Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2006 > September > 15 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USGovernment spending has to be tamed
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
It’s a simple question posed by state Sen. Chip Rogers (R-Woodstock).
“Do the voters have a right to tell us how much of their money we should spend?”
It is, acknowledged Angela Palm, policy director for the Georgia School Boards Association, at the core of a recurring debate: How big should government be?
The chairman of the Houston County Board of Commissioners, Ned Sanders, avers that “I don’t know anybody that wants to grow government bigger than it already is.” But with demands, mandates, judicial orders and the like, it grows, he said.
The debate about the size and role of government, occurring on the day that Gov. Sonny Perdue announced a plan to exempt Georgians older than 65 from the state income tax levied on retirement income, does highlight one of the essential challenges confronting a party that presents itself as fiscal conservatives.
It is to determine how much of taxpayers’ money government should be allowed to spend and where it should come from. It’s not just Georgia, either. Around the country — in Colorado, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska and Nevada, among other states — taxpayers are attempting to find ways to limit government’s growth by limiting its spending. There is no other discipline.
Thursday’s debate came in presentations to the state Senate’s tax and expenditure limitation study committee, headed by state Sen. Mitch Seabaugh (R-Sharpsburg).
The search is for a “fair” way to check government’s growth. Most efforts, including Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR), passed as a constitutional amendment in 1992, attempt to do that by limiting spending to increases in population and inflation. Colorado’s caused problems because voters also mandated increases for education that worsened cuts elsewhere. The idea, however, is sound.
At Thursday’s hearing, Emily Daniels, policy director for the nonprofit Georgia Family Council, charted budget and spending growth dating back a quarter-century. Using an average of the rate of inflation and population growth for the preceding three years — done to avoid relying on the gyrations of a single year — she tracked the impact of a TABOR-like cap.
It reveals three or four spending spikes. Many came after economic downturns and were accounted for in the ’90s by higher spending for Medicaid and for teacher salaries, she notes, made possible in part by Olympics-related job growth.
Had a cap been in place starting in 1980, the state budget would have grown to $14.75 billion in 2006, said Daniels. Instead it was $17.85 billion.
Had it started in 1990, the budget would have been $17.38 billion. Employed from 2000, it could have been $18.02 billion, she said, or more than it actually was.
Any cap would include an emergency provision. And spending could be raised if voters agree. Said Rogers, “It seems like such common-sense legislation because it really does put the power back in the hands of citizens, whose money we’re spending.”
Local officials, such as Sanders, were concerned that they not get boxed in. Palm, the school boards’ representative, questioned whether caps don’t “put fiscal policy on remote control.” Other government programs can be contained by limiting eligibility.
But with education, “Government has no control over the demand. Nor does any one level or branch of government solely control the regulations that may be added.”
Some form of spending discipline is an idea whose time has come. One key is finding a formula, especially a formula for inflation as experienced by government — concrete, for example — that disciplines spenders without creating unnecessary problems.
This, however, is just part of a larger questions that needs addressing: What should government do? What can be delegated to the private sector? And how and where should taxes be levied? For years, tax reform has been a stalking horse for expanding the sales tax to services, thereby ultimately giving politicians more to spend.
Reform the system, yes. But with an idea toward controlling spending, not making it easier.
Permalink | Comments (98) | Post your comment | Categories: Column
Services »
Comments
By Mid-South Philosopher
September 16, 2006 08:07 AM | Link to this
Good morning, Jim,
In a word, “Amen” to your column today.
Of course, the solution is amendments (to the national and state constitutions) that would prohibit legislative bodies at the national, state, and local levels from enacting any legislation, establishing any mandates, or putting into place any rules without showing how the same are going to be paid for and by repealing or defunding some other legislation, mandate, or rule to compensate for the new costs without increasing taxation.
Most legislators at “all” levels, even the sober ones, are not competent to deal with that task.
By The Way
September 16, 2006 08:08 AM | Link to this
On the state level, it is imperative that we allocate tax money to provide retroactive tax loopholes for our elected officials. Without that, we couldn’t get the class act that we now have at the gubernatorial level. Who would bother running for office without special tax incentives? We’d be stuck with mediocre officials, and our beloved Georgia would suffer.
BTW: I gotta uncle who lives in Taxes….
By getalife
September 16, 2006 08:47 AM | Link to this
Chertoff said we can’t protect the homeland or we will go bankrupt. It is Iraq stupid.
W said if he does not get to torture he will disband the CIA group to catch terrorists. Lunatic.
The Muslims say they need nukes to protect us and Israel from attacking them like Iraq and Lebanon. Failed neocon plan .
Jim says they spend too much money. Go figure.
By The Way
September 16, 2006 08:50 AM | Link to this
Amen! Typical Neo-theo-con.
Amen is better than “smooch”, or “ditto”, but there’s a bigger problem.
End game scenarios in Iraq are all lose lose, but there’s a bigger problem.
There’s no question we’re going to have to cut back social entitlements for the millions of poor urbanites and rural leeches who feel the world owes them a living, which leads to the biggest problem.
Starting with Nixon, and continuing through Clinton and now Bush, our institutions have lost their respect and awe. The intrinsic authority that commanded blind obedience by the vast majority of Americans is disappearing. We really do despise Bush, and the congress, and have taken their measure as greedy fools.
Americans now feel that a level of chaos is warping our national destiny.
Anarchy is encroaching in the zeitgeist on global and regional levels. It is possible that we will suffer a socio-cultural revolution. Armed white supremacists, drug warlords and their para-military gangs, and immigrant militias are already here.
What vestiges of national unity holding them back are disappearing. The “war on terror” is a neo-constructed re-election campaign slogan. The real enemy is us, of course, (and Katie Couric).
“But by then, Mr. President, cooler heads will prevail.” (quote from the Joint Chiefs urging Kennedy to invade Cuba, where a retaliatory nookyoolar response lay in ambush by a well-meaning but misinformed soviet general)
By catlady
September 16, 2006 09:02 AM | Link to this
I always laugh (sadly) when I see people calling for reduced government and spending, but who, I suspect, are not willing to give up their favorable tax perogatives, such as the tax/mortgage benefit, or exemptions on the 401k. When the other guy gets it it is waste, welfare, etc. When we get it it is because we “deserve” it.
