Jay Bookman

By "The Corporal"

August 20, 2008 2:25 PM | Link to this

Jay:

You need to do some more work here to be fair (and you know I like to be fair).

Please put it in terms that the common man can understand.

What are those figures in comparison to GNP ??? It’s kind of like when we had a house payment of $370 a month (a huge debt at the time) when my wife and I made $8,000 and now we pay $1,700 per month but we make, lets just say, over six figures. Our house payment is 4 times higher but our income many times higher!

You can do anything with numbers and statistics. Let’s do the right thing here.

By RW-(the original)

August 20, 2008 2:30 PM | Link to this

Then again to paraphrase Donald Trump, when you owe a lot of money the bank owns you, but when you owe an enormous amount you own the bank.

Jay, Have you added up the enormous numbers that Obama has been promising. Taxing the “rich” isn’t going to come close to paying for them. Besides we don’t have a wealth tax anyway so the rich can just take their ball and go home.

By hillbilly ragger

August 20, 2008 2:43 PM | Link to this

Corporal, if you want to know where the film’s figures are coming from (Jay’s just providing his impression of the film) I would suggest you have a look at their report: link to 5 meg pdf here.

I haven’t had a chance to really digest it yet myself, though, but it looks like it will provide the kind of context for these numbers that you seek.

By Taxpayer

August 20, 2008 2:47 PM | Link to this

Jay,

You got yourself an AMEN, BROTHER from me on this one. This is the issue that made me vote for Ron Paul and a major reason (but not the only one) why I no longer consider myself a Republican. The problem for me now is analogous to the man without a country — I’m the voter without a statesman (or party for that matter). This country really needs some fiscal conservatives in office because this tax, borrow, spend and borrow some more policy can only be denied for so long.

By "The Corporal"

August 20, 2008 2:51 PM | Link to this

To hillbilly ragger:

I am NOT disagreeing with his figures on the debt. My point was it must be taken in context with our overall GNP or whatever. I am not an economist but I know there have been more auto wrecks in the U.S. in 2008 vs. 1908 …. but how many more cars are there!!! Same principle.

I agree that we have too much debt, we owe too much to other countries, they are not paying their fare share to us for protection and we are spilling the blood of our soldiers at a way too high rate as compared to other so-called. “freedom loving” countries.

I just want a fair analysis.

By Copyleft

August 20, 2008 2:53 PM | Link to this

Everyone applauded Bush for cutting taxes (well, everyone who was ignorant of economics), but remained blissfully silent about the massive increase in spending at the same time—not to mention the Trillion-Dollar War.

Cutting taxes isn’t a magic formula that always makes things better, folks. In fact, it’s usually a bad idea unless you control your spending and choose carefully how and where your cuts are made.

But it does make for easy applause from the people who don’t even benefit from the tax cuts, oddly enough….

By RW-(the original)

August 20, 2008 2:55 PM | Link to this

Maybe the wannabe Fund Raiser in Chief can set up a few more secret web sites and get this debt paid off in a hurry.

Secret web pages and hard-sale tactics have replaced Hope and Change for the Democratic convention. The CBS affiliate in Denver discovered a hidden website that sold tickets to the Invesco Field acceptance speech by Barack Obama on August 29th, while Team Obama continued to deny that tickets were anything but free. Democratic activists complained to the reporters about Obama’s sell-out

Be sure to watch the CBS video.

By mm

August 20, 2008 3:00 PM | Link to this

Yet another wingnut moron trots out the GDP cue card. That’s the republican politicians screwing us over and convincing their dimwit supporters that it’s ok for the US to be in debt up to it’s ears. And the dimwits drink it up like the koolade slurping lapdogs that they are.

Funny how the wingnuts call the liberals idiots, yet it’s the wingnuts that cannot have an original thought in their head. Their “thoughts” have to come from one of their hate spewing loons like Boortz or Rush, etc.

RW would rather give our tax money to the Iraqi’s than spend it on Americans.

Who’s the real commie?

By ByteMe

August 20, 2008 3:02 PM | Link to this

Actually, Corporal, pegging the deficit to GNP is not useful. It’s like tagging your mortgage to the cash flow of your city and not to your personal income. The cash flow of your city isn’t going to be able to pay down your mortgage any more than GNP will pay down the deficit. Only government revenues that exceed expenditures can pay it down.

Basically, at this point, every man/woman/child in the country owes a bit less than $30,000 to the government to make the deficit go away. The only way it gets paid down is if we tax more and spend less at the same time for a long time. Doesn’t matter how big the GNP gets if we don’t tax more and spend less.

By RealityKing

August 20, 2008 3:03 PM | Link to this

Spending has followed the GDP. If you look back at Reagan, and Bush’s GDP numbers, it is easy to see that the GDP doubled during that same time period. And that today’s deficit is almost exactly the same as it was in the 70’s, when compared as a percentage to the GDP. The same can be said for most European nations. In fact, our deficit is actually lower than the average Euros. France’s wonderful social utopia, 120% of it’s GDP. But that’s another story, about where we’re headed under Obama..

By "The Corporal"

August 20, 2008 3:05 PM | Link to this

Jay:

I’M WAITING

The nuts are starting to come out !

Previous Post …………..

Jay:

You need to do some more work here to be fair (and you know I like to be fair).

Please put it in terms that the common man can understand.

What are those figures in comparison to GNP ??? It’s kind of like when we had a house payment of $370 a month (a huge debt at the time) when my wife and I made $8,000 and now we pay $1,700 per month but we make, lets just say, over six figures. Our house payment is 4 times higher but our income many times higher!

You can do anything with numbers and statistics. Let’s do the right thing here.

By Midori

August 20, 2008 3:05 PM | Link to this

excellent post, mm.

By Phil Smith

August 20, 2008 3:07 PM | Link to this

Thank you Jay for reviewing this film and providing comment. IOUSA will indeed open on Aug 21 with a live discussion with Warren B in those theaters. The movie will also play from Friday onward at selected theaters but minus the live discussion. For more info check out www.concordcoalition.org

Thanks- Phil Smith, The Concord Coalition

By hillbilly ragger

August 20, 2008 3:14 PM | Link to this

Corporal, why don’t you review the PDF from the movie that I linked above? I just had a look and you’ll find that the charts are, indeed, expressed as percentages of GDP.

That’s the film’s basis. That’s where you should look.

By Bud Wiser

August 20, 2008 3:19 PM | Link to this

I see that the latest polling has McCain with a 5% lead, this after Hussein Obama had a 15% lead just two months ago.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/elections/1117409,elexpoll082008.article

The sky is falling!

The sky is falling!

The sky is falling!

Also, see what one of the ‘brothers’ has to say about your candidate. It will not be pretty for you Obamaniacs, and I dare say you won’t be capable of watching the whole thing (@ 9 minutes)

http://www.atlah.org/broadcast/ndnr07-28-08.html

The convention isn’t even here yet and Obama is sinking like a lead balloon. Enjoy the campaign, tools!

By Black Knight

August 20, 2008 3:21 PM | Link to this

Kneel corporal knave.

By "The Corporal"

August 20, 2008 3:21 PM | Link to this

To ByteMe:

What about what RealityKing said ??

To Everyone else out there:

I’m not arguing with anyone here and I will review the film. I’m just saying be careful how you use economic statistics as you can demagogue them all day long.

I go back to the basic principle that my house payment 30 years ago was MUCH less than today but since my income is much HIGHER today I’m actually better off. I think the government works the same way and you must compare it that way. I’ll leave it to the experts as long as I am convinced they are not being partisan.

By Black Knight

August 20, 2008 3:26 PM | Link to this

Take care, corporal knave, lest ye allow inflation to nibble away at ye very existence.

By ByteMe

August 20, 2008 3:40 PM | Link to this

@Corporal: he’s saying the same thing you did, but with more words. I’m saying it’s fake stats, because you’re taking two only vaguely related numbers (one a government statistic on the size of the economy and the other the amount of T-Bills out there that we can’t pay off when they come due) and comparing them. It’s like my comparison about city cash flow and your mortgage, vaguely related, but not really related directly enough to be useful.

Instead, I think comparing debt to income (or in this case taxes) is more appropriate and meaningful and more like what a bank would do if you asked them for a loan. They don’t compare the size of your city’s cash flow, they compare how much you make to how much debt you carry.

As for other countries that RealityKing mentions: yeah, they’re in deeper doo-doo than us, both from a structural perspective as well as a demographic one. I have a conf call just now or I’d explain more. Maybe someone can pull up the stats on worker-bees vs. retirees for an understanding of the demographic problems plaguing most of the “mature” economies. Back later.

By hillbilly ragger

August 20, 2008 3:41 PM | Link to this

Ok, Corporal, you’re starting to annoy me a bit.

The PDF from Concord presents historical information about our national debt AND annual deficits as a percentage of GDP. This information is available in many other places as well. Your profession of ignorance, and your need to be spoon-fed this information sounds like stonewalling.

Do you want me to come out and tell you that yes, under Reagan/Bush and then Bush II, overall debt and annual deficits increased as a percentage of GDP? Well yeah, they did. I thought everyone KNEW that.

That’s not really the issue so much, though. The question is, WTF are we going to do about it? Again, If. You. Would. Read. the. Damn. Thing., even just scanning it, you’d realize that it’s actually a pretty conservative-friendly report.

