-
Immigration and the ‘Best and Brightest’
June 10, 2013 | 94 comments
-
Ken Cuccinelli Gets in the Game
June 3, 2013 | 11 comments
-
Memorial Day in Richmond
May 28, 2013 | 31 comments
-
Catholic Culture In America
May 23, 2013 | 35 comments
-
Earth Day 2013: The Papal Edition
April 22, 2013 | 22 comments
TAS Live
Quotations From Chairman Ryan
Shifting from a culture of spending to one of cutting.
Yesterday The American Spectator and Americans for Tax Reform hosted a breakfast with Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), chairman of the House Budget Committee, and the Republican point man on budget reform. The gathering was moderated by TAS’s publisher, Al Regnery.
Representing one of the most Democratic and unionized district in the country, located in southeastern Wisconsin, Chairman Ryan is serving his seventh term. He is unique in being the only elected official, the President included, to offer a comprehensive reform of entitlements, health care and taxation, sans tax increases, in the form of “A Roadmap for America’s Future.”
“We are headed for a fiscal cliff,” stated the Congressman, starkly, in his opening remarks. “Everyone in town recognizes we have a debt crisis except the President,” who is promoting tax increases based on the faulty assumption that the problem is insufficient revenue rather than excess spending.
Ryan is clearly focused on getting control of trillions of dollars of expenditures not just billions. He wants “to go after the drivers of our debt” which means entitlement reform. In fact, he insists that the Republicans will actually make such proposals regardless of the political heat it will, inevitably, generate. This will necessitate a massive public education campaign to communicate to voters the causes and consequences of our current predicament.
Is entitlement reform a third-rail issue? “We aren’t in the conventional moment,” opined the Budget Chairman. Spending has escalated so much, the European sovereign debt crises are so visible, that “we are obliged to offer an alternative vision,” notwithstanding the heated controversy which will result.
Congressman Ryan’s most interesting remarks, at least for this listener, was his characterization of the current fiscal crisis as more than just an economic one. It is also a question of cultural self-definition. The current Administration’s push towards an American version of a kind of European social democracy, with cradle to grave entitlements, “is not who we are,” said the Representative from Janesville, Wisconsin. His goal is to restore “an opportunity society with a safety net.”
“At the end of the day, it is a cultural thing,” claimed Ryan. The choice is between a government-subsidized hammock or an ethic of self-reliance. He framed the question as, “What kind of people do we want to be?” The government should not be providing entitlement rights for able-bodied people but simply assuring them equal opportunity, not equality of results.
Criticizing President Obama for his “fundamental unseriousness” on the issues of spending, debt and entitlement, the Congressman expressed his astonishment that, unlike the TARP controversy, a tremendous shock and surprise to the political system, we can see this crisis coming and have seen it for some time. The President knows about this ahead of time but chooses “not to do anything about it.”
“If we shy away from this moment [of crisis], it is immoral,” stated Ryan. Fortunately, “The country is ready for leadership.” Indeed, he believes the congressional Democrats will have a hard time opposing budget cuts. “Defending their spending binge is an indefensible position.”
Chairman Ryan is a very upbeat person and this attitude is reflected in his general sense that, despite inevitable disagreements within the GOP caucus, including the insistence of the freshman class that budget cuts be very aggressive (a position with which he is very comfortable it seems), the debate now centers on what to cut rather than what to spend. He believes the culture is changing even on the Appropriations Committee where several outstanding freshmen, “cutters” as he calls them, are now members. He cited an old Wisconsin farm breakfast maxim, chickens are involved, but pigs are committed. The frosh are committed! They are here for a cause, not just to be somebody. “They are doers, not just be-ers [sic].” He also views the new congressional class as generally “fantastic.”
He notes that real progress can be seen since the budget, pursuant to the new Continuing Resolution, is now below 2010 levels, below the President’s so-called “floor” at last. He foresees further progress if there are subsequent CRs, lopping off another $4 billion each time one passes. He indicated that the White House was willing to accept an $8 billion cut for an entire month. He calls this unfolding process, the “Rolling Fours.”
There are, it seems, more than one way to skin a cat.
While seeking to manage expectations as to what can be accomplished in the face of a Democratic Senate and White House, again, he wants to “focus on the big picture,” the trillions of dollars that need to be saved through reform of the budget process and entitlements, over the long haul, not just the billions of dollars in this or that individual program in any given fiscal year.
Moreover, health care inflation and demographic shifts, i.e., aging, are the biggest drivers of our current crisis. He argues for “not just one single reform,” but many that will transform the health care system into one that is consumer-driven and grounded in market principles. Ryan believes such a system would improve quality and drive down costs.
After noting a range of policy initiatives — statutory spending caps and a drive for accrual accounting, for instance — Chairman Ryan focused on the ultimate problem caused by the Obama Administration’s seemingly endless spending and taxing with its inexorable negative impact on business investment and job creation. Citing the late Nobel Prize winner, Milton Friedman, he observed that “Today’s deficits are tomorrow’s tax increases.” This self-evident truth, not lost on the nation’s business leaders, creates uncertainty in the economy and depresses risk-taking and investment. To put it another way, Ryan said that spending and endless, massive borrowing “come at the expense of long-term growth.”
Thus, Chairman Ryan aims to reverse this systematic bias away from spending and redirect it towards real budget cutting and substantive reform. The man and the moment, it seems, have met.
About the Author
G. Tracy Mehan, III served at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in the administrations of both Presidents Bush. He is a consultant in Arlington, Virginia, and an adjunct professor at George Mason University School of Law.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (155) | Leave a comment
More Articles by G. Tracy Mehan, III
More Articles From TAS Live
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/03/03/quotations-from-chairman-ryan
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Screwtape Protests
- Revenge of the Fruitcakes
- His Reach Exceeded His Grasp
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Spoonman| 3.3.11 @ 6:29AM
Working taxpayers will support massive cuts in federal expenditures given what we have seen the past two years. All TAS readers and supoporters need to continously communicate this messsage to their Representative, Senators and Governor.
vtwin| 3.3.11 @ 10:35AM
I challenge my conservative friends here to offer a balanced budget alternative to Obama’s proposed $3.8 trillion budget for the fiscal year 2011 with its 30% projected deficit of $1.27 trillion.
Link courtesy of the New York times is Obama’ Budget for 2011.
http://www.nytimes.com/interac.....tml?src=tp
Happy cutting!
Chris| 3.3.11 @ 12:23PM
Should we not try; just because the NY Times says it can't be done. Punt, Quit, Steer for the iceberg? We're Americans dammit. We have never, ever not tried to tackle the tough jobs. We put a man on the moon; this can't be any harder then that.
Inigomontoya | 3.4.11 @ 1:11PM
I must have fallen thru the looking glass. Based on all recent polls and conversations, the GOP are now off the charts for weirdness in this fanatcism over a deficit in a time when the econmy is just beginning to revive. I'm especially weirded out by the nutjob who said "we're Americans": no, real Americans prepare for the future (edication and infrastructure + exports) and don't get foamy-mouth hysterical like Ryan and the other GOP moonbats.
idalily| 3.4.11 @ 4:26PM
Revive? What planet do you live on? We are BROKE. The people who think we can continue spending what we do not have are the moonbats.
W| 3.3.11 @ 12:35PM
simple. eliminate the departments of education, interior (Indians can take care of themselves), and energy. replace the income tax with a national sales tax, this will eliminate the underground-untaxed ecomy, and will reduce the number of irs agents.
that is just a start.
SpiralArchitect | 3.3.11 @ 1:19PM
EPA, forget not the (worthless) EPA.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 1:33PM
Bye Bye OSHA
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 1:45PM
They could also start with entitlement reform. Too bad the democrats didn't do it last year on this budget like they were supposed to. At least we can count on the republicans to step up to the plate and tackle entitlements on their first budget later on this year.
Sidenote: I love how Rand Paul will be presenting the budget this fall. That will be EPIC.
Nunya| 3.3.11 @ 6:30PM
You could also eliminate the IRS, DEA, and FDA, as well as make serious cuts to DOT, Homeland Security, BATFE, and a host of others. It's not hard, it just requires a plan and a spine to follow it through.
Nunya| 3.3.11 @ 6:41PM
Oh, and I forgot all of the pensions for retired Senators and Congressmen, along with their golden health care plan. Sorry fellas, time to spend time with we proles....