By Fall Line
September 16, 2006 09:13 AM | Link to this
One area in which I would disagree with Sanders is when he says, “But with education, “Government has no control over the demand. Nor does any one level or branch of government solely control the regulations that may be added.” Government can control demand for schools by controlling development. Here in Cherokee County, growth is outstripping our schools and the only answer the politicians can come up with is to build more schools. The idea of keeping growth to a level we can live with is anathema to them.
Many states are trying hard to attract retirees because of what they bring to the table. They don’t require jobs; the money they bring to the state is usually generated outside the state; they are in the highests percentile of home ownership and in the lowest percentile of crime, both violent and non-violent. Their spending creates jobs, and the property taxes they pay support the schools for other people’s children.
What’s not to like?
By @@
September 16, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this
Jim:
This is one of those economic topics that confuses me. I do like Mid-South Philosopher’s suggestion. Everytime politicians get together to enact some new law or program, it requires additional operating expense, and more often than not is inefficient in its’ execution. Road maintenance will open your eyes to that reality. Seven state vehicles, heavy equipment, twelve government employees, and two guys wielding a shovel while 8 stand around and two nap on the job.
When you see Congress, the Supreme Court & legal buzzards debating on how a law should be interpreted, you have to ask yourself if we have too many laws.
Anyway. I’d like to see schools privatized, healthcare privatized, postal service privatized, & developers assume more financial responsibility in road maintenance.
Private enterprise will always go for the bottom line, government goes for the “clothesline.” Aaaaggghhhhh!
Now I’ll just sit back and learn if it’s O.K.
By getalife
September 16, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this
w is starting to warn us that since the #2 Iraq and #3 Iran oil producing countries have allied, they could use oil as an economic weapon.
By Political Foreskin
September 16, 2006 09:22 AM | Link to this
Getalife, there’s no more to be said about Iraq. It’s moot. Waste time with it if you want. Your insights are two years behind the curve. (and you’re the most informed. Imagine how slow the others are).
Last word on Iraq: …….Civil Wars are necessary in a country’s development. It’s natural, and no big deal. It’s a fact of life, and we may as well mourn the loss of a gizelle to a cheetah as the loss of more sunnis to the shia. Let them fight to a stalemate and they’ll negotiate a peace. Without us. Period.
We’ve got bigger threats to our national security on the homefront from our own citizens. Resource allocations are the enzymes stoking our angry rebellion.
Be specific you say? The trillion bucks Bush wants to spend on Iraqi Baby Boomers is my social security money, and that ticks me off. I DONT want to arm myself and climb a tower and start shooting at little baby bunnies or nothing, but I want Bush and Cheney to resign effective noon tomorrow.
Most of my generation are lazy thinkers who react violently when they are confronted with themselves. Just look at the blogs here. The threats that some bloggers make against other bloggers are symptomatic of the changes in our collective rage that the internet has wrought. (would you trust tftt with your baby bunny after his uniblogger act?)
If we’ve seen all this chaos before, and survived, it was only because there wasn’t an internet to compel an immediate remedy, (for perceived injustices). The fruition of that remedy has been the instigation of all wars since Adam.
By getalife
September 16, 2006 09:40 AM | Link to this
PF,
The disaster of Iraq is just starting. It grows daily. The Muslims hatred grows daily. The Pope did not help the situation, he made it worse like Israel and our continued invasion on their land.
How will it end and when? I have no idea but it does not look good.
By time for the truth
September 16, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this
So unhinged foreskin’s latest voluntary utterly pointless inpatient treatment has finished. Clearly the poorly engaged doctors have again made no difference to its normative levels of deranged paranoia and what passes for its usual twisted thinking. Its cringing attempts at humour amusingly as ever are as gormless and nescient as we have come to expect. As for its doltish knuckle dragging attempts at poltical analysis - clearly dyslexic visually impaired deaf chimps have more insights!! So nothing new there then!!
Clearly govt spending should be as limited as possible. Housing projects withing the next three years or so should be made to be economically self sufficient, tax payers should not be subsidising drug dealing and car jacking and sluttish behaviour resulting in rabbit like levels of offspring.
Title one and other frivolous educational spending should be gradually cut every year from now on. No more tax dollars on promoting the evils of homsexuality in schools. Same for any racist quotas spending and the millions wasted on enforcing and promoting racial spoils entitlements - all of which should also be quickly phased out so there is finally an equal playing field for everyone.
All taxpayer subsidies for public transport and the arts should be annually cut with the view to eradicating such wasteful spending in less than five years.
Mental patients should be made to work, thus making some contribution to their taxpayer treatment - obviously only if medically possible, no one should be forced to do so if they genuinely cant. But such freeloading is morally unacceptable. Even basic hospital cleaning by able bodied mental inpatients would make a difference to budgets and give patients a sense of achievement.
There are numerous ways that public spending can be slashed without risking national defence and security. College admission criteria should be drastically revised and made much more demanding. Simply resorting to the academic standards prevalent in the 1970’s would be an excellent starting point.
Clearly there are way too many morons just coasting into increasingly expensive higher education and then dropping out after a year or so when clearly they have been allowed to enrol in courses way beyond them. Pandering to minorities in this area is by far the worst waste of public funds - stop the dumbing down of colleges and then those who do graduate will have meaningful degrees they have truly earned.
By Van
September 16, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this
People seemed confused about taxes and the size of government, there is a direct correlation. More government, the more taxes it takes to support it. Remember folks, the government has no product to sell to make money, it is all on the tax payer.
My favorite take scheme would be a 12% payroll tax, we never see it, no FICA, no med-care taxes, just 12%, and a 12% national sales tax on finished goods.
This leaves the working poor in good share, sense all the payroll taxes are more than 12% and we are left with a modest 12% sales tax, add to that 6%+ local sales taxes and it works out rather fair.
But, the wackos that want the government to “help” them, medical care, food, housing, transportation, living wage, etc. They do not understand that nothing is free and it isn’t the governments money, it is ours.
Smaller Government means more in your paycheck, it is that simple.