I don’t actually agree with a lot of its conclusions, and I think it’s absolutely gutless in the way it glosses over the Soc. Sec. Trust fund, but at least they do pay it some lip service.

Now you want to go on yammering about your individual house payments, feel free, but I’ve tried to break it down for you so it’s understandable. Comprende? alles klaar?

RealityKing, I don’t know where you get the idea that “Spending followed the GDP” business. And I’d like a cite for the bit about France; my understanding of EU membership is that there are limits to the kinds of deficits member nations are allowed to run.

By Paul

August 20, 2008 3:53 PM | Link to this

hillbilly ragger

Thank you for the link. It sounds very similar to the speech David Walker gave when he was Comptroller General.

Mr. Bookman - this is an excellent topic. As hr’s link states, though: “(this) results primarily from the large and growing unfunded promises for Social Security and Medicare.”

There you have it. Just those two.

Sen Obama initially addressed Social Security by stating the only change he would address would be to increase the earnings cap - the amount of wages on which people pay social security tax - but he exempted the amount between $102,000 (the current limit) and $250,000. Must be a lot of voters in that range.

But a couple of days ago Sen Obama essentially abandoned any attempt to cope with the mess - said he’d address it in ten years (let’s see, two terms, four years each, eight years total, he’ll address it it ten….).

Link: Obama walks away from Social Security

McCain hasn’t walked away - but he has learned too many specifics will hurt him politically. (Think: seniors demonstrating with signs saying “Don’t steal our Social Security) on Nov 1). But he’s said he’d at least engage.

So, I agree it is immoral to mortgage our children’s and grandchildren’s futures. But it is not also immoral to elect politicians who aid and abet in this? Or to say that we will live at or beyond our means during our working years and expect someone else to pay our living expenses when we retire?

So if that is immoral, then who is the moral candidate?

By @@

August 20, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this

I.O.U.S.A.! Absotively and posilutely Jay. For all that I am, and all that I can aspire to be, I.O.U.S.A.

“Ask not what your country can do for you…..ask what you can do for your country.”

I’ll do my part. I can afford to stimulate the economy ‘cause I’ve never made the bonehead mistake of over extending my self worth.

We’re ALL in this together. See to it that EVERYBODY shares equally in OUR responsibility.

I’m off to my capital ad-venture.

By Paul

August 20, 2008 4:02 PM | Link to this

It may be a bit dry to some, but here is the gist of the briefing David Walker gave when he was Comptroller General:

Link: Walker briefing

By "The Corporal"

August 20, 2008 4:03 PM | Link to this

To HillBilly Ragger:

I just don’t believe it should be demagogued along party lines. It’s much more complex than that. The best econonmic minds in the U.S. with degrees up the “ying-yang” can sit across a table and express opposite viewpoints. That’s all I’m saying. I don’t have the expertise on this but you sure don’t either. But ……. I have had enough economic sense to have done quite well in life …….. thank you sir!

By Poste Haste

August 20, 2008 4:26 PM | Link to this

a vote for McCain is a vote for 4 more Bush years, which is like 100 yrs in Dogs-of-War years, man.

Obama 08: America found. America sound.

By Paul

August 20, 2008 4:35 PM | Link to this

Poste Haste

So you’re okay with Sen Obama not taking action on this issue?

By Bud Wiser

August 20, 2008 4:37 PM | Link to this

Obama 08: Watch as the World Laughs, At the Chosen One’s Gaffes.

McCain - Lieberman 08; A Vote for America, Not a socialist state.

By Political Foreskin

August 20, 2008 4:39 PM | Link to this

A vote for McCain is a vote for four more Bush years, which is like a hundred years in Dogs-of-War years, man.

By Paul

August 20, 2008 4:41 PM | Link to this

Wow. Mr. Bookman raises an issue that hits most everyone on some aspect of their personal behavior and expectations. And it ties into candidates, parties, sacrifice (or lack thereof) for the greater good, as well as a illustrating a stark contrast between words and platforms and deeds. For both parties and both candidates.

And the board essentially goes silent.

Amazing. Absolutely amazing.

out for a while -

By RW-(the original)

August 20, 2008 4:42 PM | Link to this

RW would rather give our tax money to the Iraqi’s than spend it on Americans.

(m)ental (m)idget,

Any chance you can back up that statement? I would prefer that the American people keep their own money and take care of themselves.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A lot of Democrats are unhappy with Joe Lieberman, and a lot of AP reporters are Democrats. So the way the AP described Joe Lieberman in this story could be either a typo or a Freudian slip; click to enlarge

By AJC/DNC Management

August 20, 2008 4:46 PM | Link to this

This is pretty interesting, in just the span of one column, Jay managed to sound like both Pat Toomey and Pat Buchanan.

Hahahahhahahaha.

By Paul

August 20, 2008 4:49 PM | Link to this

RW-(the original)

[[A lot of Democrats are unhappy with Joe Lieberman, and a lot of AP reporters are Democrats.]]

Which probably means Lieberman’s a pretty good guy?

:-)

out -

By CJ

August 20, 2008 4:50 PM | Link to this

The Corporal is complaining about useless statistics, but he’s requesting relatively useless statistics (i.e. debt as a ratio of GDP or GNP).

As was pointed out above, the appropriate figure is the debt-to-income ratio of the applicable entity. Like ByteMe indicated, the debt is serviced with government revenues…not GDP.

If my family has $30,000 of credit card debt and $100,000 of annual income my debt-to-income ratio is 30 percent. By the same token, the U.S. government currently holds (give or take) $9.5 trillion in debt and brings in (give or take) $3.5 trillion in annual revenue. So, 9.5/3.5 = 271 percent (debt-to-income ratio). That’s equivalent to earning $100,000 per year and owing $271,000 in credit card debt.

Why compare the national debt to credit card debt and not mortgage debt? Because like credit card debt, our $9.5 trillion national debt is unsecured.

In short, we’re screwed! (Incidentally, we did it to ourselves.)

By @@

August 20, 2008 4:56 PM | Link to this

Wait Paul!!!!!!!!!!

I’m probably not the one you’d like to discuss this with given my limited understanding of economics. I’m always interested though. It was taking me a while to read your link to The Walker Briefing. I went through the first 23 pages, and then I came to these excellent questions:

GENERIC REEXAMINATION CRITERIA AND SAMPLE QUESTIONS

Have there been significant changes in the country or the world that relate to the reason for initiating it?

If there are outcome-based measures, how successful is it based on these measures?

It would certainly be interesting to see our government’s answers to those questions. Probably get an “F” on every one.

What was the intended mission of our government in its original founding? They’ve gone well beyond what they were intended to do. That’s where “we the people” came in. There were those among us who wanted them to fulfill no more than their intended purpose, and then there were those among us who demanded they go above and beyond. Ergo……massive debt.

A simple TONS assessment. (ISH)

By Taxpayer

August 20, 2008 4:58 PM | Link to this

At least if the Democrats get veto-proof control, they are more likely to increase taxes enough to cover expenses and slow down the Republican economic death spiral that they have us trapped in. Hopefully, they won’t spend and borrow more and lie to us more about the ever-increasing stack of bills that are not really getting paid and the price that all of us still living in ten to twenty years will be paying. Please Sir, May I have Your Vote. I promise to be fiscally responsible, Sir. Now wouldn’t that be a welcome twist, Ollie.

By Bud Wiser

August 20, 2008 5:08 PM | Link to this

If Obama is elected (doubtful, but an illustrative point forthcoming nonetheless), he has pledged to tax the ‘rich’ to pay for his new handouts, but even the ‘rich’ don’t have that much money. Too much debt, too many iou’s that must be paid.

Guess where he will be trolling for dollars next?

The ‘rich’ will use their advantages financially to offshore a significant amount of the capital.

Guess where he will be trolling for dollars next?

New programs will require funding. Social Security is anything but, and the handouts will keep pouring out of Washington, to buy more votes. The whining masses will squeal for their handouts, but the’ rich’ will be found in the Bahamas, Monaco, or Switzerland.

Guess where he will be trolling for dollars next?

The Dimwitocrats supporting him for change are more right than they’ll ever know, because change is all they’ll have left after The Messiah calls home the dollars. If you tools are so eager to give away your money, then I’ll set up a special ‘trust fund’ account you can send donations to, tax deductible of course.

I’m not expecting much money though, because the Dimwitocrats are the primary contingent of the gimme handout loser crowd.

By "The Corporal"

August 20, 2008 5:15 PM | Link to this

To CJ:

That’s fine. I hope you know what you are talking about (and I’m not saying you don’t). A couple of points/questions.

1) In your comparisons, are we worse off than in 1950, 1960, etc. Use the same formula. If we are so be it. If it’s the same - big deal. If we’re lower, then someone is demagogueing !

2) If you notice, Jay started off by using the homeowner as an example. That’s why I used it.

3) Someone previously said each person in this country owed $30,000 to pay off the debt. O.K., what did each person owe (adjusted for inflation) in 1945? How does that compare ?

By RW-(the original)

August 20, 2008 5:15 PM | Link to this

Paul,

As I see it there isn’t much talk about the topic because we have so little control over any of it. People talk about “getting the budget under control” but nobody is going to do it and they certainly aren’t going to fix Social Security and Medicare. Democrats have become Socialists, Republicans have become Democrats, and the obvious choice would be Libertarians, but they’re isolationists.

The FairTax would take care of things, but it’s too big an idea for the dimwits we elect to get their heads around.