FTM| 3.3.11 @ 11:51PM
Nunya is wise.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 9:46PM
Bingo!
idalily| 3.4.11 @ 4:27PM
The spine, I suspect will be the hardest thing for the pols to find. The cutting is easy by comparison.
Alan Brooks| 3.4.11 @ 12:03AM
"this will eliminate the underground-untaxed ecomy"
Do you think libertopians would go for that?? and without them, what is the Tea Party; without the Tea Party, what is the GOP today? nothing.
Sam Levi| 3.4.11 @ 11:44AM
What is with you and libertopians? I am libertarian leaning because my attitude is shrink the government and leave me the hell alone. I would much rather see a flat tax that is equal to all than to see the untenable tax system they way it is. Personally, I wish I could pay a million a year in income taxes. (Think about that before you try to rebut it.) Reagan proved it, Give the people that have money more freedom to make more, and they will, creating jobs.
idalily| 3.4.11 @ 4:28PM
Please explain why you need to insult libertarians with silly names.
Lagiusmeatius| 3.3.11 @ 1:56PM
I would start by addressing the $1.2+ trillion dollars that we spend on defense in this nation. The D.O.D. may only request a fiscal budget of $558 billion, but the reality is that there are numerous other expenses totaling an additional $700 billion+ dollars. On top of the $558 billion dollar yearly budget for the D.O.D. we have an additional:
$118 billion spent on Iraq and Afghanistan,
$19.3 billion (for nuclear-weapons-related activities like making sure our current stockpile of warheads will work as expected and cleaning up the waste created by seven decades of developing and producing them)
$7.8 billion (Pentagon lumps this $8 billion in a "Miscellaneous" supplemental category for who knows what)
$9 billion ("war-related" costs for overseas wars not included in the $118 billion mentioned earlier -- they deem these funds for "counter-terrorism")
$54 billion (this is used in what's called the "homeland security" fund)
$53 billion (used for the "intelligence" budget, used for the "National Intelligence Program - NIP"--intelligence...really?)
So far we're up to $819 billion.....
$129 billion (used for Veterans programs, medical care, etc., which soared after the Iraq/Afghanistan wars)
$18 billion (other "foreign affairs" costs, not directly related to Iraq or Afghanistan)
$69 billion (retirements for military personnel, D.O.D. employees, etc.)
$185 billion (this is just the interest paid on the defense related DEBT that the U.S. incurs as a result of all this military over-spending)...
this leads us to around $1.2 TRILLION dollars. These are just the figures released by the Congressional Budget Office, the Department of Defense, U.S. Intelligence, State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development to name a few. I'm sure there are more costs that are not included or mentioned from their reports.
So we have more than $1.2 TRILLION spent on U.S. National "Security". May I remind everyone that this comprises about 40-50% of the reported U.S. "Budget" (the actual budget, before any deficit is incurred).
The U.S. has a GDP (I hate using "GDP" because it is very misleading, but I'll humor everyone as it is used by all major parties) -- which is approximately 22% of the world's GDP. If we look at military costs worldwide, the U.S. comprises about 42%, almost double the GDP percentage, indicating the imbalance and over-spending, even for an economy as large as ours...this is what I would look at first, since it is the single largest cause of debt in our country (war, defense, and related expenses).
Next, I would employ (at least in part) a reduction if not elimination of the income tax and increase sales tax to cover the under/non-taxed population. This is would where I would start.
Unfortunately, "cutting corners" on a $1.2+ trillion dollar defense expense would not be popular with many "politicians" currently in office. The likelihood on any voting to severely reduce these expenditures is not likely anytime soon. It has been going on for many years, and so many Americans are unaware of its magnitude, because they are merely given the D.O.D. budget, which as you can see is an extreme underestimate of the total costs spent on National "security".
Other people will say "It's only 4-5% of the GDP !" This entire article is about budget cuts, not spending in relation to GDP. I could spend $100 billion dollars to remove trees, and spend another $100 billion dollars to re-plant them, and I would have increased the GDP by a substantial amount with an outcome the same as what I started with -- trees in the ground. (except for a large waste of time, resources, labor, etc.).
This is one reason why I don't like to choose GDP as an accurate figure for representing the general size or even progress of the economy (many economists would agree with me), as even during times of economic growth with more jobs, etc., we've had a smaller GDP, and vice versa. The key topic here is budget, budget, budget...and we've spent so much on defense (including entitlements for veterans), and that all adds up to the fiscal crisis we are in--'defense' more than anything else when you crunch the numbers...
I do agree though, trying to offer a balanced budget period, is a difficult and daunting task, as it has been for decades. This however, is a great place to start.
Peace and love to you all,
-Lagius
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 2:41PM
Yes, there are cuts that could be made, but I would rather cut just about anything before defense.
I hope you're aware enough to know that we have REAL enemies abroad that wish us harm.
Lagiusmeatius| 3.3.11 @ 4:10PM
PhilTheCapitalistPig,
The amount of money spent on defense is ridiculous. You could cut our defense budget in half, save over $600 billion per year, and still have 27% of the world share in defense spending (this would still be more than 3 times as much as China spends on defense, which is the second largest spender under the U.S.). These figures I've shared would be based on the D.O.D. budget ONLY, which as previously mentioned is less than 50% of the actual security expense. If the true figures are used, this statistic would be:
If we cut our defense spending by 50%, we'd save over $600 billion per year, and still have about 30% of the world share in defense spending, which would still be at least 6 times as much as China's defense spending). This is if we cut the budget on defense in half! So it would not be ridiculous at all to make cuts to this, since as you can see, we'd still have the majority budget--one that would still be 5 times higher than the next highest defense spender (China).
Peace and love to you PhilTheCapitalistPig,
-Lagius
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 4:27PM
I understand that, and I agree. 20 years ago, heck, 10 years ago, we didn't need much of a defense budget, but in case you're not paying attention to the middle east, we might just have armageddon on the horizon.
Fine, make cuts, but lets wait to cut defense until we see what happens when a government is formed in the middle east. I'm afraid its more likely to be an islamic caliphate hell-bent on wiping us "infidels" off the map.
Gary Henrichsen| 3.4.11 @ 4:31AM
Who are they?????
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 2:45PM
also, defense is not the largest budget item. its the third largest behind Medicare/Medicaid and social Security.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Lagiusmeatius| 3.3.11 @ 3:52PM
PhilTheCapitalistPig,
First of all, the link that you posted shows how much debt as been incurred by those types of expenses so far (over many years), that does not show which is the largest expense in our budget this year -- just which expense has produced the largest amount of debt thus far. There is a big difference there. More importantly is the fact that the the numbers used by the Congressional Budget office for "defense" is the number I mentioned earlier, $558 billion. This $558 billion, if it ended there would make you correct (defense would be the 3rd largest expense). However, if you read what I wrote, you'll see that it turns out that the actual amount spent on U.S. National Security is more than DOUBLE the budget for the D.O.D. The $558 billion base budget is all that is used for comparison in the website you provided. It's great to see some numbers for general comparison, but unfortunately in this case, you mis-interpreted the data. Defense is still the number one expense.
One thing that makes the expense hidden is that defense costs are incurred through the department of energy, department of state, Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Department of Justice, and other areas, where the budget isn't exclusively labeled as "defense". This is the most important thing to realize.
Peace and love to you PhilTheCapitalistPig,
-Lagius
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 4:25PM
No that is for this year. The Budget is roughly 4 trillion bucks. Do the math. Plus in the headline, it says "largest budget items"
We don't have a "multi-year" budget. That can only mean its the fiscal year budget.
Lagiusmeatius| 3.3.11 @ 5:02PM
PhilTheCapitalistPig,
Again, you've missed the point here. It doesn't matter if its for the year or not, it's still based on the assumption that defense is $558 billion for this year!
It is more than twice this amount if you read my earlier posts, and so, is still the largest expense.
That site lists the expense under "Defense" which is only the $558 billion, this does not include the defense related expenses/funds that are funneled through the Department of Energy, Homeland Security, Department of Health and Human Services, and the other departments I mentioned...so it is still the largest expense.
Peace and love to you PhilTheCapitalistPig,
-Lagius
FTM| 3.3.11 @ 8:31PM
I agree with Lagius,
Get the EU, most especially the Germans and the Cheese Eating, Surrender Monkey French pay the keep the savages at arms length for a couple of generations. Same with the Japanese.