By time for the truth
September 16, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this
read this maggot brain and be ashamed … be very ashamed of your leftist rabble!!
http://www.gop.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=6576
By Dusty
September 16, 2006 10:56 AM | Link to this
Today is beautiful. Not a cloud in the blue sky and the sun shining like gold. We live in the greatest country in the world with freedom that is the envy of the less fortunate everywhere.
So what do we have here this morning. Doom and gloom from an invasion of liberals. Only Mid South and @@ even offer some thoughts on taming government spending. I don’t know any magic solutions but if we let our government know, state and national, that we WANT LESS SPENDING they will hear us. As @@ said, privatize more. As MidSouth said, No more laws and requirements without absolute figures on where the money is to come from (without raising taxes).
So what solutions do we get from liberals? Getalife wants us to cut’n’run in Iraq, of course. Political Foreskin wants Bush and Cheney to resign. And the Way declares that everyone not only despises Bush, but thinks of Congress as greedy fools. That is the liberal “solution” to everything.
Almost 50% of Americans are in favor of Bush. Most Americans realize that Iraq is a mean war just as most wars are and it isn’t easy. The president said that from the beginning.
So liberals most rightly can ask questions, but do they have a right to undermine the morale of this country? There is a difference between political discussion and outright condemnation. Liberals don’t know that.
On this bright and sunny day, I suggest we support our country with thoughtful debate without the hate and condemnation. Also, as Jim suggested, good ways to cut spending.
By getalife
September 16, 2006 11:06 AM | Link to this
“lies,
That link was pathetic, figures.
Try this one, it seems they are digging trenches around Baghdad
Going medieval to protect the politicians. Wow. Amazing. WTF?
By CJ
September 16, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this
I concur with Dusy…especially the part about “most” wars being mean. If only Iraq were one of the nice ones. Oh well…ka-sara-sara
By getalife
September 16, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this
crusty,
Ignorant as usual.
Go outside and play in your little fantasy world.
We are talking about reality here.
By Dusty
September 16, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this
Getalife,
I don’t usually respond to your “complimentary ” comments but I do wish to thank you for your nickname “crusty” whenever I post.
Crusty reminds me of that great apple pie with the brown sugar crisp topping that is so delicious. I’m sure that is what you have in mind. I have some pet names for you too. But I will leave the cute names to you as that is your specialty, not mine.
By Redneck Convert
September 16, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this
Well, I’ve recovered from my monthly bath, and now I see everyone complaining about taxes. I say let’s stop spending tax money on Those People and cut the taxes on things people really need, like Skoal, Beech Nut, and beer. Even my great hero, His Exacellancy Sonny, raised the taxes on those things. If he wasn’t a Republican, I would swear he don’t have little peoples interest at heart.
If it’s something that benefits me, then let govmint keep doing it. If it benefits somebody else, then stop it.
Let’s stop spending on education beyond the 5th grade, which I flunked and it didn’t hurt me none. If people want to go on and become librul pinheads, they can pay for their own schooling. And amen to making those crazy people work. They may not know what they are doing, but they can work just the same. And get rid of social security. The preacher says that if God had intended for old people to get paid for being old, they would have been borned with trust funds.
Well, gotta go. The boys down at Billy Bob’s plan to revoke TFTT’s Ornery Membership tonite on account of his nasty reply to their invitation, and I gotta be there early.
By time for the truth
September 16, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this
maggot brain
http://www.barking-moonbat.com/index.php/weblog/comments/civilrightsliesandthedamnlyingdemocratswhotellthem/
THIS IS THE BEST LINK OF ALL huge smirk
http://www.ihatedemocrats.com/
By CJ
September 16, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this
Hey TFTT!!! Happy Saturday pal!!!
Isn’t it amazing how a liberal like me and a conservative like you can become such good friends after only a couple of days? Working together, I’m confident that you and I can set an example to help reduce the animosity among some of the regulars here.
An observation - scanning some of the yesterday’s posts, I get the impression that Captain Freedom isn’t your biggest fan. I’m not as insightful as you, but do you get that feeling too? I don’t think he understands your subtle humor like Barbara and I do. I wouldn’t hold it against him though - some people like their coffee black.
You’re the cream in my coffee TFTT. No - I’m not gay, and I’m not black either. So, what did that mean? I don’t actually know. The words felt right, so I wrote them down.
You see - it’s sort of like a Dusty post. For Dusty, making sense is secondary. Her post @10:56 is a good example. Did you read the part where she asks whether we liberals have the right to undermine the morale of this country? You’re darn right we do. It’s in the Bill of Rights: “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of liberals to undermine the morale of this country.” Ain’t freedom grand?
Catch up with you later Truth Man.
By getalife
September 16, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this
I think of “crusty the clown”.
By getalife
September 16, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this
I will pass on your idiotic links.
My links are the truth and not fantasy like crusty the clown.
It seems you have made a friend here “lies”, hard to believe with your ugly mindset.
By time for the truth
September 16, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this
CJ just keeps on proving its a serial wanker!!
maybe you and dumb as hogsqueeze inbred redneck should get a room at Bubba JimBob’s Flea Pit Motel and consummate the most witless pairing on the ajc forums!!
By time for the truth
September 16, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
sobering thought for the afternoon
Ted Kennedy’s car killed more people than Dick Cheney’s shotgun!
By GaLiberal
September 16, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this
JW is typical of small minds that purport to be intelligent. Government spending is not driven by ‘mandates’; it’s driven by the people. People demand better schools with smaller class sizes so the government on schools. People demand an end to road congestion so the government builds roads. People demand that criminals be so the government builds prisons. People demand so the government provides them. As the population expands and becomes more diverse, more and more demands are made and spending grows exponentially. Only when people quit demanding things will government spending become controllable. And that will never happen. Maybe Sonny should pay that $100,000 tax break he passed for himself.
By Political Foreskin
September 16, 2006 12:35 PM | Link to this
Cynthia Tucker has a blockbuster column today.
The oil companies have merged and are now truly global institutions too large and too international to ever bring under control.
We are at their mercy, and the mercy of their puppets, Bush and Cheney.
The question now is this: How far down the path of war will Bush and Cheney take us at the bequest of big oil? If they wont heed our demands they pull out of Iraq, then Iran and Syria have to be our next targets.
