-
Laying Down My Pen
May 24, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Laying Down My Pen
May 23, 2013 | 70 comments
-
Despite the WaPost, Benghazi Is a Major Scandal
May 21, 2013 | 46 comments
-
Putting Heritage in DeMint Condition
May 10, 2013 | 57 comments
-
Military Might, Out of the Wilderness
May 8, 2013 | 115 comments
Streetcar Line
On Budget, Don’t Shoot Caps
Boehner can succeed like Reagan and Gramm.
One of the biggest myths on the political right, repeated so many times that it has become as much a matter of faith as was the belief circa A.D. 1400 that the world is flat, is that statutory budget caps don’t work. For historical accuracy, this claim stands just this side of the assertion that President Eisenhower was a conscious agent of the Soviet Union.
The truth is that caps have worked, for two to four years at a time, to restrain the only thing they were ever given real teeth to restrain: non-defense discretionary spending. Even beyond the four-year range, they have had beneficial effects by lowering the spending baseline and saving on interest payments.
It helps to understand that by the very nature of the beast, entitlement spending — with its pre-set formulas and broad constituencies — is far less susceptible to enforceable caps than is discretionary spending. Some previous caps paid lip service to entitlement savings, but with so many exemptions and loopholes that they were almost meaningless. Entitlement spending, including welfare until 1996, was what really drove deficit and debt for decades. But discretionary spending controlled by automatic sequesters tends to remain in check. The numbers, as we shall see, bear this out.
First, it is worth acknowledging that part of the myth is based in the reality that Congress “never delivered” on its promised $3 in spending cuts (including in entitlements) for every dollar in tax-loophole closings in the 1982 TEFRA tax bill signed by President Reagan. From that failure came the idea that Congress won’t deliver on its spending-cut promises — and from that, the conflation of vague spending-cut promises with any requirement for savings to be achieved in the future. This is a huge mistake. TEFRA itself contained no cuts or mechanism to force them. Other bills that included actual cuts did deliver those cuts and save taxpayers significant money. TEFRA, in short, is an utterly false comparison.
The first significant domestic spending cuts after the Great Society came in the form of the Gramm-Latta bills of 1981, pushed through Congress by President Reagan. They were doozies. Non-defense discretionary (henceforth NDD) spending largely inherited from President Carter in 1981 stood at $160.5 billion. The next year it dropped by an astonishing 13.6 percent, to $138.4 billion. Discipline was maintained the next year, at $143.3 billion; and even two years after that, in 1985, it remained as low as $161.7 billion. That’s $28.3 billion, or 14.9 percent, below what NDD spending would have been if it merely kept pace with inflation during those four years.
In 1985, Congress passed the first bill that specifically implemented a sequester mechanism to forbid Congress from over-spending. The Gramm-Rudman-Hollings act (G-R-H) worked like a charm. For Fiscal Year 1986, NDD spending again was cut, down to $148.3 billion. In 1987 the number was $157.8 billion — remarkably, still below the actual dollar figure Reagan inherited six years earlier, and of course hugely below the inflation-adjusted levels.
By then, the first version of G-R-H had been declared unconstitutional, but Congress passed a new, constitutionally sound G-R-H in 1987. Again, even this weaker version largely worked, keeping NDD spending in 1989 at $171 billion, which remained $1.1 billion below what the inflation rate would have dictated during those two years. For the entire eight-year span of budgets signed by President Reagan, the single-year NDD spending had grown just $10.5 billion in actual dollars, which bested inflation by $47.9 billion, or 21.9 percent. Total combined NDD spending during eight years was $45.5 billion, in actual dollars (not even accounting for inflation), below what it would have been if it had just been allowed to flat-line at the original rate of $160.5 billion annually. Measured against inflation, the combined savings reached into the $200 billion range. In those days, that was an immense sum.
In short, arrangements for spending discipline worked for eight years to an extent conservatives now can only dream of. Had we not been saddled by President Nixon with absurdly extravagant entitlement formulas, along with massive interest on national debt that resulted from the high prime rate necessary to curb Carter-era inflation — and, to be sure, had Reagan not pushed the vitally necessary defense build-up in order to save civilization by winning the Cold War — the Reagan-Gramm budgetary efforts would have balanced the budget with ease. (And no, the Reagan tax cuts didn’t cause deficits: Total federal receipts grew in those same eight years by $392 billion, outpacing inflation by $174.4 billion. Even if one takes population growth into account, as liberals like to do, revenues under Reagan outgrew inflation and population growth by $112.3 billion.)