So we’re left without much to do but point fingers like Jay does in the article blaming Reagan without mentioning the makeup of Congress at the time and frankly it’s refreshing that most have taken a day off from that.

Did you click the link to see how they described Liebs? They mentioned he was once a VP pick, but they added a well placed r to the word pick.

By Bud Wiser

August 20, 2008 5:22 PM | Link to this

Ho ho ho ha hahaha hee hee hee (belly laugh) gag, choke, hee hee

By Taxpayer August 20, 2008 4:58 PM “Hopefully, they won’t spend and borrow more and lie to us more about the ever-increasing stack of bills that are not really getting paid and the price that all of us still living in ten to twenty years will be paying.”

That was a great laugh I got from that one!

Taxpayer, you get the awards hands down for today’s biggest imagination! ha ha ha Sorry, can’t help myself!

That undoubtedly was the most inane, ignorant, stupid,___(fill in the blank) statement I have ever read from a being that supposedly walks upright on two legs. I’m not kidding! Are you like the most ignorant human on the planet, or are you a plant from the Republicans to make Democrats appear to be about as intelligent as a stalk of celery? If you are a plant (Republican, not celery), ease up. That statement is so overboard that no one with a brain could possibly believe that one!

By ByteMe

August 20, 2008 5:26 PM | Link to this

RW: not to take the thread off topic, but the FairTax(tm) would NOT in any way reduce the federal deficits or the federal debt. In fact, it would increase them because the numbers they used for revenue are current numbers, which are 400 BILLION less than we’re spending, thereby guaranteeing that there’s no way to improve the situation with just the FairTax… unless they give up on the sales tax percentage they claim is the one true number that is too low.

Oh, ewww, I talked about the FT. Yuck. Pooey.

Corporal: you want to see the debt over the years? The Treasury Department has a whole site set up for that. Check out the numbers at http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm

In 1949, our debt (not deficit, but debt) was lower than today’s yearly interest bill on the debt. When Reagan entered office, it was under $1 trillion; when he left it was over $2 trillion.

And just to be clear, I don’t believe that all deficit spending is bad, but having systemic ones that occur year after year is terrible.

By Taxpayer

August 20, 2008 5:27 PM | Link to this

At this point, I’m willing to vote for someone that’s willing to own up to the fact that the BushBills have to be paid as opposed to these Republicans that won’t even own up to the fact that the BushBills exist. Next thing you know, old BushCo LLC will be fluffing off his massive debt as just another “soft patch” — like the BushCo LLC economy and the BushCo LLC American [wet] Dream of home ownership, etc. Bush could have served us all better by staying awake in Economics class or attending classes at all perhaps.

By RW-(the original)

August 20, 2008 5:30 PM | Link to this

At least if the Democrats get veto-proof control

Taxpayer,

I assume you think that McCain will be the next President, otherwise there isn’t much need to worry about vetoes, but I’ll be willing to bet some cold hard cash that Democrats aren’t going to have 67 seats after this election.

By @@

August 20, 2008 5:31 PM | Link to this

I’m back with a question.

The line item veto? I know that such a practice would place power too much power in the hands of a president, but it sure seems like it would cut back on wasteful and politically beneficial spending. It would seem that a group of independents might be able to successfully oversee the process.

John McCain is for it.

It appears, however, that he’s in the minority. Gee, I wonder why? He’s also into cutting government waste.

Without it…..maybe even with it (I don’t know), holding constructive government action hostage with our money makes me feel kinda left out of the loopy loop of politics.

By ByteMe

August 20, 2008 5:33 PM | Link to this

I’m with Taxpayer: I want someone to own up to the problem and say “we’re going to structurally fix the debt and social security issues during my term in office*”. I don’t care if it takes a little bit of sour medicine to get this right, but it’s time we got it right.

*”Offer valid only in perfect economic conditions when the wind blows the right way and God doesn’t tell me to do something else that contradicts this pledge.” You can’t…. always get…. what you want……

By "The Corporal"

August 20, 2008 5:38 PM | Link to this

To ByteMe:

O.K. Appreciate the website. I just looked at that site - all the debt from 1791 to this year (9 Trillion). But, as a layman that doesn’t tell me much. It has to be compared to some kind of additional constant factor that accurately compares it each year - something showing a true picture of how bad the debt is in any given year. In other words, what is the REAL worst year? Was it 1919 or today? You guys tell me what it should be and where is the “chart” that shows that.

By @@

August 20, 2008 5:48 PM | Link to this

The Republicans gave Bill Clinton power of the line-item veto?

I

did

not

know

that.

Please don’t mention my Rudy right now.

Dang…….the things one can learn.

By RW-(the original)

August 20, 2008 5:50 PM | Link to this

ByteMe,

I don’t really have any desire to launch yet another FairTax debate and won’t, but you’re assuming static numbers in a dynamic environment. Trust me, I would also like to see the federal government slashed big time as well.

By @@

August 20, 2008 5:52 PM | Link to this

ByteMe:

I don’t care if it takes a little bit of sour medicine to get this right, but it’s time we got it right.

Aren’t you kinda scared that you’ll be forced to take the sour medicine only to end up with the same running trots?

By Taxpayer

August 20, 2008 6:00 PM | Link to this

Bud, my offer to help with your reading comprehension problem still stands. Of course, now that I have been given a better assessment of your abilities, I feel that I must warn you that the “nominal” aspect of my fee can no longer be honored. Do you by chance have any collateral to offer toward my fee for your first one-hour session. Something other than a trailer, that is. A gun collection, perhaps (with legible serial numbers) that’s not already in storage at a pawn shop.

By RW-(the original)

August 20, 2008 6:06 PM | Link to this

@@,

Your Rudy is getting the keynote speaker slot at the Republican convention.

By @@

August 20, 2008 6:15 PM | Link to this

OH

Yeah………we can talk about THAT Rudy, RW.

Semper watched Rudy the other night after having to hear me say the usual “Aawwwwhhh, my Rudy’s coming on.”

Anyway, he admitted that Rudy did a very good job boosting McCain’s strengths. Somewhere in there, he was asked about Lieberman as a running mate seein’s how Joe’s such a liberal and alll. My Rudy said he thought Lieberman would be a good choice.

Semper looks at me and says……….”Gee, I wonder why YOUR RUDY would think such a thing?” and I say

“Maybe it has something to do with My Rudy’s dimples.”

By @@

August 20, 2008 6:24 PM | Link to this

I feel that I must warn you that the “nominal” aspect of my fee can no longer be honored. Do you by chance have any collateral to offer toward my fee for your first one-hour session.

To Taxpayer, the struggling capitalist from @@, the ever generous philanthropist.

You’re as arrogant a manboob as is your candidate OBlahMa. Here’s 2 cents. Spend it wisely.

By Bud Wiser

August 20, 2008 6:26 PM | Link to this

ha ha ha ha h ha heh heh he he he hahahahahahahahaha

Sorry Taxpayer, I’m still in convulsions over your previous statement. For your review:

By Taxpayer August 20, 2008 4:58 PM “Hopefully, they won’t spend and borrow more and lie to us more about the ever-increasing stack of bills that are not really getting paid and the price that all of us still living in ten to twenty years will be paying.”

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA SORRY! hee hee hee heee

I think I’m going to split wide open!!!!!!!!!!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha

By RW-(the original)

August 20, 2008 6:28 PM | Link to this

@@,

Your Rudy said what?????

Geez

This and all the places it takes you might of interest to you.

Consider this an early warning that the conventions might not be the big news story of the next two weeks.

Of course if this overshadows the Obambi convention, but gets cleared up before McCain’s we’re going to hear howls of new conspiracy theories. It’s sure sounding a lot like a repeat of the lead up to WWII though. Russia playing the part of Germany, but who gets to play Japan? I’ll go with Iran.

By Taxpayer

August 20, 2008 6:28 PM | Link to this

“By RW-(the original)August 20, 2008 5:30 PM At least if the Democrats get veto-proof control Taxpayer, I assume you think that McCain will be the next President, otherwise there isn’t much need to worry about vetoes, but I’ll be willing to bet some cold hard cash that Democrats aren’t going to have 67 seats after this election.”

RW, I’d personally give the two candidates 50-50 odds right now but that could change dramatically given their selections of VPs. As for the seat assignments, I just don’t have a good feel for how the populace is leaning but if the economy stays bad into November or get worse, that can get the voters to express themselves in a significant way. Also, I don’t know if they truly need 67 staunchly Dem seats to pretty much insure, with a very high probability, a veto-proof majority. Isn’t Saxby one of your more recent “proofs” of that.

By RW-(the original)

August 20, 2008 6:38 PM | Link to this

Taxpayer,

I don’t think you’re getting a sense of how mad people are that the Democrats left town refusing a vote on new sources of energy including oil.

In any event, you said veto-proof not probably/maybe veto proof, but just as you might have wavering Republicans on some issue you would just as likely have some Dems that wouldn’t vote to override some vetoes. Either way I don’t see any 67-33 split. Today I would say around 57-43, but it’s a long way to November.

By Taxpayer

August 20, 2008 6:48 PM | Link to this

@@, I understand that you are still steaming from our last round of crap shooting but I know that you will be OK given enough time. I’m already over it. You don’t really take all this stuff seriously, do you? I thought we went over this last night. Just in case though, let me know if I need to apologize — again — to make things better.