The crusaders were free to pick their targets, depending on the evolving logistical situation and what spin the soldiers would buy and still respect the commanders.
It’s the same now. Spin it and invade.
It used to be that arguments ended with “I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the last drop of blood your right to express your opinion.”
Nobody says that anymore, we’re too busy apologizing to the world for the obscene scoundrels on the far right.
By jbmlaw
September 16, 2006 12:39 PM | Link to this
Galiberal, you would support a Federal law denying any Federal court the power to direct spending for any program by any particular local government entity? You would deny EPA power to direct inefficient production of particular grades of gasoline for particular parts of the country for particular times of the year?
If you are with us on eliminating mandates issued by self-important litigators, we can win the battle. “The people” do not demand anything that costs more. On schools, “the people” demand vouchers, yet denied by the power-elite. “The people” do not demand imprisoning any but violent criminals, but the leftist drive to criminalize business practices and self-medication certainly pushes capacity in our prisons.
I cannot envision that diversity contributes anything to the costs of government. Surely you jest.
Dr. Walter E Williams has a great idea - require anyone who demands anything of government to purchase a gun and go get whatever they want without the government’s assistance. Theft, whether by individuals or by governments, is unethical. At least if we required each thief to take his own, we get a chance to shoot back.
By jbmlaw
September 16, 2006 12:43 PM | Link to this
PF, message coming in - put on your aluminum hat.
By Redneck Convert
September 16, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this
Well, most of the boys is here at Billy Bob’s, but Joe Bill and a few others is up at Countryland Golf Club using the trick of nudging the ball with their foot like Markus. My buddy Jim Earl says its a shame this TFTT can’t get along with people, cause he thinks just like us. So I guess we’ll withdraw his Ornery Membership on account of he don’t have the social skills we need.
This Dusty person sure does raise a ruckus. Why ain’t she baking pies or doing other things for her man, instead of setting at a PC writing? Let us men do the hard thinking.
Anyway, I sure am disappointed that the libruls are blasting Sonny about that 100 thousand tax break he got passed for himself. If a guy can’t make a little money in office, why should he spend millions getting elected? And we can make up for it by cutting Those People from the welfare rolls and making those freeloaders pay for their own kids medical treatment. I always say if you can’t afford kids don’t have sex.
And another thing. It don’t matter why we went to war. If we are at war, we should just shut up and stop blasting the Bush people. This free speach bunk is just that. We shouldn’t be giving aid and comfort to the enemy. And we shouldn’t be bashful about dunking a few towel-heads under water and making them talk or maybe putting Dustys underwear on their head. I say whatever the Bush people want is good enough for me. Save the critacism until when a Democrat is in office. Its the Amerikkkan and Redneck way. This country was founded by Rednecks, and we will run it any way we see fit.
By Dusty
September 16, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this
Poor liberals,
A little optimism is definitely not “cool”. If you have any, you’ve lost your mind. Just keep repeating “The sky is falling”. Free speech reigns until you lose it.
And that is exactly why I support this administration. I truly believe they are trying to protect us from those who would love to “free” this world of Americans.
Keep the “nitty gritty” going. Be cute and cool. In the meantime, I’ll be preachy and love this country. And watch out, I may go so far as to mention “patriotism”. Shhhh
By Dusty
September 16, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this
Aw, come on, rednecks,
You know women run this world. They just let the men think they own it. But men are sweethearts…most of them.
If you don’t like what I say, just grin and bear it. I got four sons all bigger than you, one with a super tire pickup and three with black belts.
We know terror prisoners would be safe with you. You don’t wear underwear and hate water. You can be head guard and the terrorists would smell America’s secret weapon. Forgive my indelicacy. You can take it (or leave it).
By getalife
September 16, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this
Your boys should be in Iraq or Afganistan showing true patriotism.
By Dusty
September 16, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this
Getalife,
You don’t even know what an honorable discharge looks like. Well, my son, the only one eligible at this time, has one he received after long service in the military. So does my husband and my father.
Now, either sign up yourself or MYOB. I will not respond to you any more.
By getalife
September 16, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this
Poor little wingnut.
My father served with Patton as his communication officer. I know more about war than you think.
I would listen to these military men instead of chickenhawk cowards
By Political Foreskin
September 16, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this
Cheney was the one who linked 911 to saddam on Meet the Press and other public forums, and continued to imply the link as late as early this year. He’s abandoned that link, cause he knows that it makes him look like the low down, lying piece of red state scum he truly is.
Bush was content to imply that an imminent mushroom cloud was hanging over new york city direct from baghdad, which he’s still clinging to and which makes him look like the no good, yellow, lying piece of red state scum he truly is.
By Markus
September 16, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this
Gitmolife-
We would much appreciate it if you would stop lying on this blog. We know you are a sad individual and have no life. We know you invent yourself in many different aliases on this blog. We know that you drivel up some friends to pick we conservative bloggers out one by one and try to discredit him or her. We know your blatant hatred and animosity towards those that don’t think like you (read: conservatives). The closest your “father” (if you even knew who he was) served with Patton was as a KP potato peeler.
Further, your BS links serve no purpose. Nobody reads them anyway. You sad pathetic miserable creature. Blogging all day on a gorgeous Saturday. What are you, physically LAME or something? In a wheelchair? We all know you are mentally LAME. How absolutely sad.
By Truth or consequences?
September 16, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this
Just dropped by today to see if Mr TFTT responded with even one non-partisan link. TFTT has so far decided to pass on that challenge.
TFTT is just a bombastic blowhard with nothing of substance to contribute.
By getalife
September 16, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this
Macaca,
I would say you are the most ignorant pos on this blog.
I am watching football, drinking Crown, smoking cigars and bashing wingnuts all at the same time.
Very entertaining.
By catlady
September 16, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
This has to be the most uncivil forum associated with the AJC!
By Markus
September 16, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this
If Bush went to war in Iraq solely on the premise that Saddam had direct al Qaeda ties AFTER Democrats in Congress overwhelmingly approved for the authority for war, then why no quotes from said Democrats on a direct link to Saddam and al Qaeda? We’ve got plenty on their stances on Saddam’s WMDs.
gitmolife, you’re up.