Obviously, these are a lot of numbers to digest, but the lesson is clear: Spending caps work. Or, at least, they work until supposedly conservative politicians go so wobbly that they openly and specifically repeal the entire cap mechanism and replace it with a far weaker fig leaf. That’s what the elder President Bush did — and that’s when, for five years, NDD spending grew like kudzu (stopping again for three years when the Republican Gingrich-Livingston team ran Appropriations pre-Lewinsky). Until the elder President Bush went all kinder-and-gentler on us, spending caps proved a godsend for believers in limited government.
Conservatives, especially Tea Partiers, who maintain that Speaker John Boehner’s out-year spending caps are illusory are just dead wrong. Boehner’s design, as I understand it, seems just as strong as that of G-R-H. Sure, it would be nice if the cap levels were set lower — but against a hard-left president and Democratic Senate, that doesn’t seem possible. Nothing precludes the House, during the normal Appropriations process where its leverage is somewhat substantial, from improving on the savings in annual spending bills — without the downside risk of undermining the full faith and credit of the United States.
Any final debt-limit bill that includes any such enforceable NDD spending caps would be a significant achievement. Those caps will bedevil liberals for years, and provide strong support for fiscal conservatives. They will act as a statutory backstop — or, in martial terms, a well-reinforced high ground from which conservatives can launch future, even more effective assaults on the federal budgetary beast.
Note: All numbers used herein come from official figures published by the Office of Management and Budget and from official inflation calculators.
About the Author
Quin Hillyer is a senior editor of The American Spectator and a senior fellow at the Center for Individual Freedom. Follow him on Twitter @QuinHillyer.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (105) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Quin Hillyer
More Articles From Streetcar Line
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/07/29/on-budget-dont-shoot-caps
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Screwtape Talks Turkey
- Wincing at Cumberbatch
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
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
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Brian Mc| 7.29.11 @ 6:39AM
We are replacing a band-aid every few years and applauding each other, slapping everyone on the back while the arterial wounds grow.
If this Republic does not find a way to re-educate the mass of so-called citizens dependent upon socialized efforts on their behalf, (forcibly stolen from those producing the very life-blood of this nation), there is no way to repair this wound. Liberals will continue to lance at every little boil for the supposed good of the whole, cutting ever deeper as they merrily go along.
As Draconian as it might sound; how's about we try something unique? What do you say to a Constitutional form of government? No more czars, no more departments, no more agencies should be considered unless two that exist as this is written are written off the books. Remove two and only then will we the people consider creating another.
Walk into any Federal office building in the land and walk up and down each aisle of cubicles stating over and over, "You're fired, you stay, you're fired, you stay....", over and over again and I would venture to guess this country would never miss a beat.
Prudent elimination of bureaucracies and 50% reduction of the Federal work force sounds like real healing to me. So, when do we start?
Purpleguy| 7.30.11 @ 9:27AM
That's ridiculous - You could fire all 3 million people in the Federal Government and you'd only save between 15 - 30 billion dollars ... then what? No Armed Forces, No FBI, No CIA, No NSA, No Congress, No President, No Courts ... essentially no government and you didn't save much, did you?
A Balrog of Morgoth| 7.31.11 @ 5:20AM
Yeah, because all that spending just administers itself.
Patrick| 7.31.11 @ 7:38PM
OK, so doing the math on your $30 billion cost claim says you are estimating the cost of each of 3 million Govt worker at ... $10,000 dollars. You are off by an order of magnitude, at least.
Liberals can't do math, can they?
Clint| 7.29.11 @ 7:02AM
"Rep. Ron Paul has blasted top House Republicans for a lack of leadership, and called on supporters to pressure top GOP officials not to “cut a backroom deal with President Obama.”
In an email sent Thursday evening to supporters of his presidential bid, Paul urged backers to “help [Republican leaders] make up their mind.”
“The Republican congressional leadership is susceptible to our pressure — good old-fashioned grassroots pressure,” Paul wrote. “That’s why I need your help to demand Republican leaders show some backbone and loudly say ‘No!’ to any business as usual, status quo-empowering compromises to raise the debt ceiling.”
The Tea Party Rebellion Digs In On This Hill.