Bud, on the other hand, has busted a gut. How that is even possible for the gutless wonder, as seen at Ripleys, believe it or not, is a question for the masses to ponder — for the low, low price of $9.95 for admission.

By Taxpayer

August 20, 2008 7:02 PM | Link to this

RW, I think I have a fair sense of how steamed taxpayers get when they perceive a lack of effort or even caring on the part of government to fix what ails them — especially stuff like high gas prices, high property taxes, high inflation for everything, jobs shipped overseas or filled by immigrants, hospitals stuffed with immigrants that are looking for a gimme on the taxpayer’s dime (not my words), etc. If these other taxpayers could just grasp the fact that the Republicans are doing nothing more than grandstanding (at best) with their Drill,Drill, Drill and other chants, then I have no doubt that these politicians would be out of a job come November. But, I also know better than that. I’ve been around long enough to have learned a few things and it doesn’t have anything to do with arrogance, in @@’s words.

By @@

August 20, 2008 7:02 PM | Link to this

RW:

You may be right about Iran. Ahmadenijad is simmering on the back burner while the big dogs tangle. I’ve been waiting to hear from the little fella.

Rumors are out there that Merkel and Medvedev are discussing a possible security arrangement for both Eastern and Western Germany. How many troops have we got stationed in Germany RW?

Erdogan and Gul are taking the diplomatic approach with Russia. It’s like a big dang party. Putin sent invitations to everyone.

I wish I’d filed an article I read. Said Russia’s military might appeared larger than it actually is. Another article talked about the psychological impact of Russian threats on other countries, and THAT ONE came from one of their own military leaders.

Lawdamercy!

By Paul

August 20, 2008 7:07 PM | Link to this

@@

I enjoy talking about any subject with you. One doesn’t have to be an “expert” at all - common sense goes a long way. You know what they say about economists - ask two of them a question, get three answers.

The items at the end of the brief were of the common sense variety, but overlook the fact that programs build a constituency and endow a Congressman with largesse. So I’ll be happy if they just turn a bit of attention to Social Security and Medicare.

But Obama’s made his intentions clear, and as for McCain, I’m afraid any changes will be met with determined opposition. Any changes.

RW-(the original)

You’re going to hear all sorts of disgruntled hits against Lieb. But darn, the guy has some principles.

And I’m afraid your forecast about SS and Med is on target. Time to start voting for ABI (anybody but the incumbent).

After tonight, out till next week -

By Taxpayer

August 20, 2008 7:08 PM | Link to this

RW, there’s no such thing as a sure thing unless you want to start talking about such things as just being close enough like with horseshoes and hand grenades. Heck, if it were even 67-33, that would not guarantee a veto-proof vote on every issue.

By @@

August 20, 2008 7:10 PM | Link to this

Taxpayer:

Steaming……..Moi? You might need to think that, but Nope…..nope

As usual, I’m as happy as a clam, just opened and eager to reveal.

You didn’t need to apologize the first time. You must have me confused with an overly sensitive liberal.

And by the way, do my posts give you any indication that I take ANYTHING seriously?

Never worry yourself about Little @@.

By @@

August 20, 2008 7:22 PM | Link to this

I enjoy talking about any subject with you.

Awwwwhhhh, My Paulo, you’re too too kind. (ISH)

I’ll catch the latter parts of your link later.

About that largesse — just as Andy has given me pause to rethink my previous opinion on abortion, you have caused me to rethink my opinion on term limits. (Cool how I worked term limits and abortion into the same sentence, huh?)

I’ve always thought that a rep needed to be in there for a certain length of time in order to begin and complete. Thanks to you, I’m now thinking they need to be on a short leash to remind them why the heck they’re there.

You’ll be missed next week.

By RW-(the original)

August 20, 2008 7:22 PM | Link to this

Taxpayer @ 7:08,

Now you’re just humping my leg like Polly does. That’s the same thing I said I’ll still place a large cash wager that there won’t be 67 Democrat seats in the Senate after this election.

@@,

The one sure country that would be playing the part of Japan in this WWIII scenario had we not taken them out in advance would have been Saddam’s Iraq.

Maybe what President Bush really saw in Putin’s eyes was holy crap, I better praise this guy and get Saddam out of the way while he still buys it.

By GeorgiaTex

August 20, 2008 7:24 PM | Link to this

It never ceases to amaze me that the average voter still doesn’t realize that our national debt is so high because of Republican presidents.

It just goes to show the influence that talk-radio and FoxNews has on the electorate.

By @@

August 20, 2008 7:48 PM | Link to this

Maybe what President Bush really saw in Putin’s eyes was holy crap, I better praise this guy and get Saddam out of the way while he still buys it.

Heck RW, I thought all this soul searching stuff was what makes a good diplomat. Putin, and those like him, are lookin’ for a doormat.

Putin is no friend to anyone but his beloved Russian ego. He doesn’t give a tinker’s damn about Iran. Like I said before Ahmadenijad is his tool.

Putin may be able to cajole Angela Merkel and Yulia whatevertheheckhernameis, but they and Condoleeza Rice are oceans (literally) apart.

By Paul

August 20, 2008 7:50 PM | Link to this

GeorgiaTex

Or put another way, mainstream media and much of cable ‘news’ isn’t doing its job -

Hmmm, have the bills put forward by our new Congress for the Pres to sign held the line on fiscal responsibility? I wonder…..

By ByteMe

August 20, 2008 7:56 PM | Link to this

@@: Aren’t you kinda scared that you’ll be forced to take the sour medicine only to end up with the same running trots?

In a word: yes.

On the other hand, the current direction isn’t working either. Something’s gotta change, and it won’t be the current batch of policians, since 94% of those that stand for re-election get re-elected. The game is rigged.

RW: but you’re assuming static numbers in a dynamic environment

Actually, I’m not. I’m assuming that the consumer is tapped out and isn’t going to spend a whole lot of money on anything for the next 5 years, thereby depressing government revenue if a VAT is enacted. You know that GA is having trouble making ends meet with sales tax revenues plunging, right?

By RW-(the original)

August 20, 2008 8:06 PM | Link to this

You know that GA is having trouble making ends meet with sales tax revenues plunging, right?

Talk about a perfect example of using static numbers in a dynamic environment…..

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

@@,

Dick Morris says Putin is the puppet

By Taxpayer

August 20, 2008 8:07 PM | Link to this

“By RW-(the original)August 20, 2008 7:22 PM Taxpayer @ 7:08, Now you’re just humping my leg like Polly does. That’s the same thing I said I’ll still place a large cash wager that there won’t be 67 Democrat seats in the Senate after this election.”

RW, I’d place a cash wager on something that had such good odds as well. Let me know if you find that sucker, I mean bookie, willing to take that bet. But in the mean time, we’ll just have to wait and see in November which way the pendulum swings — farther to the left, back toward the right, or stuck in the middle, still.

By @@

August 20, 2008 8:19 PM | Link to this

O-:MG RW! That guy looks like the KGB of old. Months back when Putin was looking for his replacement, they implied that he was looking for someone he could control, but that would put a good face on Russia. Medvedev’s face doesn’t look like the KGB.

They mentioned that there was some instability within the Kremlin that may boil up later. A lot of organized crime bosses have infiltrated. Putin gives them free rein as long as they don’t step on his toes.

I’m gonna have to go back in Stratfor’s archives to take a look at all the possibilities.

Cool! Thanks for reminding me.

So many players and so little time. Yay! I’m off on a mission.

By Taxpayer

August 20, 2008 8:24 PM | Link to this

Just so there’s no mistake up front, Bud Wiser is an idiot, no scratch that, no don’t scratch that just add to it that first of all I DO NOT support the FairTax[tm]. That said, IF by some miracle the FairTax[tm] were implemented, then RW (I’m going to regret saying this later) may be on to something regarding his statement about Georgia and its sales tax blues — given the out of control government spending and borrowing, the FairTax[tm] would have to be increased eventually to such a high level and the monthly prebates reduced to such negative values that there would surely be a lynch mob or two out looking for politicians in need of some gentle persuasion to fix it or else. That just might be enough to force some real change — not that it would really matter any more at that point though.

By ByteMe

August 20, 2008 8:24 PM | Link to this

And, Corporal: As I maintain, if you want a baseline, it’s debt vs revenue. These numbers here are likely correct for historical receipts: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200

By the way, if you read thru the source material, you’ll find out some interesting things about the surpluses predicted for 2012.

By yescube

August 20, 2008 8:32 PM | Link to this

england red white car letter house home we day see free right land glass

By Black Knight

August 20, 2008 8:37 PM | Link to this

Corporal knave, ye hath been forewarned at an earlier time to be aware of the inflation adjusted values for they doth account for the value of the passing years upon US soil excluding the toil. Seek and ye shall be known as a seeker. Find and ye can stop seeking.

By RW-(the original)

August 20, 2008 8:51 PM | Link to this

I know that some of you don’t like it when I point out what a dunce The Dunce is, but sometimes it just can’t be helped.

I’ll link this through Hot Air so anyone interested can get to their extensive sourcing from one spot. Basically The Dunce has decided to run an ad here in Georgia that tries to use guilt by association to tie McCain to Abramoff.

Guilt by association isn’t an area The Dunce should want to play in

“Barack Obama’s ad is ridiculous. Because of John McCain, corruption was exposed and people like Jack Abramoff went to jail.