The French and the Germans betrayed America in the Oil for Food program. Screw 'em. Let's see how their national health care program holds up when the Russians decide to expand their dominion.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 9:50PM
I think we should start being a little more grateful of the friends we still have after obama continually spits in the face of our allies while praising and appeasing our enemies. God forbid ww3 breaks out while he is in office. Im not confident in his ability to guide the ship thru the storm.
FTM| 3.4.11 @ 12:03AM
Phil,
Imagine, WWI and WWII we both know about. WWIII was the cold war. We won that one. We're smack in the middle of WWIV right now. Now, the problem with being smack in the middle of WWIV right now is that in being in the middle of a world war it behooves one to realize that we're engaged in a world war. Second, the technology, strategy and tactics that we used to win I, II and III won't work in IV. We've got to have a new plan. We have to realize who the enemy is. So far, best as I can tell nobody has done that. President Obama doesn't know what day it is. Also, carrier battle groups are useless in this World War.
We have a coalition of enemies in this World War. We have radical, militant Islam. We have radical, militant liberalism. (for that matter we have radical, militant conservitism too) To lump this coalition all together onder one big tent I'd call it radical, militant ignorance. There's probably a good stronge dose of arrogance thrown in there too.
The idea that we can ignore God and get away with it. The idea that some other guy is responsible for our problems. The idea that somebody else owes one a living. Ideas like that.
I don't have a very good attitude toward our winning this World War. Mankind since the dawn of recorded history has longed for a world without God. And we're about to get it.
Bloefeld| 3.3.11 @ 2:39PM
If I were you I would try to find a better source than a bankrupt newspaper as evidence for the impossibility of a balanced budget. When a business is at the point it has to to beggar itself to rich guys like Carlos Slim to keep the doors open and pay him sub-Mafia rates of interest (14% in a 2% market), you need to muster up a better source for your claims.
That said; why is it so easy for you to believe that the shift of a few hundreds of parts per million of one molecule in the earth's atmosphere will cause the demolition of the planet, but not believe that a perpetual cycle of printing money to pay for the printing of previous money will have an effect on the financial health of the United States?
If this is indeed the case, I ask if you happen to be the chief financial officer for a Union pension plan. I have a new fund that I guarantee will get you a return of 20% annually for the rest of time.
Your pal,
B. Madoff
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 2:47PM
Wow.. Well spoken, sir. Thank you.
FTM| 3.3.11 @ 8:23PM
Get the US out of the UN, get the UN out of the US. Get the US out of NATO. Get the US out of Japan and South Korea. Get the US out of the Middle East, with the exception of Israel and let the savages consume each other.
Institute Free Trade worldwide. Currently US auto manufacturers, for example, can legally export US made automobiles to Canada and that's it. GM has the number one selling car in China, so I'm told. The caviat being that the car has to be built in China. OK, if that's the way that the Chinese want to roll then the US institutes laws that if the Chinese want to sell stuff in the US then it has to be manufactured in the US. How is it that everybody gets to dump their manufactured good on the American economy but America can't sell squat in foreign countries? This is easy.
Wine produced in California can't be sold in the European Union but EU wine can be sold in the US.
Abolish the Department of Education, the Department of Energy. The Enviro-mental Protection Racket, er, im mean Agency, the National Endowment for the Art, The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. Just to start.
Impeach Don't Wait| 3.3.11 @ 10:30PM
"The caviat being that the car has to be built in China. OK, if that's the way that the Chinese want to roll then the US institutes laws that if the Chinese want to sell stuff in the US then it has to be manufactured in the US."
Sorry to say, the only guy I heard ready to stand up to the Chinese is Donald Trump. He says they're making billions off the U.S. and can't believe what they're able to get away with. He said the president of China wouldn't have had a meal at the White House unless it was preceded by fixing this problem.
Don't know if I'd vote for him, but I sure wish some others would adopt his attitude!
Impeach Don't Wait| 3.3.11 @ 10:31PM
"He said the president of China wouldn't have had a meal at the White House unless it was preceded by fixing this problem." --> (If Trump were president, I meant.)
mames| 3.3.11 @ 3:13PM
I don't see how we can get this done with Ryan the economic schizophrenic who voted for and supported both TARP and auto bailouts. He scares me.
GavInTucson| 3.3.11 @ 11:30PM
Schizophrenic? How? Although I didn't like TARP on principle (let them fail), it was a LOAN!!! On a personal level, I can handle that a lot easier than simply throwing money away, as occurred in the stimulus bill (money we were never getting back).
Jay Dee| 3.5.11 @ 7:18PM
The future should scare you more unless something like the Roadmap isn't adopted.
Alan Brooks| 3.3.11 @ 8:52PM
Wtwin,
IMO they will end the welfare state (which is what they want to do, they just can't proclaim it too loudly without disturbing religious orgs who would have to deal with the resulting 'widows and orphans').
What they don't know is that putting the savings into guns instead of butter (which is also what they secretly want to do no matter what they say for public consumption) wont solve what to do about the outside world; this isn't 1945, the other big nations are moving in steadily to oust America as king of the world-- and eventually they will do so. No amount of "defense" (offense) spending will keep America #1 forever.
America will slowly lose its empire and your children and grandchildren wont be princes & princes of the world any more-- no matter how expensive the colleges and universities are that you send them to.
The communists, as per usual, were wrong. Krushchev was bluffing to say "we will bury you", 'burying' is not to the point.
But you will go down in rank, you wont remain on top and neither will your descendants. That is not a promise, not a threat, it is an absolutely ironclad guarantee; BANK on it.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 10:00PM
I don't believe that bs for one second. I still know this is the greatest country in the world and if ANYONE is going to take the american experiment away from ME, please rest assured that it will be peeled from my cold, dead hands.
I have to say, if you are an american, I hope they let you live so u can live out the rest of your miserable existence kissing the as* of your new slavemaster. SHAME ON YOU.
If you aren't American, and not a muslim extremist, then I suggest you show a little respect to the nation of people who saved your sorry ass in WWII. Just think, there were plenty of jacka**es in 1938 that talked just like you.
Die a slow death by your new slavemaster. I hate to be nasty, but u guys deserve it. Not only do the REAL Americans have to fight this battle against our foreign foes, but we have to fight the ppl within who would destroy it. SHAME ON YOU.
Alan Brooks| 3.3.11 @ 10:41PM
Do what you have to do. But if you reinstate conscription at some point in the future, it will be the end of you. From now on you will have to fight your own wars or give up the ghost.
And that is another guarantee
Alan Brooks| 3.3.11 @ 10:44PM
PS,
you think I care about the future. I don't.
But do not ever bring back the draft-- or else.
I mean that.
Remember which side lost in 1865?
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 11:21PM
Yes, the democrat south lost. Now that u bring it up, it was lincoln who formed the republican party.
And if u think for one second that if this nation is threatened that we will need a draft, then I suggest you look at what happened the day after pearl harbor was bombed.
People think this nation has fallen. I don't believe that. This nation is still filled with the patriots that pulled off mission impossible by defeating the grits in the revolutionary war. Do not doubt our strength. If u think we need all the fancy planes and tanks your kidding yourself. This nation is the reason u live a modern life. Everything from electricity and automobiles to cell phones and computers was invented here.
The thing is, we are just as creative when it comes to a good fight. I urge any nation that doubts this to put us to the test. We don't need obamas permission to show you rookies the ropes on defeating forces multiple sizes larger than ours.
Lagiusmeatius| 3.7.11 @ 12:02PM
PhilTheCapitalistPig,
A few words regarding some inaccuracies in your statements:
First of all, to be more accurate, it was the "War Democrats" and "Republicans" that sided with Lincoln and won (both the War Democrats and Republicans formed the Union Party), not just "Republicans" as you implied.
Second, you mentioned Pearl Harbor and no need for a draft, but in WWII, there was a draft issued, and in fact the majority were draftees -- so what was your point here?
If you think we don't need all the fancy planes and tanks to win a war, then I would think you'd be more in line with my views (that you replied to earlier) to cut defense spending in half--after all, you just said "Do not doubt our strength. If u think we need all the fancy planes and tanks your kidding yourself." So concerning our previous posts, and according to your rationale, it seems that we'd be just fine if we reduced our defense budget and got rid of those "fancy planes and tanks"...right?