By Markus
September 16, 2006 03:03 PM | Link to this
If Bush went to war in Iraq solely on the premise that Saddam had direct al Qaeda ties AFTER Democrats in Congress overwhelmingly approved for the authority for war, then why no quotes from said Democrats on a direct link to Saddam and al Qaeda? We’ve got plenty on their stances on Saddam’s WMDs.
gitmolife, you’re up.
By CJ
September 16, 2006 03:13 PM | Link to this
Hey Dusty,
Re: your 2:05 post. What does an honorable discharge look like?
By Markus
September 16, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this
Wooten touched a soft spot on traditional conservatives on this topic. All of these “polls” that the media loves to tout on Bush’s unpopularity specifically amongst conservatives is a Cheech-n-Chong pipe dream.
Sure we are upset at the Bush-led GOP spending habits. However, if any liberal in the media or on blogs or in Washington thinks that said conservatives are going to reject future Republicans, whatever questionably fashion they run on like Chafee, and vote Democrat or even sit this one out, they are more deranged than they know.
No, we’re not happy with the GOP right now by and large. But we know the alternative. So liberals, sit down, stop drooling, and reflect inwards as to why you jackasses can’t win elections. Maybe you people need to acknowledge out of the closet that you people are really socialist liberals. Running on a LIBERAL SOOCIALIST platform would get you people ahead in this nation, wouldn’t it?
By @@
September 16, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this
Jim: I’m in for a glass of water. I’ve been cutting grass.
Let’s add prisons to that list of those things that can be privatized. Put some retired military guys in charge as wardens. Whose that guy out in the southwest who is so controversial? Some just like him would be great. I like the idea of retired military teaching our kids too. Our society needs some structure. We’re loose and lazy.
And tort reform Jim….How about some tort reform? The losers pay. It’ll inspire all of us to be winners.
By Markus
September 16, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
Uhmmm… gitmolife? Your turn. Hit me with your best shot at a response. Google minutes don’t count. You know the topic.
By getalife
September 16, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this
Markus,
The intell was dead wrong. The Dems said they were wrong. W won’t.
You think the Dems will screw up worse than the gop, just look at when they were the majority.
No comparison.
The country was on the right track.
By Markus
September 16, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this
Oh NO you don’t, gitmolife. Now you are trying to switch back to false intel on WMDs. That kite won’t fly liberal jackass. I S-P-E-C-I-F-I-C-A-L-L-Y asked you about YOUR topic on an Iraq-al Qaeda link mentioned S-P-E-C-I-F-I-C-A-L-L-Y by Bush (or anyone ELSE in his cabinet) pre-war, and you come up with absolutely NOTHING.
By the way, as I’ve said here countless times, I’ll take the GOP ANY DAY over candyassed neomarxist socialist liberals that want to dictate all fashions of America, from corporate pay scales to healthcare to retirement. Thanks, but no thanks, jackasses.
By Dusty
September 16, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this
CJ, the doubter, since you asked,
I have a framed enlistment document that I can reach easy. This one starts at the top saying:The President of the United States of America,….to all that shall see these presents, greeting: Know ye,that reposing special trust and confidence in the patriotism, valor, fidelity and abilities of (my father’s name|, I do appoint him First Lieutenant…..
This is my father’s enlistment paper when he served quite honorably as a doctor. My husband’s discharge is in a file((also lieutenant but Navy) and my son has his at his place. All three served overseas.
I will post no more information about my family. Now, CJ, let us hear about your military experience.
By getalife
September 16, 2006 04:09 PM | Link to this
I posted it on the last thread macaca.
Here admit the failure like this wingnut:
“Rightwing radio host in LA, Doug McIntyre, apolgizes for voting for Bush and calls him the worst president in American history.
This is an eloquent and sincere analysis of Bush’s betrayals and failures from a genuine conservative.
So, I’m saying today, I was wrong to have voted for George W. Bush. In historic terms, I believe George W. Bush is the worst two-term President in the history of the country. Worse than Grant. I also believe a case can be made that he’s the worst President, period.”
Just admit macaca.
By Markus
September 16, 2006 04:17 PM | Link to this
Dusty-
Don’t waste your time attempting to validate personal/family military experience with these tinfoil hat appeasement liberals. Serving our great nation in the military wasn’t important to them during Election 1992, so it shouldn’t be important to the pathetic hypocrites now. Again, stop wasting your time with these liberal goons. Their opinion on the matter isn’t worth an autumn red oak gutter leaf.
By Political Foreskin
September 16, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this
I have to give the point to Markus on that last exchange. He alone knew that “jackass” would get through the word screens. That’s quite a coup, sir. Bravo.
Cheney made the 911 saddam link. Cheney is part of the Bush Administration. Therefore: The Bush Administration made the 911-saddam link.
I know that the term “administration” has more than two syllables and thus Markus cant understand it, but most americans can, and that’s why markus claims that Bush never made the 911-saddam link. Markus should just watch football, and stfu.
All of Markus’s, realisps, tftt, and barb’s arguments have this type of logical flaw, which is why they can only resort to threats: they’re very angry people. Markus, ignorant and angry is no way to get ahead in life, at most, you will only succeed in giving yourself a heart attack. And that would be a dang shame.
By getalife
September 16, 2006 04:30 PM | Link to this
Macaca is one of the wingnuts who will never admit to anything.
His head will explode when w is on trial.
w has backed himself into a corner with the torture thing.
By Markus
September 16, 2006 04:34 PM | Link to this
gitmolife, you are a priceless piece of liberal work. So now you are saying you voted FOR George W. Bush. Hell, and to think I thought getting the L word out was hard enough from you people! Good God almighty. That statement you made has GOT to take all in the HISTORY of blogging ANYWHERE. Did I not remind you not to LIE to us earlier?
No, you still can’t address the original topic on why no Democrats who voted FOR autority of the Iraq war didn’t utter ONE WORD about an alleged D-I-R-E-C-T link between Saddam and 9/11 as so insinuated by you and your ilk.
How utterly, FREAKING pathetic.
By getalife
September 16, 2006 04:39 PM | Link to this
Can you read Macaca? That is a quote from a wingnut. Read it again.