“However, if Barack Obama wants to have a discussion about truly questionable associations, let’s start with his relationship with the unrepentant terrorist William Ayers, at whose home Obama’s political career was reportedly launched. Mr. Ayers was a leader of the Weather Underground, a terrorist group responsible for countless bombings against targets including the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon and numerous police stations, courthouses and banks. In recent years, Mr. Ayers has stated, ‘I don’t regret setting bombs … I feel we didn’t do enough.’

“The question now is, will Barack Obama immediately call on the University of Illinois to release all of the records they are currently withholding to shed further light on Senator Obama’s relationship with this unrepentant terrorist?” –McCain spokesman Brian Rogers

By AJC/DNC Management

August 20, 2008 9:13 PM | Link to this

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a sharp turnaround, Republican John McCain has opened a 5-point lead on Democrat Barack Obama in the U.S. presidential race and is seen as a stronger manager of the economy, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.

Buh-bye barry.

By AJC/DNC Management

August 20, 2008 9:18 PM | Link to this

Welcome to the good old W.I.n.R.A.Q:

Iraq and Lebanon plan to sign a series of trade agreements in coming weeks, including one on Iraq exporting oil to Lebanon, the prime ministers of the two countries said today.

At a news conference alongside Prime Minister Maliki, Mr. Saniora offered support for Iraq and urged other Arab states to do the same.

“I do believe that Iraq’s return to the Arabs and the Arabs’ return to Iraq is a key goal and we all have to work to achieve it,” he said.

Buh-bye dimwitocrat party.

By AJC/DNC Management

August 20, 2008 9:23 PM | Link to this

I’m listening to Limbaugh on podcast right now for the first time today and I’m not kidding, word for word:

By AJC/DNC Management August 20, 2008 12:47 PM | Link to this “Whatsoever you do to the least among you, you do unto me”-Matthew 25:40” Mr Obama, 26, the youngest of the presidential candidate’s half-brothers, spoke for the first time about his life, which could not be more different than that of the Democratic contender. “No-one knows who I am,” he told the magazine, before claiming: “I live here on less than a dollar a month.” His own brother?

You don’t have to believe me if you don’t want to, but this is uncanny.

By ByteMe

August 20, 2008 9:25 PM | Link to this

RW: No one cares. Seriously. No one cares about what happened with some ‘60’s radical. No one believes any of it except for the true-believers-of-all-things-negatively-conspiratorial-concerning-Democrats. On the other hand, Reed is a duplicitous slimeball in the present day. Hard to fathom why The Straight-Talker wants to be seen anywhere near him.

And Management: the party hasn’t even gotten started yet. You know that things are going to be fluid between now and the end. There’s so much misperception about BOTH candidates at this point that it’s hard to imagine the numbers staying on any kind of trajectory for long. Obama’s going to get prime-time exposure for his soaring but empty oratory on all channels next week and then it’s going to be followed by McCain’s … uh… smiling at the wrong points in the speech? He’s just awful at it, isn’t he? Let’s hope he spends all next week working on his delivery.

By AJC/DNC Management

August 20, 2008 9:38 PM | Link to this

By ByteMe August 20, 2008 9:25 PM Obama’s going to get prime-time exposure for his soaring but empty oratory on all channels next week and then it’s going to be followed by McCain’s … uh… smiling at the wrong points in the speech? He’s just awful at it, isn’t he?

It’s probably incontinence with McBushie but what ever.

The horse is out of the barn on Lord High Dimwit’s as-s.

What’s he gonna do now, bozo, become a neokkkon?

Buh-bye barry.

By RW-(the original)

August 20, 2008 9:42 PM | Link to this

No one cares

ByteMe,

I sincerely doubt you have the ability, much less the permission to speak for everyone. Obama not only sat on the board of the Woods Foundation with Ayers and kicked off his political career at the ayers home, he also chaired the Chicago Annenberg Challenge where he worked closely with Ayers for years. Now the documents that were listed for public display in the Daley library, on the campus where they both worked and where the offices of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge were located free of charge, a hold has been placed on reviewing any of the documents.

I believe it sounds like a little more than some guy who happens to live in his neighborhood which is how The Dunce tried to answer the question the first time around.

By @@

August 20, 2008 9:47 PM | Link to this

Hey RW, I’m back! There’s a wealth of information over ————> there, you know where, on the puppet master, Sechin.

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin on July 8 ordered state natural gas giant Gazprom to open up the country’s pipeline network, Russian business daily Kommersant reported. Sechin gave Gazprom and the Federal Anti-Monopoly Service until Aug. 5 to develop a plan that would allow other natural gas producers “nondiscriminatory” access to natural gas pipelines.

Gazprom keeps a tight rein on the Russian natural gas grid — it owns the entire network outright and controls about 85 percent of the throughput, with the rest coming from smaller players. This monopoly allows Gazprom to keep the most lucrative business — exports to Europe — to itself, and force other natural gas producers to sell into the barely-profitable-to-unprofitable subsidized domestic market. The biggest loser in this arrangement is the largest of Gazprom’s competitors, oil company Rosneft.

And the chairman of Rosneft, not coincidentally, is Sechin — who, under Prime Minister and former President Vladimir Putin, is now deputy prime minister with oversight over the energy industry.

Sechin is also the head of one the Kremlin’s feuding power clans, and was given his position by Putin partly to balance the elevation of President Dmitri Medvedev — who belongs to a rival clan and is the former chairman of Gazprom.

He’s got two feuding clans in the Kremlin? Boy howdy, this is gonna be interesting. I’m goin’ back in.

There’s another article over there called “The Arrival of Russia’s Dark Rider” — it’s like a cyclical thingy. First there’s the White Rider, Putin in support of his people, and then comes the Dark Rider, Putin trying to promote himself while oppressing his people. Thas a good’n. There’s already been protests and Kremlin security was brutal in putting them down.

Above all else, the Russian people want stability. With Putin bringing in all those on his periphery, he’s actually opening up a greater opportunity for instability.

Oh my!

By ByteMe

August 20, 2008 9:52 PM | Link to this

RW: You just don’t want to believe that no one but the conspiratorially inspired really cares. But they don’t. Most people aren’t even paying close attention to what they eat let alone who Obama might or might not have slept with.

Now say he slept with Lindsay Lohan before she changed sides… that’ll get people’s attention. Some ‘60’s radical? Nah. That’s ancient history for most people. And Ayers sure doesn’t look like Lindsay when he’s passed out. Y’know?

And I notice you don’t say anything about McCain and Reed the Slimeball. Wonder how you can forgive one but NEVER EVER EVER forgive the other.

By Hillbilly Deluxe

August 20, 2008 10:00 PM | Link to this

Back to the original topic, I agree with the premise of Jay’s column. It has taken us decades to get in this mess and there is plenty of blame to go around. The country can’t go on like this forever. I don’t really know all the ends and outs of GDP to debt comparisons and all that but anybody knows that if you have more going out than coming in it’s eventually going to bite you. I am thankful I was raised by the Depression era generation who taught me to pay as I go. If only the politicians could learn that. Maybe someday statesmen will step up and do the right thing, re-election be damned, but I doubt it.

By RW-(the original)

August 20, 2008 10:13 PM | Link to this

@@,

Good stuff! Much more interesting than this little ankle biter that believes he speaks for the entire electorate.

Most people have been grossly exaggerating Russian military strength and prowess in this exercise, obviously one long in the planning, and actually involving relatively small forces. By all accounts, the Russian “58th Army” has invaded Georgian territory with about 500 tanks and an equal number of infantry fighting vehicles—the equivalent of roughly two armored divisions. That’s pretty small beer, really, but adequate to handle a smaller Georgian army largely dispersed to deal with counter-guerrilla operations.

ByteMe,

Ordinarily I would agree with you, but since the Democrats decided to run a teleprompter with no record these things need to and will be vetted.

I’m no fan of McBushie but I won’t be surprised if he wins handily. Unless you guys are smart enough to nominate Hillary next week instead of The Empty Suit.

By @@

August 20, 2008 10:21 PM | Link to this

Whoops! I see you’re busy RW, but WOW! Late December, 2007……

According to sources, the purge resulted from Sechin’s essentially throwing of Bogdanchikov and his associates under the bus; he blamed them for the political moves that have landed Rosneft on Putin’s bad side. But in all actuality, this is a weak excuse by Sechin, who obviously orchestrated all of Rosneft’s moves in the past year.

Though the true motives behind Sechin’s actions remain unclear, what is apparent is that his plate is overflowing with clashes, rivalries and enemies as he ejects those most near. Sechin has been waging war against Gazprom since 2005, a conflict which has spilled into a nasty power-struggle with Gazprom’s political backer, Vladislav Surkov, another individual who has Putin’s ear. Within this, Sechin’s enemy list has vastly expanded, covering everything from the Judicial and Finance ministries, the Prosecutor General’s office and more.

With Putin ready to wrap up Russia’s internal consolidation as soon as presidential elections take place in March 2008, Sechin has a limited amount of time to continue these sorts of battles. And his list of enemies seems only to be growing.

The puppet master has made some serious enemies. That can’t be good inside Russia. They kill people over there, ‘ya know?

Okey Dokey……I’ll leave you to talk about OBlahMa and HIS terrorist ties.

Oh……..you know that “mole” on the side of OBlahMa’s nose?…….I’ve been thinking it probably has a name.

Only the “mole” knows. (IW&SH)

By Bud Wiser

August 20, 2008 10:24 PM | Link to this

John McCain is as much like George Bush as Hussein Obama is like David Duke.

