DescentBB

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:the DNC isn't in contact with me.........I was just looking through business articles and blundered across it. Why do you people cry 'DNC' when I present something you don't agree with? Sorta lame, don't you think?

Oh, and the analysis you posted is beyond wrong, it is idiotic. Simply because the 2009 House/Senate came in doesn't mean that 2009 spending wasn't completely dictacted(more so than most, in fact, thanks to the ongoing stimulus) by the prior administration.
Thus, I will stand by the 2012 analysis. Obama is the smallest spender since Roosevelt.

So now you are saying Forbes prints idiotic articles. As such the one you read is equally idiotic. Man, you really have a knack for coming across as a blindly partisan hack. I take back my Kudos comment.

no, I am saying that gentlemen(who isn't an investigative writer, he was a commentary writer) gave an obviously flawed analysis. Read his words, and read the initial article. Unless you are blinded by Obama-hate or some other ideology, it is clear which writer had the facts right.

Perhaps you should look at the writers Bio:

"I am Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy for the Heartland Institute, Senior Advisor for Entitlement Reform and Budget Policy at the National Tax Limitation Foundation, General Counsel for the American Civil Rights Union, and Senior Fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis. I served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under President George H.W. Bush. I am a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, and the author most recently of America's Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb"

OTOH Rick Unger is what?:

"Ungar moved into the world of journalism after a long career as a creative writer and executive producer in television, particularly in the world animation industry. His first creation, Biker Mice From Mars, which began its first run in the United States and the United Kingdom in 1993, became one of the most successful animated television programs of its time, spinning off some 400 licensed products throughout the world."

Yeah, Unger obviously has more creds than Ferrara. Nice try at trying the Alinsky tactic of demeaning the messenger. Flawed my ass.

woodchip wrote:
Perhaps you should look at the writers Bio:

oh, goody, let's do that!

"I am Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy for the Heartland Institute, Senior Advisor for Entitlement Reform and Budget Policy at the National Tax Limitation Foundation, General Counsel for the American Civil Rights Union, and Senior Fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis. I served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under President George H.W. Bush. I am a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, and the author most recently of America's Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb"

every single item on this resume reeks of partisan hack. He works for a conservative think tank, two in fact. He is a lawyer, not a journalist. And, he wrote a book that desperately needs his narrative to be justified.

OTOH Rick Unger is what?:

"Ungar moved into the world of journalism after a long career as a creative writer and executive producer in television, particularly in the world animation industry. His first creation, Biker Mice From Mars, which began its first run in the United States and the United Kingdom in 1993, became one of the most successful animated television programs of its time, spinning off some 400 licensed products throughout the world."

Yeah, Unger obviously has more creds than Ferrara. Nice try at trying the Alinsky tactic of demeaning the messenger. Flawed my ass.

and, as I suspected, that latter is and has been a PROFESSIONAL journalist. In other words, someone who has a career aimed at unbiased analysis of the news.

callmeslick wrote:

oh, goody, let's do that!

"I am Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy for the Heartland Institute, Senior Advisor for Entitlement Reform and Budget Policy at the National Tax Limitation Foundation, General Counsel for the American Civil Rights Union, and Senior Fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis. I served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under President George H.W. Bush. I am a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, and the author most recently of America's Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb"

every single item on this resume reeks of partisan hack. He works for a conservative think tank, two in fact. He is a lawyer, not a journalist. And, he wrote a book that desperately needs his narrative to be justified.

And all this makes him inept at finding fault with something?

callmeslick wrote:and, as I suspected, that latter is and has been a PROFESSIONAL journalist. In other words, someone who has a career aimed at unbiased analysis of the news.

Unbiased? HAHAHAA.....from Ungers own Bio:

"I am a Senior Political Contributor at Forbes and the official 'token lefty,' as the title of the page suggests. "

Go blow smoke up someone else's skirt.

woodchip wrote:Go blow smoke up someone else's skirt.

why would I bother, with your head in the way?

callmeslick wrote:... is and has been a PROFESSIONAL journalist. In other words, someone who has a career aimed at unbiased analysis of the news.