You are a liar.
By Markus
September 16, 2006 04:41 PM | Link to this
Political snakeskin, et. al.:
Take heed, clown(s). Not you, your alias gitmolife, or any other has provided a DIRECT LINK to Democrats who voted FOR authority to go to war in Iraq on direct Saddam-al Qaeda links as the PRIMARY reason to go to war. If they didn’t mention anything about it, then it must have NOT been a priority. Please let me know if you need me to tone down the direct logical correlation factor for you liberal twinkletoe(s).
Give it up liberal goon(s). You’ve been painted into a corner. Now move along to the next liberal bedwetting toilet topic o’day. Say, “free” healthcare.
By Markus
September 16, 2006 04:47 PM | Link to this
Yeah that’s right getmolife, you support someone’s opinion who ALLEGEDLY voted for W and take it as gold. So as far as I’m concerned, you are on the same page as him. Or, are you just a cherry-pinkin’ lib who likes to point out inner-party differences out of one butt cheek while saying that all right-wingers are sheep out of the other butt cheek? BTW, I’ve never heard of said person. Not that I have time to listen to talk radio or much else during the weekday while “stepping on the backs of the poor” to better my life.
By getalife
September 16, 2006 04:51 PM | Link to this
What a dumbass.
By Markus
September 16, 2006 04:58 PM | Link to this
Be careful what you post here fellow bloggers, gitmolife can’t interpret reverse logic. If you post something from a leftist website, they may claim you to be a closet liberal and on their side, and if you call them on it, they’ll just say you can’t read or are cherry-picking. Take your logic arguments down a few notches, please.
By Dusty
September 16, 2006 04:59 PM | Link to this
Markus,
Thanks for the good advice. I know I shouldn’t try to prove anything to liberals who want to believe nothing.
It is so frustrating when you love this country and your family fights for it, and then these people act like they are talking about trash.
The distorted facts, the straight out lies and pure hate for our elected president are too much to accept as dissent. It is more like subversion.
The worst fact of all is the knowledge that these are Americans. At least, I think so.
By Markus
September 16, 2006 05:04 PM | Link to this
Gitmolife-
Any rebuttal for any Democrat comments on Saddam and al-Qaeda links yet when they voted FOR authority to go to war? Inquiring minds wanna know.
BTW, “jackass” is just one name for a certain animal. I can’t help it if your political party chose the symbol of said animal over 200 years ago.
By getalife
September 16, 2006 05:06 PM | Link to this
“crusty the clown,”
The whole supported the war in Afghanistan. He threw it away for Iraq and lost the support.
Deal with it.
By Allaina
September 16, 2006 05:07 PM | Link to this
Oh my goodness. I’ve been catching up on some work and checking in here occasionally.
These liberal folks really can’t answer a question directly. When they can’t, they call people names or change the subject.
Oh my goodness. I’m going to have to watch them more closely.
Very good Markus!
By getalife
September 16, 2006 05:09 PM | Link to this
Your logic is flawed macaca.
My party is my country dumbass.
By Markus
September 16, 2006 05:16 PM | Link to this
“Your party” uh getmolife? Well, I’m glad we cleared that up. Therefore, you shouldn’t wet your pretty pink satin liberal sheets when “we” show quotes from leftists on Saddam’s WMDs. Not that an al-Qaeda link was the predominate reason for going INTO said situation, right there my little leftist friend?
Michigan kicking Notre Shame’s butt. Priceless.
By pookapooka
September 16, 2006 05:31 PM | Link to this
Both Whitfield County and the City of Dalton have gleaming new government centers that more than tripled the size of their previous digs. Those politicians obviously have no plans to rein in spending. Too many people get elected, get buddied up to the bureaucrats who say they can’t do their jobs without more money. Here it’s led to every government worker getting a desk on a quarter acre lot. Throw the bums out.
By getalife
September 17, 2006 09:19 AM | Link to this
W wants to change the Geneva Convention to cover his a* for breaking international law with CIA renditions and torture.
Three Senators say this will allow our troops to be tortured now and in future wars.
I support the troops and I am wondering how many wingnuts will do the same.
Support the troops or support the criminals.
By Cut Spending?
September 17, 2006 09:27 AM | Link to this
Everyone agrees we have to cut spending. neo-cons would cut welfare; eco-libs would cut and run.
Cut welfare and suffer a social revolution. Cut and run, and suffer nothing.
Notice that the new mansions are fortresses now? One particularly ostentatious home near me has an oversized steel fence across the driveway only, (not extending into the yard on either side). Like that would foil toilet paper pranksters.
Another egregious show of wealth has a managerie of statues adorning the front approaches. There are gigantic lions perched atop huge pillars guarding both sides of the driveway entrance, and then a figure of Mary welcoming visitors near the front door. Dont these people know what the lions did to the christians?
So, not only do we have to feel like loser trash because our homes aren’t half the size of these compounds, but we also have to suffer their bad taste. I’m wondering if that statue of Mary fits on the dashboard of their hummer. Does the statue get it’s own airbag?
But that’s where we need to spend the money we save by cutting and running from Iraq: Finishing School for all the American People!
We simply have no class. None. We eat like pigs, drive like rude screwballs…and when we eat and drive it’s a wonder why there’s not more drive-by food fights.
And the plastic fork goes on the right, next to the cup holder….
By Cal
September 17, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this
Looks like we have been threatened by a communist sympathizer (liberal) at 9:27a.m. when they said:
Cut welfare and suffer a social revolution. Cut and run, and suffer nothing.
Folks, For those of you who may be looking into this site. The emboldened text above projects the mind & objective of the Democrat Party.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
By Profiles in Conservative Courage
September 17, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this
Come on ladies - get out from under your beds. Those big bad terrorists didn’t get you last night.
Damn.
By e. t.
September 17, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this
When you talk about limiting government spending, each agency can come up with a zillion reasons why their agency should be exempted. Education, social services, public safety, etc., all think that they should not have to bear the burden of spending cuts because of the importance of their “mission.” The only way to limit government spending is to throw out the current tax code and enact the Fair Tax proposed by Rep. John Linder. Sure, it’s controversial and has its skeptics, mainly those who would lose power because of the reforms. If the Fair tax were enacted, then government would have to re-think it’s plan for delivery of services. It would have to do what my parents taught me to do when I was growing up, which is “live within your means.” I daresay we will never see the Fair Tax because too many politicians and lobbyists would have to go out and find real jobs.