Then, you go on to say "This nation is the reason u live a modern life. Everything from electricity and automobiles to cell phones and computers was invented here."
First off, regarding that statement, this nation is not "the" reason we live a modern life. No doubt it is a factor in our progression, but lets not forget the industrial revolution (which actually began in the UK, not the US). This was probably the biggest foundational reason for the level of subsequent technology for many decades to come. As for electricity, the term actually originated from "electricus", coined by the father of electricity, an Englishman by the name of William Gilbert--also not an American). As for the automobile, François Isaac de Rivaz, a Frenchman, was the first to invent an automobile with an internal combustion engine--so once again, not an American invention. As for computers, due to such a large variation in what people define a computer to be, the first known inventor is hard to define. In terms of the first programmable device, which utilized punch cards, Joseph Marie Jacquard, a Frenchman, was actually the first person to employ the "punch card" automation for textile looms (which this "punch card" technology would later be used in "punch card" computing). In terms of the first "programmable computer" Charles Babbage, a British engineer, was the first to invent it. After this first invention, numerous advancements have been made, but nevertheless the first programmable computer was not an American invention (it was British). You did have one claim that many would agree with however, for the cell phone. I believe the first cell/mobile phone (as we know them today) was invented by an American named Martin Cooper. I will mention that the level of modernization you imply a cell phone to possess, was not realized until the first commercially automated cellular network (the 1G generation) was launched in Japan by NTT in 1979. The first commercially automated cellular network in the U.S. was not realized until 1983, 4 years after Japan--so although the mobile phone (as we know it today) was an American invention, the use of the mobile phone on a network scale of communication was a Japanese invention.
The first "modern" network technology on a digital 2G network was first realized/invented in Finland, and the 3G network just like the 1G, invented by the Japanese--so again not American inventions. If we consider that all GSM systems require SIM cards, even SIM cards themselves are a foreign invention (Germans). I just wanted to point out the facts, as America is not solely responsible for "modern life" or "modern inventions"--although they do contribute, there are many nations other than ours that actually invented so many elements of modern life that many think of as "American inventions". I'm not refuting America's participation in invention and technology, but the examples you gave were mostly incorrect (all but the cell phone inventor--and given that the commercial cellular networks themselves were a foreign technology, the inventor of the mobile phone has a subjective importance at best in your "modern life" claim). Regarding a more important issue to address surrounding your claim is, how do you define "modern life"? What steps taken to achieve this level of modern life in America are considered admirable? Compare our way of life to that of our founding fathers, and we can start to see the level of waste in this day and age. Consider that the U.S. is responsible for about 25% of the worlds waste produced, and exploits the resources in 2nd and 3rd world countries to mine for Tantalum, copper, and other metals/resources used for electronics including cell phones, computers, cars, etc., not to mention U.S. corporations employing numerous overseas sweat shops to produce so many of the U.S. consumer goods including toys, clothing, shoes, etc. Looking at the overall level of "modern life" in the U.S., including the subsequent amount of waste, the environmental and social impacts worldwide-- perhaps more people should be addressing the consequences of this modern life or at least the true cost of "achieving" it, rather than just glorifying the U.S. as the "reason we live a modern life". Perhaps we should look at the number of out-sourced jobs that go from hard working Americans, to overseas, by so many U.S. corporations. It is these same U.S. corporations that in combination with their consumers, are greatly responsible for this level of "modern life" via consumerism and its consequences.
Lastly, regarding the U.S.'s ability to fight, do you really "urge any nation that doubts this to put us to the test"? Would you really want to "urge" this test only to prove a point, despite the number of American lives that may be lost in the process? Let's not brag about war tactics or use "bring it on" rhetoric when we should rather try to cooperate as much as we can to avoid the needless casualties in the first place. I understand that you may have confidence in the U.S. military, and there's nothing wrong with that in my opinion--it is just more productive to avoid the bragging of who can beat who, and work to cooperate instead. We'd still be spending more than 5 times more than China in defense, AFTER taking a 50% cut in our defense spending. Rhetoric that glorifies war just exacerbates the situation, exaggerates the apparent "need" for war and such a high defense budget, and doesn't provide any real long term solutions for mankind.
Peace and love to you PhilTheCapitalistPig,
-Lagius
FTM| 3.4.11 @ 3:19AM
Don't get your panties all in a wad there Alan, folks came to the realization a while back that some folks don't even make good cannon fodder.
Sam Levi| 3.4.11 @ 11:53AM
Alan,
We veterans say screw you. There is no need for a draft, the military turns away volunteers every day.
idalily| 3.4.11 @ 4:33PM
I take it from your comments, Alan, that you are not an American? If you are not, then go pound sand. Our budget isn't your business. If you are an American, then stop talking as if you're on the outside looking in.
I'll bank on the extraordinary EXCEPTIONALISM of the United States of America and its people over any other country in the world.
saleboter| 3.3.11 @ 6:35AM
Ryan will be demagoged as taking food from the starving, candy from babies and medicine from the sick. He better have a tough hide.
GavInTucson| 3.3.11 @ 11:47PM
I think he'll survive it. Remember back in the 90's when liberals were proclaiming that welfare reform would cause millions of children to be homeless and hungry?
Of course none of that happened, unemployment went down, and Clinton was given credit (even though he was dragged to it by a Republican House and Senate).
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.3.11 @ 6:49AM
The moment of truth comes with the debt ceiling. Watch carefully.
All politicians talk a good game but when push comes to shove, a raise in the debt ceiling indicates all is for naught and the cuts are all phony.
If the debt ceiling is raised then the magic act continues where money is borrowed from the Social Security Trust Funds while telling the public there's a surplus or less of a deficit, and the ruling class continues on with a smirk on their face.
Mimi| 3.3.11 @ 6:55AM
The country and yea, even the world can't help but notice the STARK difference between the ....Character, morality, positive attitude, verbal skills, knowledge and decency, and LOVE and RESPECT for country of the esteemed Paul Ryan and our very own President of these United States! With one security....and responsibility... and the other....reckless -spending and Danceland!
martin j smith| 3.3.11 @ 7:00AM
Recall the bumper sticker: Shared sacrifice ? Well here is a golden opportunity. Indeed lets have shared sacrificed but in this case NO EXCEPTIONS--NO SPECIAL INTERESTS.
Thus, all citizens must give up excess goodies that the economy--i.e. tax payers cannot afford as part of the bargain. That also MUST INCLUDE ALL LAWMAKERS AS WELL--NO EXCEPTIONS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Then there must also be a plan to grow the economy, too. Drill baby drill etc.
Mattled| 3.3.11 @ 7:51AM
I sincerely believe that if Ryan and Boehner start marginalizing Obama, he will become ....marginalized. Statements like; " We thank Mr. Obama for weighing in, but as in the past he doesn't sincerely believe, or live up to, what he says. So here is the reality."
The 3M CEO and others have already decided that Obama just isn't serious. He is the most unserious president ever to have been in office. The only thing he is focused on is "reshaping" America into his fathers twisted "dream". It miffs me to hear Conservatives take him seriously. They should treat him as he is......a joke.
Start putting out two sentence statements that kinda sorta disses him and he will crack under his own ego.
JayDick| 3.3.11 @ 10:29AM
Mattled, I like your approach. Other ready responses could include things like: "If we don't reform Medicare now, no one will get it 10 years from now." People just don't understand we can't continue as we are; a good approach would be to describe, in detail, the dire future awaiting us if we don't change. Drastic changes are needed, NOW.
SpiralArchitect | 3.3.11 @ 1:22PM
They should treat him as he is......a joke.
They should treat him as he is......dangerous.
SeriousMan| 3.3.11 @ 3:17PM
Wow, look at you sick, sad people.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 3:33PM
Thanks for that penetrating analysis.
SeriousMan| 3.3.11 @ 3:35PM
You're quite welcome.
idalily| 3.4.11 @ 4:35PM
Why are we sick and sad? Please explain, and try to do it without sounding like a two year old.
MikeD| 3.3.11 @ 7:58AM
Every one of us knows that the democrats will soon be screaming about "granny eating dog food" (The very same Granny they're trying to 'do in' with their death panels!) "what about the children?!"(another reliable standard.) "Boehner hates black people!"(It worked before!) and, of course: ("Republicans hate those who didn't win the "Lottery of Life!" Which translates into: Rich people worked harder and smarter than the poor! The dame
Deborah D | 3.3.11 @ 10:23AM
I already saw a post on FB the other day by a liberal "friend" -- it was an article about Republicans hating children. It's already begun. They'd better have a response.