Stand & Fight.
Have you considered| 7.29.11 @ 11:47AM
Here is an article from the Tea Party Nation today explaining exactly why they oppose the Boehner plan.
I agree with this linked article 100%:
http://www.freerepublic.com/fo.....5695/posts
USSAlabama| 8.1.11 @ 10:13AM
Thanks for the link. I read it and agree as well.
Here is one issue: Replacement of current incumbents. I have written this before; everyone is so focused on GOP candidates for President that they are neglecting the process of drafting members of their own communities to run for seats in congress in upcoming elections.
One of the MOST important jobs we have as citizens and voters is finding responsible members of our own society and drafting them to serve, preparing them to run, and committing ourselves as voters to vote for them regardless of the amount of money spent by incumbents to win.
Otherwise more of the same: closed door deals behind the backs of the American public, triggers, and ever richer law-makers.
George S| 7.29.11 @ 7:30AM
There are too many a contradiction here...
If spending caps were in place, why were they lifted if the sequesters are enforceable? And why do only "conservatives" replace the sequesters with fig leafs... while Democrats abide by them?!?!
NDD spending does not require a government with the economic might of the United States to borrow money -- only unfunded entitlement spending promises do. The sequesters in place all these years are powerless; entitlement spending is kicked in by law.
I think you are trying to make the point that the Boehner plan will force future congresses to live by the promised cuts. But in the same breath your historical recount shows just the opposite. And nowhere in the Boehner plan are entitlements even addressed.
Purpleguy| 7.30.11 @ 9:30AM
Right, it's all those seniors spending all our money on their crap we don't think they should have - food, medicine, rent, clothing - why do we keep letting them get away with this fraud? Throw grandma off the cliff. She's an entitlement that we have to stop!
A Balrog of Morgoth| 7.31.11 @ 5:24AM
Indeed, because the only two choices are to spend everything or spend nothing. One cannot calibrate one's spending to pay out a little less here and a little less there. No, one must continue to spend exactly what we do now on every single entitlement, +7% per year ad infinitum. Otherwise, grandma gets it.
Jesus Christ, did AmSpec draw the short straw in the DailyKos draft?
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.29.11 @ 7:33AM
The real issue isn't spending caps which may have worked short term, the real issue is two political parties who have bankrupted the nation with their false promises, idiotic regulatory conceptions and a horrible lack of ethics.
Even if what Quin states is true, it doesn't reflect the reality of a political mafia comprised of both parties who lie to the public 24/7. Is it any wonder the public looks on with complete cynicism?
In fact, the real point is that previous spending caps were all part of the illusion cooked up by the Ruling Class that implied responsibility, all the while planning to plunder ever more from the U.S. Treasury which has become a conduit to taxpayer's paychecks.
Although Quin makes a case that spending caps may have worked in band aid like fashion, what he doesn't make a case for is supporting the continued deception displayed by Washington, D.C. Inc.
The public is skeptical of any plans hatched by the Capitol Hill professional buffonery squad. They should be because the spending caps were always preludes to ever greater spending.
In that sense, they never worked because the politically elite have developed a practiced art of lying and deception. Once again, it's an issue of trust, and the public no longer trusts the government.
Even the Ryan plan which is sensible in some ways is also deceptive because it allows for ever greater levels of debt, ever greater levels of spending and ever growing government influence.
The facts are that while Quin pays homage to spending caps which only slowed the freight train of spending down, there is no real plan to cut the debt or the deficit.
The Ruling Class continues to lead us to financial oblivion and we are informed that band aids will work. It's just more Ruling Class Kabuki.
Iaidoka| 7.29.11 @ 7:43PM
"the real issue is two political parties who have bankrupted the nation"
No. The real issue is the American public who repeatedly voted for these two parties, for decades.
Everyone wants a tax increase to pay for all their goodies, as long as it's someone else who, you know, actually has to pay the taxes. Everyone wants government spending cut, as long as it's someone else who gets their "services" cut. The American people are a bunch of uninformed morons who are getting exactly what they voted for. And even now that the bill has finally come due, they still refuse to pay. They still want someone else to pay. I hope you all like toast, because it won't be long before the whole country is exactly that.
Purpleguy| 7.30.11 @ 9:32AM
It isn't the end of the world kids - balancing the budget for 15 years and most of the national debt will be gone, retired. That's all it would take. As Treasury bonds come due, pay them and don't issue any more. In 15 yrs or so, the debt is gone.