By e. t.
September 17, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this
When you talk about limiting government and cutting spending, each government agency can offer a zillion reasons why their mission is so important that it should be exempted from the aforementioned cuts. I see only one way to limit government. Do away with the current tax code and enact the Fair Tax, or a similar plan. Make each agency learn to live within their means, as our grandparents did. The trouble with enacting Fair Tax is that a lot of powerful politicians and lobbyists, not to mention some career government employees, would have to go out and find real jobs.
By Shooter
September 17, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this
Spending very easily gets out of hand when your spending OPM, the more you have access to,well you’ve seen how it works.
By getalife
September 17, 2006 10:19 AM | Link to this
This what w is trying to do to save his a-ss
Support the troops or support the criminal.
Make a choice wingnuts.
By Road
September 17, 2006 10:53 AM | Link to this
Be afraid? The only think we have to fear is you neo-clods swinging at everything. What a bunch of fallguys. You fell for the phoney intel from Iraqi exiles, and you fell for Rummy’s tranformation army.
You’re toast, and you know it.
A defeat in November is going to be good for the Republican Party, because they have lost their zeal and have forgotten what is means to be conservative.
The Iraqi Catastrophe can be understood by even the biggest flag waver in the trailer park, and no spin can convince that former dittohead that a military option for victory exists in Iraq.
If we stay for fifty years, or cut and run tomorrow, there is a destiny in Iraq that will unfold the same. We are as irrelevant as desert mirages, and we need to leave now.
Virginia Senate Incumbant George Allen today on “Meet the Press” could only come up with one reason for invading Iraq, and he repeated that reason three times as he struggled to regain momentum in a debate with his opponent: “Saddam was paying $35K to suiciders who attacked Israel”.
You neo-clods know you’re liars and it’s embarrassing to witness. Britt Hume has begun to demonize Colin Powell over his anti-war pronouncement this week. It’s so over. Powell was the face of WMDs in Iraq, and now he’s the bad guy? Transparent.
More and more, the right is saying the word, “oil” when they talk about Iraq. Maybe the American People will say, “Okay, why didn’t you say it was for cheaper oil, that we will support.”
Try it neo-clods. The trailer park set might go for it! Cheaper oil!! Brought to you by those dead sunnis over there…it….could…..WORK!!!!
By Road
September 17, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this
The only question now about the ‘08 election is whether Hillary will pardon Bush and Cheney after she becomes our president, or whether she’ll allow their prison sentence to be fufilled.
By Road
September 17, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this
The death this week of Ann Richards reminds us of W’s gubernatorial campaign to defeat her in the ’90s.
That’s when he started all that “born again” stuff and used evangelists to smart mob precincts.
Every Bush television ad had a lie in it, and he prevented large blocks of voters from getting to the polls by misdirecting signs and closing streets with cops and using german shephards to scare people away and of course, losing whole district’s results of voting by having stooges dump the machines in lakes and streams. He stole that election from a great american.
From the baptised roots to the flower of war, the George Bush tree is rotten.
Bush expects the Iraqis to forget who they are, and join hands across the land and tiptoe through the fields singing songs together in unison: that’s his idea of victory. Some crazy fantasy that cant happen even here in the USA.
Civil War is civil war. We need to let them have theirs. Civil war is good. I’ll repeat that: Civil war is goooood. Nice civil war. Good little civil war. Nice little good little itsy bitsy teeny weeny little civil war. It’s part of the natural growth of any country. Nobody can negotiate power. You have to fight for it.
Why? Because nobody trusts the opponents to not use force at some point after a peace is reached. You have to fight to a stalemate and THEN you can negotiate a peace.
Even red state trailer trash knows that. oh yeah, after reading the blogs today, i guess they dont.
Still like the finishing school idea with the money we save by cut and run.
By Road
September 17, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this
Notice how cal cant define what would be suffered by cut and run? That’s because victory cant be defined in Iraq. Ditto stay the course, ditto stand down when they stand up, ditto any policy statement given since march of ‘03 by Bush. Go ahead and try to enunciate when we can leave Iraq.
Go ahead. I dare you.
I SAID I DARE YOU!!!
By getalife
September 17, 2006 12:43 PM | Link to this
Rumsfeld now says we are staying in Iraq for cheaper gas prices.
This is true now, the neocon plan is such a disaster.
The troops will die for cheaper gas prices and w wants them to be tortured legally to save his own a-ss from being a war criminal.
It is time to show your true patriotism wingnuts.
Support the troops or support the criminals.
Write a article on that Jim!
By e. t.
September 17, 2006 12:45 PM | Link to this
These blogs are a perfect example of why nothing gets done in Congress, or the State Legislature for that matter. Someone comes up with a perfect good idea for debate, such as limiting government spending, and folks come out of the woodwork blaming Presidents and Governors for everything from murder to eating the last piece of chicken on Sunday. The debate gets sidetracked and nothing gets done except a lot of namecalling.
By Van
September 17, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
Shooter was right about “Other Peoples Money”. When a legislative branch gets a hold of OPM, it flies out the door like promises during campaigns.
By limiting the spending power of the legislature and returning to the people their own money, that would be most fair. Except.
The left will bring out a ton of people that would not be getting any oney back. These folks are in the enviable position of not paying any state or federal income tax. But, they whine, that is not fair.
My response, So what! Life is not fair. Some people work all their lives and wind up with little for old age, while others work all their lives and live comfortably in their golden years.
Now all you good little Stalinists would take from those that have something and give it to those that have nothing. Sorry Charlie, in todays world we must all live by our own hand and take responsibility for our own actions. I would rather have worked hard and live with little, than do nothing and take from everryone else.
By getalife
September 17, 2006 04:09 PM | Link to this
You are right Van.
We should cut Iraqi welfare.
Just think about all the money wasted.
