to do so and has then spent his time attacking them. As for harm. Obama flushed a trillion dollars down the shitter so that leftist government workers unions would stay flush with cash for an additional year or so. That was money either borrowed from China or taken from productive citizens.
Most of the "social" and "redistributive" spending is a complete waste of money and time. It is used mainly to hook citizens on handouts and make them wards of the nanny state who can depended upon to vote to keep the money flowing. Entire federal departments could be shut down and we would be better for it. Obama can be depended upon to protect every iota of it.
Sooo... you joined because the Navy was your free plane and travel agent? Interesting motives. Nothing in there about love of country, desire to preserve and protect...
We bought all those planes and ships, not just for Skippy, but for war.... the war we're in now (even the third one your messiah won't admit he's knee deep in.) Not war someday where we save all the stuff in the port and on the tarmac for years till we need them but the war where we need them now. War has a way of doing that.. using up all that equipment (which really wasn't bought to give future pilots toys to play with.)
<span>I think there is a deeper question-this not politics as usual. It is a deliberate decision by democrats to pull the house down around us-just to make a political point and get their president re-elected. A system built on compromise has to have reasonable actors. The current democrat party does not-in any way shape or form-meet that definition. They are so opposed to the will of the American people to be fiscally responsible that they reject reasonable offers that give them most of what they have asked for. These folks have rejected potential deals designed to cater to their big-state fantasies and wish lists. They send the worst treasury secretary ever who didn't even pay his own taxes out to increase our taxes and say the DEFAULT word to rattle the markets. The President will not agree to cuts in taxes that will help business owners and he sucks up to many activists, leaders, union bosses and members of his Party. And yet, he keeps advocating the idea of compromise as an American virtue and a goal worth pursuing unless its his side that must compromise. Then he scares old people by threatening to take away their social security checks. That's more than just a simple disagreement-its a real problem for us.</span>
There. mefixie for ya!
you forgot misogynist...
(I know, I know, playing to type.)
"URR-you do not get it. The United States is under economic threat from its own legislature. That is just as much a terrorist act as anything that has been done by radical Arabs."
Can we make Godwin's Law 2.0 for illogical comparisons to fundamental Islamic Terrorism?
DB,
You are correct-it is not politics as usual. Something deeper is going on. But when people can get so angry that we cannot find a compromise-and I get so angry that I say a bunch of stupid things, it is definitely not politics as usual. I think it might have been better if Obama had never gotten elected, because this spiral is going too get worse. 2012 is not going to a good year for anyone.
I suspect, the only way to win is not to play. I think the markets are going to take a beating in the next two weeks, and it appears Harry Reid just caved-so maybe there will be some sort of solution. Until the mext big fight.
"when people can get so angry that we cannot find a compromise-and I get so angry that I say a bunch of stupid things, it is definitely not politics as usual."
sounds like a "you" problem. And this, ladies and gentlemen, is what is wrong with American society on BOTH sides of the political spectrum. No, no...I am not responsible for what I said...it's those damn lunatics on (insert opposing party here). They MAKE ME SO MAD!!!!!!!!!!
SG - when did you call? I didn't see anyone but Lee's call. Sometimes you have to hold ... Lee did for 8 minutes.
Also for all - if you have not read Skippy's blog in the last 48-hrs. You should. A nice cautionary note about drunkblogg'n.
"<span>It's just this war and that lying </span><span>son of a bitch Johnson"</span>
I did call @ around 1736 or so says my cell phone. Just rang and rang unfortunately. Maybe I dialed wrong. :(
You got 50 points for the Battlestar Galactica reference, and now 60 points for quoting Forrest Gump. I need to remember to use that line if the cops ever show up to my house for a domestic disturbance...
It is a "me" problem. I was 100%wrong.
Hey DB. This is kinda funny:
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our government's reckless fiscal policies. America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means "the buck stops here". Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem, and a failure of leadership. America deserves better!"
-Senator Barack Obama, March 2006
Hmmm, tastes like crow...
Obvious to perhaps half of American adults is this painful fact now:
Our elected President is a deeply, deeply dishonest man. Can't wait until 2012 electrions.
Actually the shooter is just a lunatic. Looking for consistent policy preferences in expressed beliefs is pointless. He is full blown insane.