Iaidoka| 7.30.11 @ 6:46PM
I agree. The problem is, how exactly are you going to get the budget balanced?
You have near 50% of the population that pays no federal income tax. You have Obama elected by the same population, plus a significant number of others. I stand by what I said.
Have you considered| 7.29.11 @ 7:49AM
Quin, the Boehner plan simply does not comport with their Pledge for America...you know, the document that they produced as an enticement to vote for the GOP? Are you saying that campaign promises don't matter?
The Pledge, full text link:
http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/38020848
I see a lot of "fight" in this pledge, but nowhere do I see the words "after we get permission from the Democrats"
How are they going to square this with the voters who put them in the majority?
The ONLY thing they have actually done that does comport with the Pledge, is to pass a bill to repeal Obamacare, which sits in the Senate. This is OK by me insofar as the House did do what they pledged they would.
But then they passed a bill which allowed funding for the implementation. Completely incongruous.
Please explain to me exactly why we should vote GOP in 2012?
Brian Mc| 7.29.11 @ 8:43AM
...because, short of revolution, they are our only surviving hope. To be sure, I want no more "compromise" with communism, but until we can wrest away more power from the elites our battles must be chosen carefully. The mindset that concurs, the answer to the problem is bigger government, must be eradicated, totally. It has been a long time brewing; it will take time to cool...if we can turn off the flame at all!
Have you considered| 7.29.11 @ 9:43AM
Brain, I often agree with you, but I don't believe the GOP will be the savior, and even you leave the trailing "if"
Do you disagree that they have defaulted on the Pledge? Like I said, what are they going to campaign on in 2012...another pledge?
Both the big Tea Party groups have stated they now want a primary challenger to Boehner. I don't have faith that the voters will actually replace him. They will be told that "Boehner is a safe seat, and the primary challenger simply can't win in the general...do you want another Delaware?"
I think it is time to start the process of qualifying a 3rd party. I don't think they can be ready for 2012, as it takes a long time to get a party constituted and on the ballots. But this will certainly apply additional pressure in the interim, and provide a place for voters like me to roost.
More of the same business as usual is not the answer.
Brian Mc| 7.29.11 @ 1:36PM
Sobering thoughts...
Margie| 7.29.11 @ 3:25PM
You know who the saviour is?
Do you know who it's going to be?
We the People!
No third party!
Obama will win.
Let's keep voting in conservatives who run in the Republican party.
THAT is how we'll succeed.
Have y0u considered| 7.29.11 @ 4:49PM
Margie, I simply do not have your faith in either the party or the citizens.
Do you disagree that the GOP has defaulted on the Pledge? I posted it upstream if you want to refresh what it promised.
We ostensibly Did vote in conservatives in 2010, hows that workin' out?
Margie| 7.30.11 @ 1:47AM
Hello,
It's not that I have faith in people, I just know they're fed up.
We need more freshman conservatives next time around.
I'm not for a third party simply because most people won't vote for it.
It's just a reality.
But now~ there are a lot of people waking up to the reality that Obama isn't what they bargained for.
They'll vote for real conservatives.
And we need more of them.
I did read your post at FR.
The thing is, the good conservatives aren't gonna go third party. Michele won't, and I doubt any of the others would, so again, it's just not doable IMHO.
If they did they'd just split the vote & Obama will be re elected.
I share your frustration. I'm just a realist though!
You have great passion.
But no third party!!
Occam's Tool| 7.29.11 @ 7:49PM
Vote for Michele Bachmann. She's a Tea Partier who will not cave in to Terror.
Margie| 7.30.11 @ 1:50AM
Michele is wonderful. She's a bright shining star. I would be glad to vote for her.
Hey, O.T.~ have a great week away.. you'll be missed!
Margie| 7.30.11 @ 1:52AM
p.s. If you're still here.
Do you know of a Dr. Ronald Hoffman out of NYC? He has a radio program every night and on Sat. He is one of the best Dr.'s in the world.
Just curious if you know about him.
Purpleguy| 7.30.11 @ 9:37AM
Is that all you people think about is Revolution?
John II| 7.30.11 @ 5:05PM
No--on weekends I think about ice-skating and reruns of "Hogan's Heroes," to which I now return.