SpiralArchitect | 3.3.11 @ 1:28PM
Carnegie put it best when he cited the uselessness of arguing as their is never a winner.
Why prove to a man he is wrong? Is that going to make him like you? Why not let him save face? He didn't ask for your opinion. He didn't want it. Why argue with him? You can't win an argument, because if you lose, you lose it; and if you win it, you lose it. Why? You will feel fine. But what about him? You have made him feel inferior, you hurt his pride, insult his intelligence, his judgment, and his self-respect, and he'll resent your triumph. That will make him strike back, but it will never make him want to change his mind. A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. - Dale Carnegie
Sure, it is fun to work over the Lib's but it really does get you/us nowhere.
A coworkers says 'if I do not think so (agree with...) then it is a lie. He is not so swift, but a very sincere nice guy, I let it go... only to laf later.
Let's be bigger than them. Um, trolls aside, sorry V-Brooks.
Old Joe| 3.3.11 @ 2:08PM
Spiral,
As long as no one argues for what is right and true, then that which is wrong or a lie will continue and grow. If we don’t argue our side, we definitely lose. If I say that you are an immoral or crooked person and you don’t reply, people will assume I was right and you are immoral and crooked. Grow a pair and stand up for what is right and yourself.
Sam Levi| 3.4.11 @ 12:07PM
All that it takes for Evil to prevail is for good men and women to do nothing
or
One bad apple can rot the whole barrel.
MikeD| 3.3.11 @ 8:03AM
(sorry:THIS DAMNED COMPUTER HAS A MIND OF IT'S OWN! IT JUST DOES WHATEVER IT WANTS!) To continue:
"Which translates into: "Rich people worked harder and smarter than the poor! The GAME must be rigged!")
We need to see this garbage coming and make a game of it by anticipating the media and dems remarks and strategy in advance. Use their best 'lines' before they do! Make bad and supposedly inapporpriate jokes. Turn the left's own language against them. (And get anything but a Microsoft operating system computer! MS Vista is the spawn of the Devil!)
Mattled| 3.3.11 @ 11:30AM
Exactly----they need to hire Ari Fleischer for messaging and PR. The way he smacked down Chrissy Tingly a few years ago was priceless.
It's as if the Reps don't have ANY strategy at all. I still say we should kneecap the media by putting faces and names on billboards and printing BIASED and LIBERAL underneath.
Katie Couric: "Don't watch her. She lies". (That would be a priceless thing to see along an interstate).
SpiralArchitect | 3.3.11 @ 1:36PM
Merely gives ammo to the lib's so they have to manufacture less - as enjoyable as it might be.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 1:58PM
I disagree. I think the reason so many people are ignorant is we never fight back. It's time we start playing the same game as them. I'm tired of sending people with knives into a gun fight. The republicans can't sit idly by and let the democrats take control of the rhetoric.
Look at what they did with the Arizona shooting. People that had nothing to do with the shooting were criticized on the right when the kid, it seems, had no political affiliation. If anything you would say he's a commie. after all, he KILLED a conservative judge and SHOT a blue-dog democrat congresswoman.
In contrast, you have signs comparing Governor Walker to Hitler. You have very violent rhetoric coming from the protestors. You have ASSAULT on Tea Party Members from these protestors.
What happened to civility?
I think its time we quit turning the other cheek and start fighting fire with fire. Continuing to turn the cheek does nothing to win the fight we are in.
Let me tell you this, tea partiers, if someone assaults you at an event like this, you have every right as a citizen to beat the snot out of these punks. Do NOT be bullied.
SeriousMan| 3.3.11 @ 3:21PM
Advocating violence in the same post where you question, "what happened to civility?"
Nice one...
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 3:34PM
I say "what happened to civility?" because the left was asking that of the right for no reason whatsoever, and then they go out and show us what they're really about in these recent protests. It's meant to convey, "could they be more hypocritical?"
I'm starting to wonder if there is a liberal with an ounce of intellect left on this planet.
SeriousMan| 3.3.11 @ 3:37PM
And after hearing you equate all muslims with terrorists and paint anyone who disagrees with you with the same brush I don't have to wonder the same about you.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 3:47PM
You don't know what you're talking about. I guess you're not so serious after all. In fact, if you look at my posts (not someone else's) I said that many muslim-americans could teach people like you a thing or two about what it means to be american. And I still know that's true.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 4:32PM
And two, I wasn't "advocating violence." That's very different from standing up for yourself and Counteracting violence, tool.
Sam Levi| 3.4.11 @ 12:09PM
Under Arizona law, you are within your right to strike preemptively if you have a reasonable belief you are about to be assaulted.
Intelligent Design| 3.3.11 @ 8:31AM
A few ways to cut spending and reduce the national debt: 1) bring all the troops home from Afghanistan and Iraq - we do not need troops on the ground in Muslim countries; 2) repeal Obamacare in its entirety and start over with a market-based approach; 3) eliminate the $200 billion or so in duplicate expenses identified by the GAO; 4) eliminate funding of the UN, aid to the Palestinians, etc.; 5) execute the terrorists at Gitmo to cut overhead; 6) fire half of the TSA's 60,000 employees; 7) eliminate the Departments of Energy and Education; 8) cut the Departments of State and Interior in half; 9) privatize Social Security by giving everyone the freedom to opt out on July 4, 2011; and 10: enact the Fair Tax (www.fairtax.org) which would completely eliminate the federal income tax system and the IRS, resulting in a huge increase in economic growth (and higher tax revenues).
Michael Tomlinson| 3.3.11 @ 9:30AM
Would you rather fight the Muslims in the US? Killing them here is far better than Indiana.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 9:54AM
Yes, I for one, would rather fight them here at this point. We should watch very closely what's happening in the middle east. If Saudi Arabia falls, then they will have our boys surrounded. God bless those guys. I hope our completely incompetent, impotent on national defense president wouldn't hesitate to drop the hammer in that situation. But I get this feeling, just like the feeling I get that he's not going to defend israel when these muslim nations invade in the near future, I also get the feeling he's going to show his impotence once again if the muslim nations try to squeeze our troops.
Bloefeld| 3.3.11 @ 2:43PM
Just gotta say that I love your username. Perhaps "Phil the Catapultist Pig" has just a bit more wit. It is great as it is though.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 2:49PM
LOL.. I do it to spite liberals.
Impeach Don't Wait| 3.3.11 @ 10:46PM
"But I get this feeling, just like the feeling I get that he's not going to defend israel when these muslim nations invade in the near future,..."
Some students of the Bible feel that scripture prophesizes that Russia and Iran (among others) will attack Israel, and no one will come to their defense. I always ask: Well where's the U.S.? Then I worry: Either we're decimated, or disabled (spread too thin), or economically impotent. Or... Maybe we just have a democrat in the White House.
What you say may well be true.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 11:25PM
We're getting very close to the scriptures being proven as non-fiction. I just know i'll be glad to do my part to send satan to the lake of fire for 1000 years. Just sayin'.
Intelligent Design| 3.3.11 @ 11:51AM
Removing our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan is only part of the picture, which would also include: 1) bombing Iran's nuclear and military sites; 2) bombing terrorist targets of opportunity, as we do now; 3) placing about 25,000 U.S. soldiers along our border with Mexico to keep out Muslim terrorists (who knows how many have already entered the U.S.?); 4) banning all immigration of Muslims into the U.S.; 5) outlawing mosques; 6) having Congress recognize Islam as an organization subversive to our Constitution / Bill of Rights; 7) banning Muslims from serving in our government in any capacity; 8) banning Muslims from U.S. airports and aircraft: 9) shutting down Muslim "charities" in the U.S.; 10) building nuclear power plants rapidly; 11) converting more trucks and buses to natural gas; 12) converting more cars to electric/battery; and 13) giving more military aid to Israel. And like that.
Bloefeld| 3.3.11 @ 2:50PM
This is bigotry and ignorance on your part. Perhaps some history of the Middle East, a bit of reading about Islam, and an understanding of physics would help you to better understand why each and everyone of your ideas are unworthy.
I wish to point out that I am not making an ad hom attack on you personally; you are probably a nice person but pretty angry about things at this point. Rather I am merely stating my dislike for your entire position.