You are terribly generous handing out the unbiased badge when you want to be. I've seen you say the exact opposite about a number of other professional journalists.

really? Examples, please.

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:Since you worked all those years as a Democratic fund raiser I just naturally assumed you were on the DNC mailing list. And kudos for admitting your error.

I resist ANY mailing lists, by and large. Further, to my knowledge, there is no 'DNC mailing list' of 'talking points' that I was ever aware of. I have always raised money, by the way, for CANDIDATES, not for party organizations. In so doing, there are probably a half-dozen Republicans over the years that got checks from me. Two are still in office in PA, and believe me, they have heard about their likelihood of ever seeing another dime after the present debacle.

http://my.democrats.org/page/s/talkingpoints

I said, to my knowledge.....Heretic, in other words, I am on no such list. Nor, would I wish to be. I think the Dem establishment is pretty clear about my independant thought at this juncture. I have called a former mayor of Philly/ governor of PA an 'idiot' for endorsing Al Gore, for instance, to his face. We're still friends, but most of the powers-that-be know full well I don't just go along with the 'group think' of the Party.

Yet you still spew the democratic talking points like you breathe.

Heretic wrote:Yet you still spew the democratic talking points like you breathe.

not really......if you listen closely. I do support much of the Obama plans, as I strongly support him. Not so much the party as a whole.

more good news for the US economy and business community. Thank you Tea-hadists!!!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 56570.html

now, we're a long way from Chinese currency being the world reserve, but this is a first step, and one unlikely to have gone forward without the assclowns holding our economy hostage. I note, as I type, that the House GOP STILL wants to tie Obamacare to any deal and make for even less flexibility in debt repayment. Sheesh, I hope folks remember this by next November.

Yep, it's a first step forward. I've been waiting for that headline about 10-11 months now. I realize there are great hurdles right now to replace the dollar, but those against it as the world reserve will never stop till it's replaced.

China's currency will not replace the US $. but a world currency might. something like the Euro.

callmeslick wrote:more good news for the US economy and business community. Thank you Tea-hadists!!!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 56570.html

now, we're a long way from Chinese currency being the world reserve, but this is a first step, and one unlikely to have gone forward without the assclowns holding our economy hostage. I note, as I type, that the House GOP STILL wants to tie Obamacare to any deal and make for even less flexibility in debt repayment. Sheesh, I hope folks remember this by next November.

Yes this is all the tea party's fault because they don't cave to the Demoscammer's demands. And isn't Obama doing exactly what he railed against Bush...you know, taking out a credit card from the Bank of China.

woodchip wrote:Yes this is all the tea party's fault because they don't cave to the Demoscammer's demands.

In what crazy ass-backwards mental universe do you live that you view this as what's happening here? Who are the people tying what should be a routine debt limit increase to their own petty vindictiveness over a certain law?

Tea-hadists!!!

Spitehouse


Hmmmm, I’m trying to figure out the difference.

Give me a chance now, everyone knows I’m a little slow…

Top Gun wrote:

woodchip wrote:Yes this is all the tea party's fault because they don't cave to the Demoscammer's demands.

In what crazy ass-backwards mental universe do you live that you view this as what's happening here? Who are the people tying what should be a routine debt limit increase to their own petty vindictiveness over a certain law?

Looking at raising the debt limit as routine is what got us 17 trillion in debt.

No, the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression necessitated increased deficit spending in order to avoid economic free-fall, coupled with decreased tax revenue as a result of said recession, which led to increased debt. I know slick has explained as much before. And as has been said many many times over the past few weeks, the debt limit has nothing at all to do with future spending, but instead authorizes spending on debt that the US has already incurred. The psychopaths in the House would rather see our country commit economic suicide than just sit down and pass what should be a routine bill.

Top Gun wrote:No, the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression necessitated increased deficit spending in order to avoid economic free-fall, coupled with decreased tax revenue as a result of said recession, which led to increased debt. I know slick has explained as much before. And as has been said many many times over the past few weeks, the debt limit has nothing at all to do with future spending, but instead authorizes spending on debt that the US has already incurred. The psychopaths in the House would rather see our country commit economic suicide than just sit down and pass what should be a routine bill.