The fact is that Arizona's mental health establishment is incompetent and the politicians who should supervise it are corrupt and village idiot stupid. Not to mention fiscally and morally utterly irresponsible.
The kid doesn't know up from left from chocolate Tuesday.
midnight.
His lawyers oppose involuntary administration of anti-psychotic medications known to be effective because it denies him reasoned choice in controlling his medical treatment. The Judge may be a grown up, stay tuned.
Coupla things.
Unions. The forty hour week, overtime pay, viable safety programs in the industrial workplace, medical/dental/optical plans, a defined benefit retirement at age 65, pay which provides middle class status to the skilled trades and a living wage to semiskilled manual labor, and a measure of job security based on due process as a restraint on jerks as shop floor supervision, middle management and to a lesser degree company senior managers are the results of organization of the workers and collective bargaining. The existence of Unions keeps these things in place.
Union abuses, corruption, racketeering and abuses of power by nepotistic union officials all exist and must be restrained. Stupid managers and stupid union bosses are equal threats to a company's success and workers well being. The bigger a business, the more a union is a good thing, if only to inspire management decency in order to avoid dealing with a union. Laissez faire (sp?) capitalism left unrestrained would result in all the abuses of the gilded age and much worse.
Having worked union and non union, union is better. Far from perfect, but better.
That said, the current crop of union bosses the Reuther brothers, they ain't. Not even close.
No point in being knee jerk about unions. Lawyers, mmm, I'll get back to you....
Sorry... trillion.
I was going to say, DB, "You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means." :)
I've worked for employers where I thought that company was the reason for the existence of unions, and I've worked for places that have been badly impacted by unions. Heck I've worked for places where I have thought "Dear God, please get a union in here!"
I don't begrudge the existence of private sector unions, but I do have a major issue with the public sector ones.
That being said, I think the stupidest thing the unions ever did was aligning so closely with the Democratic party. By doing that they inherently made opponents of 50% of the population and the government. With a bit of forethought, and some adept navigating by those in command, the unions could very well have furthered the non-political agenda of supporting and enhancing the lives of their members. Instead they chose to further a political agenda of bureaucracy, statism, and thuggery...
Their mistakes show in their in their anemic and declining membership - unions are now an afterthought for much of America as they are not seen as furthering the interests of their members and the working class, but instead of furthering the political machine of the Democratic party.
But are union members really a monolithic block voting for the Dems all the time? I doubt it. I suspect there are plenty of folks who vote GOP because that is what they believe. The money may be being funneled to the Democratic party by their PACs but I doubt individuals can lumped as voting a certain way all the time. Besides with unions only being about 15% of workers and going down their influence will too.
A union which gets in bed with a political party winds up becoming an ATM for money and votes with little influence. It's smart to support candidates who support the unions interests on issues vital to the union.
A party which sets itself up by anti-union bias loses funding, votes, and becomes beholden to groups with little or no interest in the well being of a prosperous middle class, and foolish scorn for the skilled trades. It volunteers to be the caricature for the marxist left, and falls for picking a side in the marxist world view of endless class warfare.
In both cases, the result is a loss of a feedback loop which sooner or later winds up with them well out of the bouyed channel and on the rocks.
The devil is in the unions, the devil is in management, because the devil is everywhere, hard at work all the time. We all recruit from the human race, we all can call on angels to assist us, we all are bedeviled, mostly by our own imperfect nature.
Put not your faith in Princes...or political operatives.
"...Marxist world view of endless class warfare."
That about sums it up.
And therein lies the problem Skippy - I agree with you that in no conceivable way are union members a monolithic voting bloc. You pretty much have the spectrum from end to end in their membership. Yet the unions themselves (as individual entities, not as the sum of their members) are a monlothic bloc for the Democratic party, which does a disservice to those of their members who may not want to give money and support to politicians they oppose.
Although their voting impact through their dues paying members is declining*, they are still the biggest single source of money in politics...
*well, the private sector unions are declining - the public sector seem to be in pretty good shape
In full disclosure, I have been a member of 2 unions in my life - when I worked for UPS while in college I had to join the Teamsters, and then as a member of the minor league hockey players union.
Post a Comment