Cheers,
Bloefeld
Intelligent Design| 3.3.11 @ 5:57PM
I suggest reading: 1) The Crisis of Islam, by Bernard Lewis; 2) Islam by Bernard Lewis; 3) The Grand Jihad, by Andrew McCarthy; 4) Reflections on the Revolution in Europe by Christopher Caldwell; 5) A Lethal Obsession by Robert Wistrich; 6) The Strong Horse by Lee Smith; 7) The Israel Test by George Gilder; 8) In Ishmael's House by Martin Gilbert; ETC.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 3:10PM
I agree with Bloefeld here. Let's not be as bigoted as union members and the radical islamists. I know plenty of Muslim-americans. (Iranian, Egyptian, Libyan) (all very attractive women I might add) and they are ALL conservatives! Crazy huh? Well many of the muslims that come here can tell you more about the american dream than Richard Trumka. I can promise you that.
Let the left be the bigots. Conservative has nothing to do with bigotry, that's not us. The Nazi's were leftists along with every other genocidal maniac to walk this earth. Don't say crap like that to further the ignorant rhetoric.
SeriousMan| 3.3.11 @ 3:22PM
What an angry, sad person you are Phil.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 3:35PM
Not as angry and your commie union friends in wisconsin, troll.
Intelligent Design| 3.3.11 @ 5:59PM
See above.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 10:10PM
Oh don't get me wrong, i'm primarily referring to "muslim-americans", not your "hezbollah" variety. Its important to stay grounded and recognize the difference. The crazy variety want to wipe us off the map, im well aware, but we would be no better than the nazis (or progressives during wwII who were just as bigoted against the japanese) to fall into the trap of bigotry and slaughter them.
You're not a progressive are you?
Biff| 3.3.11 @ 12:31PM
I for one; would rather fight them here. No telling who might get in the way.
FTM| 3.4.11 @ 3:30AM
Actually fighting these folks here would be a good idea for two resons.
A: Americans need a good 'ol fashioned slap-in-the-face wake up call. I would imagine that a serious proportion of the self-appointed "ntellectual elite" would be talking out of the other side of their heads if folks were mopping up suicide bombings in Indianapolis. As in, "Guess what folks, this is real." Get in the game or die.
B: With the US out of the Middle East, after the fifteen minute orgasmic celebration over the ultimate defeat of the "Great Satan" these savages would revert themselves to the sixth century with all their modern weapon systems. The ones that survived would be back to following goats around for a living and the most advanced weapons system that they'd have would be a leather strap and a base-brawl sized rock.
The Middle Eastern nations produce nothing but oil. Their population centers are supported via imported western technology, water purification, power generation etc. Get the US out of the way and let these barbarians destroy what little they have. After the smoke settles and the dust clears the people that are left wouldn't be able to field a decent soccer team.
Ken (Old Texican)| 3.3.11 @ 9:22AM
Well at least Ryan and the cutters are making sausage. Keep sending the Reps atta-boys!
Michael Tomlinson| 3.3.11 @ 9:30AM
Before messing with entitlements Congress needs to show its true mettle by rolling back the Obama 24% increase in entitlement spending, funding to the UN (boot the useless bastards out of our country too) and go after Democrat sacred cows like Planned Parenthood, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, legal aid (require Democrat trial lawyers who net over $100,000.00 in income to do a similar amount of pro-bono work), funding for usless university research projects, the National Endowment for the Arts, etc.. Entitlement reform is necessary, but not before we've gotten serious about cutting out the fraud, waste and abuse in discretionary spending.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 9:47AM
Hearing Paul Ryan talk about cutting spending gets me all giddy inside! Yet another I would love to see debate O'Barry.
SpiralArchitect | 3.3.11 @ 1:50PM
My son is ten, I would love to see him debate B.O.
...or my dog, or cat or... you get the idea.
Barry Don't Debate - straight up; he don't do dat.
SpiralArchitect | 3.3.11 @ 1:51PM
The message is real even if the pic is not -
a must see:
http://img210.imageshack.us/im.....ailkx4.jpg
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 2:01PM
LOL
Wonderful News| 3.3.11 @ 3:24PM
Er, were you watching his response to the State of the Union? Not only did he sound more depressed than B.O., he looked like he'd been up crying for four days. Ryan does not offer much in the way of confidence.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 3:36PM
Wow, you are an idiot. That was one of the most realistic, honest speeches I ever seen from a politician. too bad you're too naive to appreciate it as such.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 3:39PM
Would you rather see confidence or honesty? I question your values given the situation we face as a nation.
idalily| 3.4.11 @ 4:40PM
Would you rather he sugarcoat the medicine for you and the other children? We are BROKE. Deal with it.
Storage Steve| 3.3.11 @ 12:10PM
I believe the cuts are needed but for the average joe to believe the government is not just cutting their social security check wwe need to cut alot of fat first. This would allow us to approach the people as an example and not just cutting programs we think are not fair. The U.N. and duplicate spending is the place to start. I for one would be willing to contribute to paying down the debt to provide4 a better future for the country if our government could prove it can run lean.
Peggie| 3.3.11 @ 1:10PM
I like this. Oh, if all of Congress thought like this!!
CharlieEcho| 3.3.11 @ 1:11PM
cut, cut, cut,
Irish22| 3.3.11 @ 1:18PM
The "cutters" must gore everyone's ox equally. (And some more equally than others!) Republican handouts to their favorites in agriculture, banking, oil, etc. must go! Only then will the Dems see the handwriting on the wall . . .
idalily| 3.4.11 @ 4:41PM
Absolutely. No department should be spared. Cut, cut, cut. EVERYWHERE. Yes, including defense. There's waste in that budget, too. Although defense is one of the few that is actually mandated in the Constitution.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 1:37PM
Paul Ryan needs to man up and enter his presidential bid. This is HIS moment.
Question: What will be the main issue in the upcoming election? That's right. Spending and Budgets.
Tell me, who is better to educate the people on the problem, knows the issue better than anyone (I can think of), and has a plan to fix it?
Only one man I can think of. That's Paul Ryan. History is calling his name.
SpiralArchitect | 3.3.11 @ 1:52PM
It has only been a few years, you think the anyone but Bush theme will be enough to keep the Community Organizer in office?
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 2:11PM
Call me crazy, but I think Obama might be the Anti-Christ. Just sayin'.
I probably just lost credibility with some, but I don't care.
Steve A| 3.3.11 @ 2:35PM
Nah Phil, he really is not smart enough. Too many mistakes & gaffes.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 2:49PM
LOL.. good point.
Impeach Don't Wait| 3.3.11 @ 11:08PM
"Nah Phil, he really is not smart enough. Too many mistakes & gaffes."
But he seems to be what they call a foreshadowing of the antichrist... that is, one who "prefigures" that person, demonstrates his qualities and ways... He's smoothtalking, can win people's trust, is charismatic and, well, anyone can have all that, but what he seems to have which sets people on edge is the ability to come off like he's working to improve the lot of the common man while actually seeming comfortable bringing a nation to economic ruin. That's hard to overlook. I hope he's not the one, for the antichrist is not a blessed man if you know what I mean... Having said that... If he ever becomes head of the U.N. or something, I'd worry.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 11:28PM
MAN! That's what I was saying. Look how many people are still enchanted by him.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 11:30PM
Satans army of 200 million? I hear that's the estimate size of the chinese armed forces.
GavInTucson| 3.4.11 @ 12:35AM
I don't think the Anti-Christ would need a teleprompter to talk to 5th graders. Just sayin'. :)
We don't have an Anti-Christ in office. He's nothing more than an affirmative action poser, whose only job skill is the ability to agitate an uneducated mob.
idalily| 3.4.11 @ 4:42PM
I wish he would, but he won't. He's already said he won't run, and he is very valuable where he is, so I can't complain too much.
Who Knows?| 3.3.11 @ 1:56PM
“Who pays the piper, calls the tune” combined with “You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time” are a couple of hoary sayings that seem to me to have a lot to do with our present fiscal AND moral mess.
First, ever since slick Willie, at least, it’s been obvious to me that Lincoln’s bromide needs updating into, “You can fool enough of the people for quite enough time” to do real damage to America. And, also, those people paying the piper have NOT been calling the tune, either!
I think the concept of a BUBBLE probably applies here, as well as to most other out of whack conditions.
In consciousness, there is a supremely stretched incongruence between what is believed and what is TRUE!