By ByteMe

August 20, 2008 11:07 PM | Link to this

RW: I definitely never said I speak for the “entire electorate” and you know I never said that, but you seem to like the distraction of thinking it.

Ankle biter? Too funny. Or weak. One of those.

If you really think an empty suit can’t win the White House, check out what happened in 2000.

And @@: Stratfor is better than most novels. Always an interesting read.

Off to dreamland. Long day tomorrow.

By Political Foreskin

August 21, 2008 5:55 AM | Link to this

What they found in Bigfoot’s stomach during the autopsy:

1: A nascar cap

2: An alabama license plate

3: an Iphone

4: Bambi

5: Lassie

6: Trigger

By AJC/DNC Management

August 21, 2008 5:56 AM | Link to this

War mongering POS liberals:

Missile accord raises tension- Russia angry as U.S., Poland complete deal for interceptors that they say target threats, not Moscow.-Urinal/Jihad

Is it not obvious that the AJC looks upon it’s dimwit readership as a bunch of dullards that do not know what the word “defensive” means?

~~~~~

Remember all the nonsense, just a few short weeks ago, about how the Iraqi’s were in favor of Lord High Dimwit’s surrender plan, why did I know that it would never come to pass?

In addition to spelling out that U.S. troops would move out of Iraqi cities by next summer, the Iraqi government has pushed for a specific date —- most likely the end of 2011 —- by which all U.S. forces would depart the country.-Urinal/PMS

~~~~~

This needs to be clarified?:

French President Nicolas Sarkozy vowed Wednesday that French troops would stick it out in Afghanistan despite an exceptionally deadly attack and frustration at home about the war. He spoke to French troops from units who lost some of the 10 soldiers killed in a Taliban ambush and firefight Monday.-Urinal/Jihad

~~~~~

Trying to resurrect the “civil war” that never was, are we, Urinal?

Top Sunni politicians accused Iraq’s Shiite-dominated security forces of carrying out political arrests, warning this could push the country into another round of sectarian fighting. The outcry came a day after three high-profile arrests of Sunnis.-Urinal/Jihad

Victims, victims everywhere!