That isn't true. Raising the debt limit simply frees them to go further in debt. To issue more securities to sell to China etc. to print more money, etc.
It doesn't do anything to determine where they spend those dollars.
I doubt you could get a single democrat to agree to that kind of stipulation!

Will Robinson wrote:That isn't true. Raising the debt limit simply frees them to go further in debt. To issue more securities to sell to China etc. to print more money, etc.
It doesn't do anything to determine where they spend those dollars.
I doubt you could get a single democrat to agree to that kind of stipulation!

sorry, but you are wrong. Years of deficit spending, with the current budget still in a deficit(albeit shrinking) necessitate the debt increasing to pay for what has long ago been agreed to.

callmeslick wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:That isn't true. Raising the debt limit simply frees them to go further in debt. To issue more securities to sell to China etc. to print more money, etc.
It doesn't do anything to determine where they spend those dollars.
I doubt you could get a single democrat to agree to that kind of stipulation!

sorry, but you are wrong. Years of deficit spending, with the current budget still in a deficit(albeit shrinking) necessitate the debt increasing to pay for what has long ago been agreed to.

It might be necessary to pay off standing obligations in most people's mind and quite likely to happen but raising the debt limit DOES NOT inherently guarantee that is going to happen and certainly doesn't restrict them spending the revenue from further borrowing to ONLY paying off current obligations. That latter part is highly unlikely!

Raising the limit is self explanatory. The limit they can borrow increases to allow further borrowing above the level they already met. It has no built in restrictions that I know of, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

If they were as fiscally responsible as the false premise TopGun offered there would be no debt crisis now. They won't even try to stop non essential spending during times of record deficit unless it is to stage a political stunt and even then they leave the Presidents golf course open and shut of the publics parks! So don't try to tell us they are about the debt problem. They are all about keeping their political wheels lubed.

the President's golf course is, I believe, privately funded, but whether it is or not is trivial. The bottom line, Will, is that your idea of non-essential and other people's will vary.....widely. Thus, we have these creations called elections, wherein the people are SUPPOSED to vote around what they do and don't wish government to do. Sadly, it is very easy both to convince people they want all the goodies AND that taxation is an evil burden. The result of years of this smokescreen(played by both parties) is deficit spending. One of these years, we will have an honest sorting out, but even I am not so hopeful that it will happen soon, or even soon enough that we don't have to take truly drastic measures, either by way of slashing spending or really jacking taxes, either of which is proven to be hard on a domestic economy.

callmeslick wrote:...The result of years of this smokescreen(played by both parties) is deficit spending. One of these years, we will have an honest sorting out, ...

I agree. And that honest sorting out, it's going to start out looking just like the thing Ted Cruz did...only it will have enough people join in to bust the status quo.

Will Robinson wrote:

callmeslick wrote:...The result of years of this smokescreen(played by both parties) is deficit spending. One of these years, we will have an honest sorting out, ...

I agree. And that honest sorting out, it's going to start out looking just like the thing Ted Cruz did...only it will have enough people join in to bust the status quo.

there, I would disagree. In fact, to my way of thinking, what Cruz did was a self-serving act of a pure politician trying to set himself up for a Presidential primary run and raise money from certain PACs. Cruz doesn't address much of anything, and CLEARLY doesn't wish to have a functional government that assists ALL the people. What I am talking about is a true debate about the benefits of government and how we pay for them. Frankly, at this point, the payment part is more out-of-whack than the benefits, but clearly, the benefits have to be somewhat adjusted to account for population demographics. The real cost savings to us all will come when we start to wean ourselves off a massively expensive, bloated military.

God, I hope Cruz doesn't try to run for president... He'll be a bigger joke than Romney, Sara Palin, and Kim Jong Un combined.

Isaac wrote:God, I hope Cruz doesn't try to run for president... He'll be a bigger joke than Romney, Sara Palin, and Kim Jong Un combined.

I will guarantee that Cruz fully intends to run for the Presidency, and this entire exercise in stupidity has been to position himself to do just that.