And, aided and abetted by the brainwashing and dumbing down by pubic schools, far too many eligible voters are STILL so disjointed in this sense, that the bubble just keeps growing.
Well, as is space-time obvious, if something can’t continue forever, it has to stop!
Physical reality must eventually get so bad that change becomes the imperative.
I’m thinking that the nation NEEDS another gas crisis type of event, with something like those lines of cars at gas stations unable to get nonexistent gasoline.
What will it take?
Actually, American politicians have perfected kicking the can down the road---it seems as if the growing time bomb of social security and Medicare have been warned about my whole adulthood!
Why, I well remember being TOTALLY pissed and flummoxed when congress dropped the Gramm Rudman Hollings way of stopping over spending!
Why did they STOP---it was working!
As Keynes observed, “In the long run we are all dead”---and, this obvious truth infects almost every elected official confused voters throw up into power.
We’ll see if a Paul Ryan and his ilk can really educate enough fat and fat headed Americans to stop the suicidal madness.
Truth Hurts| 3.3.11 @ 2:03PM
I see the writer is an adjunct professor at George Mason University School of Law. GMU is another institution founded & funded by the Byzantine radical right Koch Industries family, which explains the RW bias and positive analysis of Chairman Ryan's regressive economics. Even GOP buddy Goldman Sachs was one of many real, qualified & respected economists/analysts reporting this week how GOP/Tea Party House $61B budget cuts would destroy nascent US economic recovery, cost close to 1,000,000 more jobs & 1.5 - 2 % points of GDP!! In addition to the thousands of jobs GOP governors are cutting, growing the unemployment crisis daily rather than tax the under-taxed 1% (who received 66% of Bush tax cuts' financial benefits, BTW)
Thank God America is finally waking up. It won't be long before Chairman Ryan will be defrocked as just another propaganda tool.
The Koch's are related to the German Koch's, did you know? Including Ilse & Kurt Koch, convicted & imprisoned Nazi war criminals. Well, we won't let that kind of persecution of middle-class taxpayers happen here in America.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 2:14PM
LOL.. Trolls..
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 2:17PM
What a moron.. THis guy says the GOP is in cahoots with Goldman-Sachs. This idiot doesn't know Obama has 30 Goldman-Sachs lobbyists in his cabinet!
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 2:19PM
Seriously people. Do you see what we're up against? This is the liberal clap-trap information going around in those circles. This will be difficult to have an honest debate with these people because we can't agree on what is true and what is not.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 2:21PM
BTW, Troll Hurts, please provide concrete evidence of your claims.
Oh I forgot, you're just a propagandist.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 2:23PM
Funny.. I didn't see anything on liberal ran wikipedia about the Koch Brothers here..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.....University
idalily| 3.4.11 @ 4:43PM
As yes, blaming Bush is so last year. Let's blame the Koch Brothers instead. Liberals are as deep as a puddle.
Oldefarte| 3.3.11 @ 2:12PM
Everyone demands governmental benefits, until they begin to come to the realization that, as taxpayers, THEY WILL END UP PAYING/FUNDING these benefits. It's called MORONIC IMBICILISM 101! The Democrats have historically resembled DRUNKEN SAILORS WITH STOLEN CREDIT CARDS in their QUID-PRO-QUO providing governmental benefits to the indigent welfare class in return for same's votes at election time [and the corrupt Republicans are not far behind these Democrats either]. The connection between labor unions and the politicians providing them governmental benefits can be understood by the realization that politicians, once elected, go off to their repsective governmental legislatures and are thereafter unsupervised/monitored by superiors/bosses [as opposed to the private sector]. Since the taxpayers are their bosses and are back home in their residential districts, these politicians are free/unrestricted to do whatever they so please with no managerial oversight from their bosses/taxpayers. The current tea party movement has now established the idea of political oversight of these politicians into the equation, and same is long overdue. Instead of their historical drunken-sailor spending benges, they're now being forced to not spend as much [and hopefully one day to save possibly]. WAKE UP AMERICA, it's about time, and reclaim YOUR credit card!!!!!!!
FTM| 3.3.11 @ 8:58PM
Nah, Oldfarte, think about it...
The problem is that we've let everybody vote. Look back into the history of the country. Virginia for example, you had to have so much money or property in order to meet the state mandated qualification for public franchise, e.g. the "right" to vote. The logic being that the people paying the bills got to write the laws.
Today everybody gets to vote. I hear that in Florida even convicts get to vote. Is it any wonder that the country is bankrupt? You don't have to be a rocket scientisit to figure this one out.
And now for the sad reality. The situation can not be reversed. The game is over. The republic is lost. Argue as you will. Ask anybody that you meet how they would correct the problem of national bankruptcy. The number of solutions will exactly match the number of people that you ask. It's a turkey farm. The second law of thermodynamics in action, entorpy moving from the minimum toward the maximum.
Blazon1| 3.3.11 @ 2:21PM
"We are headed for a fiscal cliff," stated the Congressman, starkly, in his opening remarks. "Everyone in town recognizes we have a debt crisis except the President,"
Ryan is wrong here. The president (sorry, can't capitalize this guy) knows full well that he is spending too much and pushing us towards the cliff. He will continue on this path because that is his plan. It is up to the GOP to stop him and reverse the trend, but I am extremely skeptical that they are serious about making tough cuts. $100 billion is a drop in the bucket.
Bloefeld| 3.3.11 @ 2:25PM
The difficulty that Dr. Paul and others face is that they believe that the President and the leftists in the Democratic Party are just being obstinate.
The truth of the matter is that they are following a carefully laid out political plan that has been in place since the early 70's. It is people like Obama who are now of the right age to bring the plan to fruition.
The alternative to this is that Obama and his comrades are simply stupid. Clearly this is not the case. They can add the numbers, do the regressions and see that their accelerated spending must eventually cause the breakdown of the American and hence the worlds financial system.
In fact that is the very nub of their plan.
On needs not to read and think about what Dr. Ryan is saying (well actually I guess they do), one needs only to read a handful of books to see what is going on.
Glen Beck is on the right path of understanding. He understands both what the road map is and who the players that are implementing the road map are.
If every reader of this comment simply went out to the library and borrowed the little 'book' "Rules for Radicals" by Saul Alinsky. Read it carefully, read it two or three times; (most readers on this forum would have no need to do little more than glance through it) it would be clear to them how well Alinsky's rules have worked.
When we see the disorder in the Middle East we are merely seeing the endless bickering of a particular race. We cannot fix it and they have long had a democracy as needed to run tribal societies.
When we see the unrest in Europe and Wisconsin we see the true source; Marxism.
We in America simply are too ignorant about the goals of Marxism, too poorly educated on the subject to see that President Obama is not simply a bit left of center but is indeed a Marxist/Alinsky/Lenin/Maoist.
Once we embrace that fact, we can start to undo the damage already done and the greater damage meant to come after 2012.
Cheers,
Bloefeld
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 3:05PM
Agreed
Carole| 3.3.11 @ 2:31PM
While spending cuts are necessary in the short-term, long-term economic stability (much less prosperity) cannot be achieved without growing the GDP and increasing revenue. Tea Party ideology notwithstanding, there must be a direct correlation between each and every spending cut and increased government efficiency and productivity that achieves GDP growth. In the absence of this direct correlation, willy-nilly cuts focused solely on deficit reduction and not on fostering economic growth will doom us to double-dip recession and perhaps worse.
One other random observation. Repeated use of the term "entitlement programs" in reference to Social Security and Medicare distorts the nature of the relationship between taxpayers and the government. Much like private insurance, this is a contractual relationship (not government welfare) and taxpayers who have paid into FICA for decades have a reasonable expectation that government will perform on its end of the contract. A more accurate depiction of Social Security and Medicare would be "contractual obligations", not "entitlements".
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 2:51PM
BS. Government doesn't create ANYTHING! all they do is confiscate capital. period.
Any dollar the government can give back to the people is more capital that will be used more efficiently and productively than being in the hands of government.
Storage Steve| 3.3.11 @ 3:06PM
This is absolutely correct. Every dollar spent by government replaces that with approx. .7 dollars of GDP growth. So if you continue to take dollars out of the private sector eventually you'll go broke. Now if any liberals want to trade me 1 dollar for 70 cents then I can be a rich man quickly. Conservatives in this country can produce enough wealth to pay off the debt but until government shows it can stop trying to get involved in things other than what the constitution provides and stop spending our money to get votes we will eventually all go Galt.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 3:18PM
Kudos on the John Galt reference..