~~~~~

Obama TV ad to highlight McCain link to Ralph Reed, blah, blah, blah-Urinal/DNC

Whoop-dee-do.

~~~~~

The libs at the Urinal did it again:

Social Security’s clogged pipeline- Disability claims languish, with thousands paying a dire price-Thee Doom and Gloom/PMS

Attached to this sob story is a picture of a woman sitting in one of her matching leather recliners, feets planted on thee Oriental rug, eyes downcast, in a well cleaned and obviously rather new house.

What’s next AJC, will we see her whining from within thee Jacuzzi?

By AJC/DNC Management

August 21, 2008 6:01 AM | Link to this

Obama has had several embarrassing events where the teleprompter either malfunctioned or the screens were not fully visible.

“He just locks down and can’t get the words out,” says one political consultant. “For such a fine speaker, it’s really quite remarkable that he’s had issues.”

Yeah, “locks down.”

By AJC/DNC Management

August 21, 2008 6:45 AM | Link to this

Obama said there was evil at home here in America too, and we should be humble about combating evil because a lot of evil has been done in the name of combating evil. So in answering a question about evil in the world, he thinks about America, and never brings up Al Qaeda. People who might think Obama’s answer was better are dangerous to the rest of us. We can’t have a national leader who is uncertain and plagued with moral doubts about confronting evil threats to America.

By AJC/DNC Management

August 21, 2008 7:00 AM | Link to this

Welcome to the good ol’ I.O.U.S.A

That leaves our total welfare state costing us about $1.7 trillion, almost 3 times national defense. Those are the funds spent for the poor, the sick, and the old. Our total Federal budget is about $2.9 trillion.

But they need it, right?

Maybe that is why studies of the actual consumption and living conditions of the reported poor are so inconsistent with the notion of actual poverty. Browning reports, based on official government data, that 46% of the poor own their own homes (compared to 65% for the non-poor). “The average home owned by the poor is a three bedroom, one and a half bath home with a garage,” Browning writes, equal in value to about 70% of the median value of all homes in America.

Moreover, more than two thirds of the poor live in housing with more than two rooms per person. Only 5.7% of the poor live in housing with more than one person per room. Today, 76% of the poor have air conditioning, while 30 years ago only 36% of all Americans had air conditioning. Browning also reports that nearly three-fourths of the poor own a car or truck, with 30% owning two or more. Color televisions are owned by 97% of the poor, with more than half owning two or more, and 25% owning a large screen TV. Microwave ovens are owned by 73% of the poor.

By Taxpayer

August 21, 2008 7:02 AM | Link to this

I see that someone is out searching for a urinal to hike its leg on yet again. Careful that you don’t get a head of yourself.

By AJC/DNC Management

August 21, 2008 7:56 AM | Link to this

This week, Barack Obama’s challenge is to select a running mate who’s young, hip, and whose accomplishments in life don’t overshadow Obama’s. Allow me to suggest Kevin Federline.

By contrast, Obama has experience pouring out of those big ears of his. Asked last year by Robin Roberts on ABC’s “Good Morning America” about his lack of experience in foreign policy, Obama took umbrage.

Swelling up his puny little chest, Obama said: “Well, actually, my experience in foreign policy is probably more diverse than most others in the field. I’m somebody who has actually lived overseas, somebody who has studied overseas. I majored in international relations.”

By hillbilly ragger

August 21, 2008 8:33 AM | Link to this

Luckotrool @ 7.56, 7.00, 6.45, and many more times in the past day—

did you remember to ask mommy about how to set up your very own blog at blogger.com?

Did you remember to tell her it’s free? As in “no charge?”

Not that we aren’t all tremendously entertained by your ability to manage those tricky “Crtl+C” and “Crtl+V” keys, really, it’s terrific!

but Luckotrool, grown-ups are trying to talk now, and you’d probably be happier playing in your own blog.

Run along. There’s a good lad.

By Lee

August 21, 2008 8:34 AM | Link to this

It’s simple. Bush swore he would never raise taxes, and refuses to do what his father did when taxes needed to be raised. So, when the war came along, he borrowed and fought the war on a credit card. We don’t have higher taxes, but we are paying taxes in other ways, such as the credit crunch as the government borrows more and more money, which leads to the dollar decline which leads to the sub-prime mess, which leads to increases in oil, which increases our debt. The fine economy Bill Clinton turned over, with a surplus, has been turned into a deep national debt to save Bush’s butt. When there wasn’t enough money for body armor for our troops, Bush wouldn’t raise taxes to protect our soldiers because he made a stupid pledge, and he would rather troops died before he broke his political promise.

Guns and butter, indeed!

By juicyamerica

August 21, 2008 8:35 AM | Link to this

you australia ocean english all ocean glass car glass apple trust boy

By GMAN

August 21, 2008 8:47 AM | Link to this

Today, John McCain’s challenge is to find a running mate that doesn’t keep his teeth in a glass on the nightstand, whose energy policy is more than drill, drill, drill, can stay awake in major policy meetings, and can spell cat without being spotted the “c” and the “t”.

John McCain is so old, he sat next to Jesus in third grade.

GOP - Taking Pride in Ignorance

By hillbilly ragger

August 21, 2008 8:49 AM | Link to this

Lee @ 8.34, it’s actually more galling when you consider that when John Kerry made a point of explaining that he voted FOR an appropriations bill to fund the Iraq operation because it was actually paid for with appropriate tax hikes, and then voted AGAINST one that wasn’t, the entire GOP joined forces to ridicule him as a “flip flopper”, claiming that he had changed positions and abbreviating his thoughtful expressions down to “I actually voted for it before I voted against it.”

Have we all forgotten about that? How Kerry supposedly blundered by voting responsibly and talking about his vote?

Jay, if you go in and dissect how that talking point was hyped and pushed along throughout the ‘04 campaign, you’ll have a good feel for why we are in this dismal economic mess.

By ButtHead

August 21, 2008 9:00 AM | Link to this

So much to do about nothing, if they can’t balance the budget, fire them. We need to fire more of these idiots. I would bet that I could balance the budget, give me the check book, they may not like some of my choices but you have to live within your means. But isn’t that what we pay them to do, make the tough calls? Come on people lets put the blame where it belongs, on us, we put these idiots there, now only we can do something about it.

By Willie

August 21, 2008 9:23 AM | Link to this

Could you professional bloggers please post your highest degree and the name of the college along with your posts? You guys sure bore the hell out of me….

By C. M. Thornton, III

August 21, 2008 9:28 AM | Link to this

The only way to rebound from this national debt crisis is to stop foreign aid and start drilling for oil here. In Alaska, South Dakota, off the cost of Florida, or wherever else its at.

Completely cut off aid to other countries. No more money from the US government to bail out or boost the failing economy of other countries around the world.

And if Japan and China want to play hard ball, stop imports from those countries. Hard to sell Toyotas if we don’t let them bring them here.

By Michael McCarthy

August 21, 2008 9:29 AM | Link to this

I am old but once was young and in all my years I’ve never seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging bread. (somewhere in the Psalms)

We no longer have righteousness. Everything is relative. One party is willing lose a war for their political gain. Both parties are willing to spend into oblivion to stay in power. The third party doesn’t exist.

JFK cut taxes and the economy grew but congress spent us into a deficit.

LBJ gave us civil rights, the Great Society, the Vietnam War (Gulf of Tonkin lie and 55,000 dead or 10X Iraq) and congress spent us into oblivion.

Nixon was a crook and congress cut off our Vietnamese friends’ funds and they lost the war and continued to spend us into oblivion.

Ford kept bumping his head on plane doors and getting shot at. Congress continued to spend us into oblivion.

Carter couldn’t do anything because our “malaise” was causing his presidency to fail. (actually we were too damn cold with the therostat on 65) But the Russians liked him so much they invaded Afghanistan. And Mr. Carter allowed Iran to become a Mullah run country. Congress continued to spend us into oblivion while cutting our military to where Canada could have invaded us.

Reagan cut income taxes 25%, the economy went into a boom not seen since JFK. The military increased spending by 1/3 to counter the Soviet bear which eventually put them out of business. Congress increased spending so much that the booming economy couldn’t keep up with the deficit.

Bush 1 said, “read my lips, no more taxes” and promptly agreed with the Democrat congress that Washington needed more tax money and we entered a recession, the first since the second year of Reagan. Congress spent us into oblivion.

Clinton, restrained by a Republican congress balanced the budget, not the way a corporation does their bookeeping but it was progress. Congress instituted reforms and for once spending was not insane.

Bush II took over and there was 911. I’ll leave this up to the contemporary audience.

By RW-(the original)

August 21, 2008 9:48 AM | Link to this

ragger,

John Kerry said in response to a question, I actually did vote for the 87 billion before I voted against it. Those were his words, not some evil GOP splice job to make believe he said it. If there was some larger explanation that made sense there was no news blackout that kept him from explaining it.

By Pat

August 21, 2008 9:59 AM | Link to this

People got so sick of Bush’s incompetence and blatant deception they flocked to Obama’s promise of hope. Cue the media to go wild with hype, eager for fresh meat. So surprise! People quickly grew tired of the Obama phenom. Now McCain’s weary old act seems “new” again! It’s like the whole country is a 5-year-old with ADHD, hopped up on sugar sound bytes. We get the government we ultimately deserve. If after 8 years of Bush, people keep the GOP in the White House, they deserve what they get. McCain once was a standup guy, admired by both parties. But he decided he’d rather be president. So he flushed his principles, and is now arm-in-arm with the same creeps who screwed him in the 2000 South Carolina primary, using their same slimy tactics. Sure, he’d make a far better prez than W the Boy Blunder, but so would Elmer Fudd. Obama’s got legit weaknesses - duh, he’s not the Messiah. Why use the media’s hype to ridicule him with claims he never made? Oh, that’s right - it’s a dig that the dummies who aren’t paying attention can follow. But why is it so hard to get Americans to consider intellect and character as requirements for our highest office? There are smart, decent Republicans - why can’t they get elected? Because they’re not extremist nut jobs who earn a “thumbs up” from right-wing talk radio! We say we hate politicians who lie to us - then refuse to elect anyone who doesn’t tell us how wise, wonderful and superior we are to the rest of the world. Meanwhile, we fall farther and farther behind other countries. We’ll be China’s beeyatches for the foreseeable future. Teach your kids Mandarin - they’ll need it to be able to talk to their boss.

It reminds me of the movie “Idiocracy.” The premise: over centuries, intelligent people carefully considered reproduction, while the ignorant bred like bunnies. So an average Joe wakes up after being cryogenically frozen to discover he’s the most intelligent being on the planet. Whenever he gives a reasoned argument to one of the cretins around him, their response is, “You talk like a fa_!” That’s the average “swing voter” gut reaction when confronted with any pol with a thoughtful approach to any issue. So we elect morons who “talk tough” and keep their answers to complex issues bumper-sticker simple for the learning-impaired. The typical post on this board is Exhibit A. No need to keep smearing Obama, guys. Absolutely no hope is left here. We won’t elect an intelligent, forward-thinking President in the US of Ignoramuses - not for a long, long time.

By Willie

August 21, 2008 10:10 AM | Link to this

By Michael McCarthy August 21, 2008 9:29 AM | Wow! You woke me up with history and facts. Tnanky you…

By GaLiberal

August 21, 2008 10:22 AM | Link to this

It is not irresponsible people who are at fault. Ever since Reagan, the standard of living for the middle class has been declining. Salaries have not kept up with inflation and you now have to fund your retirement. People have to use debt to make up for the difference.

The Rethuglicons have done an excellent job a conning everyone into believing they are better off with lower taxes and less government. Just tell that to people that worked for Enron or other companies that forced their employees into buying only company stock. So when the company tanks there goes your retirement. Bush and the Rethuglicons have just exacerbated a process that started with Reagan. I’ll remember in November. Will you?

When you vote Rethuglicon, you vote against your own best interests. And the erosion of the middle class is living proof.

By ButtHead

August 21, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this

Right GaLiberal, we have a dimacrat congress that the only record they have set is that they have done less than any other congress. Boy that is a proud moment in history. Vote Rethuglacan is against your best interest, vote Dimacrat and get exactly nothing, what a choice…

By Joe

August 21, 2008 11:16 AM | Link to this

Sitting around waiting to get bailed out. Kind of reminds you of the liberal philosophy. It’s hard to imagine anything getting better as long as we have libs in charge of Congress. I think the majority of dems are good people but Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid obviously do not represent the people in this great country. Having the twin loons in charge is why I believe they wanted Obama instead of Hillary to be the dem nominee. They realize with his total lack of experience that they would run rough shot over the will of the people and raise taxes as high as they want. Of course this will be for those that are sitting around waiting to be bailed out and severely hurt the middle class while doing this.

By Common Sense

August 21, 2008 12:00 PM | Link to this

To: Ajc/bud Wiser and Paul

What does this topic have to do with Mr. Obama? We have a balloning deficit and the only thing you 3 losers can talk about is Mr. Obama.