By Markus
September 17, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this
Van, I have to hand it to you. You have posted one of the most arrow-straight and painfully true comments on this blog yet:
“Now all you good little Stalinists would take from those that have something and give it to those that have nothing. Sorry Charlie, in todays world we must all live by our own hand and take responsibility for our own actions. I would rather have worked hard and live with little, than do nothing and take from everryone else.”
Man, I only wish I’d have come up with that one. Listen to these little bedwetting neomarxist liberals whine about those who have what others don’t. Listen to these pathetic cretins whine that those who got off their @sses and have disclipine to either better themselves and make more money or save more money (or BOTH) are not being “fair” to others either too stupid or to lazy to do so.
Therefore, in their warped liberal Utopian socialist society, the government should step in and “even things out” a little bit. It’s totally against what this nation was founded upon. If we were a socialist state, we’d be mirroring France right now with 25% unemployment rates for those potential workers under 21. Thank God Chicago mayor Daley told those neopinks where to stick it on the so-called liberal neomarxist “living wage.” Idiots.
By Markus
September 17, 2006 04:51 PM | Link to this
One more thing about the sickness of liberalism: they are taking away things other generations used to enjoy like grade school Field Day. Anybody remember Field Day? That was when you could win ribbons or medals beating someone else.
Back then, nobody wet their pretty pink panties because someone else lost and [gasp!] it might hurt their feelings and cause them to have low self-esteem. Now we have pansies on the left in control of schools who have already done away with Field Day because it shows the “inequality” amongst each other.
Does anyone have any FREAKING IDEA how dangerous that liberal wussy mentality is to the future generations of this nation? Obviously the jackass bedwetting liberals don’t.
By Markus
September 17, 2006 05:15 PM | Link to this
What Clintoon does best: act. He supposedly teared up while escorting Ann Richards’ casket. Who could ever forget the Great Leader tearing up on the beaches of Normandy marking the 50th anniversary of the Allied Invasion?
Democrat or not, Ann Richards was an incredible woman. I vehemently disagreed with her policies, but I did admire her. Her speech during the ‘98 Democratic National Convention brought the house down. Her convictions, her no-nonsense Southern/Texan in-your-face humor, her unapologetic dry wit, and her unabridged persona all at the expense of Republican ideology even had my attention. At least this woman knew who she was and what she stood for.
Bill Clinton and other current finger-licking, wind-sticking liberal Democrats are not leaders. They are followers. Followers of the masses. That’s not leadership. That’s followership.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060916/D8K67VHO0.html
By getalife
September 17, 2006 05:16 PM | Link to this
Ahhh, poor wittle macaca misses his field day.
Talk about a wussie.
By getalife
September 17, 2006 05:16 PM | Link to this
Did you win the ribbon for bedwetting?
By Markus
September 17, 2006 05:23 PM | Link to this
Cuba, the role model installation that Jimmy Carter and other liberal neocommunist appeasement leftists love so much, had a summit over the weekend with many Great Third World Nations. We were so unfortunate not to be involved with this commie Frick-n-Frack outfit. They bashed the US and the UN. Well, at least they got the UN part down right. This is the “world” that the candyassed liberals want us to be respected amongst. GAG me.
powderpuffliberalism
By getalife
September 17, 2006 05:28 PM | Link to this
Yes, and w wants our troops tortured to save his own a*.
What kind leader is that Markus?
By Markus
September 17, 2006 05:31 PM | Link to this
gitmolife, you can’t even come up with a quote where a RAT who voted for authority for war said that the primary reason we went to war in Iraq was because of an al-Qaida link.
Ask me if I give a jackass tail what you think about me? Of course, we all know about you. You were too stoned to partake in said sports as a juvenile delequent. That also explains your jackass liberalism, your constant yammering about those who have more than you, and your blatant hatred towards those who don’t live in your little myopic liberal socialist Utopian society. Candyass.
By Markus
September 17, 2006 05:34 PM | Link to this
Yeah we all saw the bedwetting on George Steponanoctapus this morning. That ugly man who used to be a news “commentator” was about to have a coronary about Bush’s rebuttal to Powell. OMG, our troops or mercinaries were NEVER tortured before Gitmo, RIGHT gitmolife? You pathetic islamofascist-loving liberal.
By getalife
September 17, 2006 05:43 PM | Link to this
Macaca,
I was a linebacker punk.
I loved to hit folks.
You play football wussy?
You are a pathetic pos scum for choosing that criminal over the troops.
By Markus
September 17, 2006 05:53 PM | Link to this
gitmolife-
For the Love Of Jesus, how many different times to Sunday do I have to TELL you to STOP LYING on this blog? First your pappy served right next to Patton, and now you were a great linebacker in grade school. Your stench of lies wreaks through my CPU vents. You so-sad pathetic no-life cretin. GOD you make me sick… your jackhole policies notwithstanding.
By Markus
September 17, 2006 05:58 PM | Link to this
Most deranged liberal comment of the day: “If we treat them right, they’ll treat us right.”
Loud music is torture (well, if it’s that crap called rap, maybe so); cutting the heads off of people is apparently not torture. Suuuure, we treat these islamofascists with dignity and they’ll just give us Brownie Points for future reference when dealing with us. Mentality like that costs lives. Just ask France.
By getalife
September 17, 2006 06:00 PM | Link to this
I never lie like you cowards.
Why in the world would you choose to have our troops tortured in this war and future wars to save w from war crimes?
Are you really that pathetic of a human being?
By Markus
September 17, 2006 06:13 PM | Link to this
Again, gitmolife, loud music and snapping German shepards is NOT torture. We should BE so lucky if our GIs are “tortured” in that manner. And you KNOW that’s the God forsaken TRUTH, you cowardly liberal worthless filthy liar.
By Van
September 18, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this
getalife,
Hey you ignorant moron, if they are tortured, they would be alive, not in some ditch with their heads removed.
By Van
September 18, 2006 02:39 PM | Link to this
Markus,
Anyone that has read and studied Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels would be appalled at how the left loves them. If you look at the Congressional Progressive Caucus you will find out what the leftie wackos want for the hard working Americans.
From the sound of it, it looks like the little blue area called midtown is so full of socialists that I will seldom set foot there. Between the cruisers at Piedmont and the effete snobs that live there, any real people would seem few and far between.