FTM| 3.4.11 @ 3:35AM
"Go Galt" I like it!
John Navratil| 3.3.11 @ 3:38PM
Milton Friedman stated that every dollar spent by the government was a tax. The revenue side, while important otherwise, didn't alter this fact.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 3:41PM
That is a fact. Every dollar coming out of government coffers is a dollar taken directly from the people or backdoor taxed via inflation.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 3:02PM
You must not have ever done the numbers on social security. While taking MBA classes, in my "Modeling & Simulation" class, which is a class geared towards building statistical models.
Well, my model exposed Social Security. a person that works for 40 years (age 25 to 65) and never makes a dollar more, or a dollar less than $28,500 paying 7% (Fica Tax) into an investment account earning 8% throughout those years will be a millionaire at age 44, and will have accumulated 4.5 million dollars at age 65.
Compare that to the Social Security Benefit. Then tell me these are legitimate investments. If that's legitimate then Bernie Madoff is a good, honest man.
John Navratil| 3.3.11 @ 3:46PM
Carole,
A more accurate description of "contractual obligations" might include the word voluntary. A contract is an agreement between parties. When one party doesn't agree it is called coercion. When the parties agree that the "forgotten man" is to pay for it, it's called theft.
A typical liberal (strike that) Orwellian (strike that) progressive trick is the call something that which it is not, don't you think?
George S| 3.3.11 @ 5:32PM
A contractual obligation does not allow for one party to change the rules. From the 1935 Social Security Act Section 1104:
"The right to alter, amend, or repeal any provision of this Act is hereby reserved to the Congress."
Reserved to Congress. That is not a contractual obligation. That is the power of taxation where Congress gets to change the rules whenever they want. That was upheld in the Supreme Court Fleming v Nestor when Congress took away social security benefits of a deportee.
It's not a contract. It is a tax and entitlement program. You are guaranteed zippy doo-doo.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 3:20PM
Must be getting close to election time. Seems like the hired troll sightings have been increasing. Anybody else notice this, or am I imagining things?
Dave | 3.3.11 @ 3:50PM
Political and financial bubbles
http://www.psychology-advice.n.....al-bubbles
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 4:41PM
I'm pretty sure the price of gold has more to do with inflation than demand, but whatever.
uncle curmudgeon| 3.3.11 @ 4:21PM
Another good place to get cutting is in the "social justice" sector. Talk about coporate welfare! Open hearings and tell every 501-3-c outfit that takes in more than a $M a year to take a number.
Turn these crooks inside-out on live television and then totally defund the lot of them. Very few Democrats could get elected without this tax-payer funded network in place.
Bianca| 3.3.11 @ 4:25PM
He and all his corporate masters are delusional. "Entutlements" exist in their heads as the money that belongs to their family petty cash, to generously bestow on undeserving masses, spoiled and in need of discipline. You will all get a shock when your "
Education" propaganda fails. Go after trillions of dollars that are stolen fromo our economy, as you all have multiple tax havens on your favorite islands. And first give back trillions given by the Treasury for bailouts and "stimulus", that only stimulated bigger bonuses and the current WLlStreet bubble. When you suck in more pension fund victims, you will pull the rug from underneath again. Congessman can just let his patrons know that the gig is up. Even the dumbest of baggers are getting out of the fog.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 4:38PM
That's was one of the most unclear, delusional rants completely based in fantasy land i have ever heard!
The TEA party escalates another notch! This is the REAL revolution, comrades! Not your BS organized thuggery in wisconsin.
P.S. Why are you guys rallying in california and new york against those "union-busting" governors. Oh yeah, its all political. Organized by Obama and is commie cronies.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 4:39PM
Unions are the biggest contributor to political campaigns in america, almost solely to the democrat party, and you are worried about "corporations"?
Wake up!
WhiskeyJim | 3.3.11 @ 9:19PM
Ryan is one of my favorite politicians.
The question is not so much what spending to cut but how, since even Tea Parties do not want favorite programs cut. But remember that Congress holds the purse strings and the Dems did not make a budget. PERFECT. Here's how to balance the budget:
1. Stare down the President on shutting down the government. Substantially cut or eliminate spending on useless departments, while providing funding for necessary ones, using a two week rolling continuance on spending. This will continue all year. Now we are concentrating on getting rid of regulation and programs, rather than adding.
2. Use the President's own words in the press. He is a perfect example of how to say one thing and do another. Use his words now. Tell everyone you are agreeing with him. Use his media clips.
3. You must tackle Defense as well. We are armed for WWII. Arm for ongoing terrorist, guerrilla warfare. That is much different, and costs much less. Save at least 30% of defense budget while making soldiers safer.
4. The public will notice that shutting down departments, like education, does not bring about a collapse. Tell them about it in the news with a year long recurring funding discussion with the explicit threat of shutting down government.
The Dems have handed the Republicans the landscape for a perfect strategy to curtail the federal government. They should use it.
idalily| 3.4.11 @ 4:51PM
The immediate HOW is simple: cut all departments to 2008 levels, then cut 15% after that. Cut everything, including SS and Medicare. Raise retirement age, eliminate COLAs, prescription drug, whatever. Renegotiate our interest payments. Just get everything down 15% below 2008. That's step 1.
That, alas, is when the serious pain will begin. That will be the point where whole departments will have to be eliminated. It will be ugly. If we get that far. I doubt we will. The rioting will start long before then. Look at the crybabies in Wisconsin just because they have to pay some of their own health care and pension.
WhiskeyJim | 3.3.11 @ 9:28PM
Regarding SS, if Mohammad will not come to the mountain, bring the mountain to Mohammad.
Here's how. In the 1980s, Canada's version of SS was bankrupt. Rather than privatize it, which was politically impossible, they hired investors and actuaries and began running the department using the very conservative rules of the insurance industry; GAAP, investment risk avoidance, etc. They made it illegal to raid the fund. Now it is solid and self-sustaining.
That strategy gets us out of the Ponzi scheme. In 10 years, as citizens see the investment piling up, we introduce the personal option of managing at least part of the portfolio.
Done. But you must stop raiding the fund first and investing the money.
How to sell it: It is a minority play. Blacks and Hispanics, especially men, die before aged 70. In SS, they are funding old white women who live the longest.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 10:21PM
That would involve too much common sense for this president. Remember, we're talking about a democrat party that didn't really give a damn about talking to doctors or insurance carriers on what were the best options for improving healthcare.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.3.11 @ 10:23PM
But I do like the way you think, sir.
Gary Henrichsen| 3.4.11 @ 4:26AM
Chairman Ryan, who is in a 7th term, was there for the tremendous spending increases, runaway pork barrel spending, and increasing deficits of the GWB years. Where was his voice then?
idalily| 3.4.11 @ 4:53PM
I'm confused. Does his tenure make what he's saying now any less true? Do you think he's making it all up?
scott bowers| 3.4.11 @ 11:26AM
Defense is still 2nd to entitlement spending, transfer payments issued by government last year totaled 2.1 trillion dollars, for one year, current unfunded liability in medicaid\medicare 38 trillion dollars, entitlements are the largest drivers of our debt to say orher wise is simply a lie. Also, defense spending is constitutionally mandated as the main duty of government. Entitlement spending on the other hand is something the constitution does not allow the government to even levi taxes for, the idea of wealth redistribution was not addressed in the constitution because the founders would have considered it a moral affront to confiscate the hard earned wealth of one person to give to another less industrious person using the power of government to do so.
Joseph R. Hall| 4.24.11 @ 11:31PM
Spending must come to an end. It is not what a person/government makes---It is how they manage the money should be in question. There should be great accountability because our country is counting on our government's leadership to protect our future rights as Americans. Corruption, Conspiracy, and greed will be the destruction of our own country if integrity is not reconciled to its fullest extent. "We the people, United We Stand, Justice For All" seems to be the protocal for a true futuristic America.
العاب بنات | 4.11.12 @ 6:04PM
As long as no one argues for what is right and true, then that which is wrong or a lie will continue and grow. If we don’t argue our side, we definitely lose. If I say that you are an immoral or crooked person and you don’t reply, people will assume I was right and you are immoral and crooked. Grow a pair and stand up for what is right and yourself.