People like you get into positions and create chaos, just like Mr. Bush. You blame everyone but the right person.

Mr. Obama relationship with Mr. Ayers etc,etc.

The 2 year old democratic congress should make do wonders and change the path of destruction in 2 years after 6 years of dunder kept from the Bush Adminstration.

What is happening to the United States citzens when we cannot see we need people who actually care about this country.

McClain we will win the Iraq war! I thought we already won the war. That is what Mr. Bush stated.

I will cut taxes for everyone and keep 2 wars going. Now as I take a look at our currently economy, How is Mr. McClain going to do that?

By RealityKing

August 21, 2008 12:05 PM | Link to this

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

As you can see, the National debt has indeed gone up and down dramatically, throughout our history.

But hey.., look! The sky is still above us.

By Paul

August 21, 2008 12:12 PM | Link to this

Common Sense 12:00

We are selecting a President who, many hope will take action on the ‘deficit’ - driven primarily by Social Security and Medicare.

What does it have to do with Sen Obama? Sen Obama stated his fix for Social Security would be only to increase the earnings subject to Social Security tax. He would consider nothing else. Then, just a few days ago (link provided earlier) he said he would not work to implement his fix for ten years.

This is not about fixing blame. It’s about fixing the problem. If people think Sen Obama will take action to fix the financial problems largely driven by Social Security and Medicare, they need to consider if waiting ten years is acceptable. If it is, there is not a problem with voting for him. If one considers inaction for ten years a problem, then one has to consider that along with all the other factors that lead to a decision on whom to vote for.

By Randy

August 21, 2008 12:23 PM | Link to this

What’s the worry? We’ll just flake out on our debt like an over extended home flipper.

By GaLiberal

August 21, 2008 12:32 PM | Link to this

ButtHead: Look back over the last 20 years or so and the Rethuglicons have been in control of Congress more than Democrats. It’s the Rethuglicons that have made matters more difficult for the middle class with their ham-fisted economic policies of ‘free market’ and ‘less government interference.’ This has resulted in union busting by big business holding down wages and benefits for everyone. Add on the big lie about 401ks being better for you and it’s no wonder the middle class is having to use massive debt to pay for basics like housing and cars.

When you vote Rethuglicon, you vote against your own best interests. And the ButtHead is living proof.

By Marie

August 21, 2008 12:35 PM | Link to this

Jay:

You know as well as I do that the President alone is not responsible for spending. STOP THE PARTISANSHIP. Congress must also be held accountable for the massive amount of spending that has occurred in every administration.

While I am too young to remember the Reagan administration, I can say that President Bush has asked repeatedly for Congress to hold the line on spending. And while I readily agree that he should have vetoed a lot of the run away spending bills passed by the Republican controlled Congress; it is evident that Nancy PEAlosi and Harry Reid are doing NO BETTER in towing the line on spending.

Like folks say, IT IS SOOOOO EASY TO SPEND SOMEBODY ELSE’S MONEY. But this madness will never end until the people in this country declare enough is enough and do the Donald Trump and tell these clowns, ‘You’re Fired’!!

By sickfan

August 21, 2008 12:36 PM | Link to this

I don’t think that blaming Americans for their overspending is entirely fair considering our government and our corporate lords overtly push us to spend more. Remember if we spend more its good for the big wigs that run the show. The problem occurred when the corporate fat cats stopped paying us enough money to support the spending addiction they pushed on us. This miscalculation has lead to a real problem. You cannot simultaneously encourage people to buy stuff and then not pay them enough. Here’s the thing the big wigs don’t care until it hits their pocket book.

By Shawny

August 21, 2008 12:55 PM | Link to this

It isn’t about enough tax revenue, it is ALL about excessive spending. Review the text of any bill, any law, as it passes the house and then the senate and see the crap that is in there that has absolutely nothing to do with the main premise of the legislation. If you don’t get POed, then you no habla ingles.

If the person you plan on voting for promises to raise taxes on ANYONE… “rich”, shareowners, etc., then DO NOT VOTE FOR THEM. They plan on continuing ‘spending beyond our means’. Limit the power of the govt to spend, and everyone is better off. Less free rides, less social programs, less subsidies. The govt was not created to take care of the freeloaders, but rather to protect against foreign threats. We don’t need them for much else.

By Shawny

August 21, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this

GaLib, you show your ignorance in ways that defy belief.

Reagan’s policies righted a sinking ship, that was freefalling into an abyss made possible by Carter. The spending and tax cutting was the shot in the arm that we needed to get the machinery of economics going again.

The problem with what Reagan did was that after the economy turned around, the spending did not cease. Had pork projects been stopped, unnecessary programs eliminated, etc., then deficits would have been curtailed. Carter, Reagan, Bush I, and the first 2 years of Clinton had a DEMOCRATIC congress. Hmmmm….spiraling deficits and a DEMOCRATIC congress.

Enter the Contract w/America and 1995, when Republicans took congressional control and t budget was balanced. Do you think the balancing was Clinton’s acheivement?!? Does the president draft budgets?!? NO.

Problem #1 with with the Republican congress in its short tenure from 1995 - 2006, may it rest in peace, is that they strayed into the abyss themselves, spending like idiots and we tossed them out. Unfortunately, the current ‘foxes in the henhouse’ are as bad or worse.

By jwatl

August 21, 2008 1:18 PM | Link to this

Seldom agree with Mr. Bookman, but did he nail this one! Whatever happened to that nation that was far sighted enough to plan for our future; remained self reliant; drove ourselves to success; and willing to sacrifice for our kids and grandkids?? Each time I see TV commercials advertising ‘scooters for seniors — without costing a penny’ (paid for by MEDICARE), I am reminded just how far we have fallen. Mr. Bookman and former Sec O’Neil are correct: when we are unable to service our debt, watch China, India and the Mid East oil titans drop us like a hot potato!

By Jake

August 21, 2008 1:43 PM | Link to this

By Jake

August 21, 2008 1:52 PM | Link to this

Jay, Where did you get that alarmist 45% number? According to this the Treasury shows foreign held as of June 08 at about $2.6T or more like 18%. www.treas.gov/tic/mfh.txt

By Paul

August 21, 2008 2:10 PM | Link to this

Jake, you have a rich fantasy life. By definition, borrowing is done today, with a promise made to pay back with tomorrow’s dollars. I recall a time, not so very long ago, that we were on track to have a surplus.

By Chuck

August 21, 2008 2:14 PM | Link to this

Yeah, boy, Jake - those Chinese folks holding our deficit IOU’s are sure likely to snap up OUR manufactured goods, visit OUR restaurants - errrr, well, maybe not.

By ButtHead

August 21, 2008 2:20 PM | Link to this

GaLiberal, Union busting is a good thing, unions drive prices up and jobs go over seas. Thanks for making a good point for the republicans. Privatizing my 401K would be much better than the 2% that social security is paying, Thank you GaLiberal for making two great points why to vote republican. But wait there is more, Nancy Pelosi and Harry “Do Nothing” Reid are going to save the world, they should worry about their district, not the world. Dimacrats!

By Shawny

August 21, 2008 2:32 PM | Link to this

Had GM/Ford/Chrysler ‘union busted’ back when we were fat, dumb, and happy with no foreign competition, maybe they wouldn’t be facing bankruptcy today.

By Jake

August 21, 2008 3:15 PM | Link to this

Paul - Get educated. Google myths about national debt. What was the national debt 30 years ago when Reagan spent like crazy on his Star Wars fantasy? Or 20 and 10 years ago and how much of it has been paid back since? Answer none, it just gets re-financed over and over. Additionally, since we hold most of it, if we did ever pay it back we’d just be paying most of it to ourselves. Chuck - I agree they may not want our goods and services, but they have no choice. I still have some Eastern Caribbean currency I got on a cruise long ago. Why? I can’t spend it here. Actually most of the interest on the debt paid to foreigners has just been re-invested in the U.S., buying more debt, stocks or all those Japanese owned golf courses in Maui. Try buying ten pounds of rice in rural China with your U.S. dollars, you can’t do it. Ultimately you can only bury them in your back yard or buy U.S. goods and services.

By Slotl

August 21, 2008 3:39 PM | Link to this

Why do the Republican political advertisements time after time say that the “Democrats will increase taxes” or “tax and spend Democrats” while the Republican administrations run up deficits year after year?

McCain says Obama will RAISE taxes, but if McCain is elected President how does he intend to pay for this deficit?? Smoke and mirrors?? Taxes will go up no matter who is elected President. They have to!! You can count on that.

The underlying question is who will be taxed? McCain will continue to give tax breaks to major corporations (who don’t pay their fair share in the first place) and to the wealthy (who could afford the increase). The middle class will always pay the brunt. Always!!…and we can LEAST afford it with rising inflation, tight credit, expensive gas (for our cars, we haven’t hit the heating bills yet).

By Duke

August 21, 2008 3:45 PM | Link to this

It is interesting to note that all of our money is debt. That is the only way money can be created, and introduced into circulation. Every dollar in circulation still pays interest to some bank. If all debt were repaid, there would be no money. After the Civil War, people belatedly realized that as they paid off the war debt, they were extinguishing the money supply. It caused devastating deflation; and the more dollars they repaid in debt, the more the remaining debt was worth in terms of cotton, corn, etc..

There is no reason in the world why any nation should have to pay interest to anyone in order to issue its own money.

By professional skeptic

August 21, 2008 4:39 PM | Link to this

It should come as no surprise that Americans spend more money than they earn and owe more than they can pay back. After all, the battle call sung by our federal government is loud and clear: borrow and spend, borrow and spend!

Want a plasma TV? Borrow and spend! Want a bigger house? A fancy SUV? Borrow and spend! Take a job earning less income than in prior years, but still want to maintain your gluttonous lifestyle? Borrow and spend! Fight a war we cannot afford, because tax revenue doesn’t come close to covering the tab? Borrow and spend, borrow and spend!!

What happened to the days of saving up for major purposes? Finding ways to earn more money when we want/need to buy more? What happened to the days of Victory Gardens, when Americans used to work hard and make sacrifices to support war efforts?

Our nation’s pervasive borrow-and-spend mentality is absolutely disgusting. I’m going to see I.O.U.S.A tonight, and wondering whether anyone will be handing out airline barf bags as we file into the theater.

By Jimbo I

August 21, 2008 5:04 PM | Link to this

Guys this information has been out there for years. The Comptroller of the US has been saying we’re approaching an untenable position and that the nation is becoming insolvent.. IT DOESN’T MATTER who was in office or what they did. THIS has been coming for decades ever since we stopped replacing our numbers and in creasing our population. Sure the war debt doesn’t help but this is a result of years of deficit spending and the looming insurmountable menace of the baby boomers retiring.

Sniping about the war debt and the incredibly irresponsible deficit spending of the last 8 years is like crying about your sand castle in the shadow of a tsunami. Clinton’s surplus wouldn’t have mattered a bit in the face of this coming disaster. The sooner you grasp that the sooner we can move on to tossing baby boomers into volcanos or whatever reasonable solution I’m sure we’ll come up with. With any luck this whole thing with Russia will go south and we won’t have to worry about little things like our government’s fiscal collapse.

By professional skeptic

August 22, 2008 9:30 AM | Link to this

So yes, I caught I.O.U.S.A last night. Great film. The live Q&A session afterward left me slightly less of a fan of Warren Buffet, whose rosy ramblings about “pie” seemed out of touch with the stark financial reality that the film depicted. It’s one thing to disagree with the content of a documentary, but I would have expected someone of Mr. Buffet’s stature to offer facts, not rambling platitudes, to illustrate his views. Former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker was a rock star… as much as an CPA can be, at any rate!^^ He had to disagree with Mr. Buffet, and remind him sternly that the numbers don’t lie. It was 100% awesome.

What I struggle with, though, is the fact that Mr. Walker, who served in the highest accountancy position in the federal government (as head of the federal Government Accountability Office, on par with Attorney General or Surgeon General), felt obligated to resign from that position and join a not-for-profit group in order to speak out and try to make a difference about our nation’s addiction to debt!

It’s high time to give the nation’s top auditor more teeth, I say!

^^I’m a CPA too, so I ain’t knocking the guy!

By Jimbo I

August 24, 2008 7:59 AM | Link to this

@ Professional Skeptic

I think you’re right. The fact that none of the politicians want to own up to this one because they feel that anyone who does will be unelectable is what is disgusting. We need to give these people the ability to hold the government accountable, like real auditors. Our government makes Enron look like rank amateurs.

The fact that people want to believe that since things have never been that bad, they can never be that bad is stupid. We’re shoving our heads in the sand and hiding from it.

Meanwhile both candidates either want to reduce our revenue or increase our spending without really fixing things because that’s what the people want. The people want Rome to fall. This is like opening the gates and letting the barbarians in for tea.

Maybe I’m a sky is falling kind of guy, but our prospects don’t look good and you don’t have to be a CPA to understand addition and subtraction and positives and negatives.