Dave | 7.29.11 @ 11:26AM
There's too much minutia to cover in a comment post, so I'll try and keep this on the short side. After looking over, hearing about and reading-up on all the proposals and counter proposals to consider, it seem to these tired eyes that voting for the current (or even) newly revised Boehner plan will simply deliver us to the same plot of degraded dirt that Harry, Nancy and Obama plan to drive us to. It'll just take the bus a little longer to get us there. That's the way Republican compromises generally work out.
Oh, a quick question: How come-it-is conservatives are always the ones being bullied to "compromise?" When's the last time to heard anyone seriously on the Left say: "Ya' know what, Beaver, I think you and Wally are exactly right."
Take it to the bank, kids. That only happens on The Family Channel.
tsd| 7.29.11 @ 7:59AM
Thankfully we have some new blood in the house today who have brought some sense to the bills/votes in congress. They seem to have the ability to see the problems and the courage to act... we could use more of them ASAP. As for the RINO and Democrats who still play the same old game... be afraid, be very, VERY AFRAID!
Big Tony| 7.29.11 @ 8:16AM
By looking mostly at NDD spenting the writer of this article seems to have missed seeing the forest by focusing on a couple of trees. It all depends on who's ox is being gored. Ya da ya da ya da, NDD spending bad, defense sending good, entitlements are a waste, you are forced to pay into FICA but it's a gift if you receive any of that money back. Sell the defensive dept. a $500 hammer, that defeated communism and it is good, throw away the money on some stupid study grant and that's bad. We need a constitutional ammendment, the reps. in Washington will never do the job without it.
Brian Mc| 7.29.11 @ 8:46AM
Great points, B.T.
I'm unsure where your supposition was headed...but I must argue things need un-doing; the last thing we need is more amendments to the Constitution. I await your argument to the contrary.
Pecos Pete| 7.29.11 @ 8:17AM
If you want a REAL spending cap then repeal the 16th Amendment to the Constitution.
Passed by Congress on July 2, 1909, and ratified February 3, 1913, the 16th Amendment established Congress's right to impose a Federal income tax.
Repeal the 16th Amendment and Congress will have to find a more direct method for stealing your money.
But none of this matters in the long-run. We have spent the USA into ruin. The only logical method for continuing the spending spree is hyper-inflation and even then there is a limit.
Live on a farm/ranch in the middle of rural America because that's the only way your family will survive.
Brian Mc| 7.29.11 @ 8:48AM
And once we have accomplished what you envision, P.P., we can then remove the 17th to cut back on "Look how much money I've brought back to our State!".
Ken (Old Texican)| 7.29.11 @ 8:35AM
Quin,
I gotta' go with you and Thomas Sowell (NRO article today).
Let's get a first down and kick a field-goal.
A hail-Mary pass is a very low percentage play at this point.
Ken (Old Texican)| 7.29.11 @ 9:37AM
Quin,
I just had another thought. Encourage the House to pass the bill everyone here is yelling for.
Call it:
The "Samson Option"
Just crash it all down.....now......rather than bleeding us out from a thousand cuts down the way.
Put another way, let's just create the rubble right NOW! Maybe when the poverts get hungry and cold, we can clear away the rubble and rebuild sensibly.
Put yet another way...let's boil the pot so we frogs have to jump out.
How to do it?
Simple really; and I would hope someone with a megaphone and a stage would start what I call the
"ONE MONTH VACATION OPTION PLAN".
Just get 50 or 60 million productive people to coordinate a one month UN-paid (un-taxable) vacation, and watch the communists go apesh*t with no vote buying dollars.
Jerry K| 7.29.11 @ 8:57AM
I've read many great postings to this and many related articles, but it strikes me that there is one common thread that is never addressed - Term Limits!
Boehner has been in Washington how long? How about McConnell, McCain, Graham etc.
The problem is that these people all belong to the same club. It's them versus us. They understand the rules to the game in DC so they tell us what we want to hear to get reelected and then go back and screw us again every time. The best congressmen out there are the ones we elected last November.
We need term limits and then we can break the good old boys club because there won't be any old boys to control the rest.
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 7.29.11 @ 10:00AM
18 years as Senator max (3 terms)
18 years as Congressman max (9 terms)
or some sort of combination of the two equaling 18 years (but not exceeding it) at max. Then the only option they'd have left after that would be two terms as President, but the chances of getting that one is, really slim!!
How's that sound for term limits? Or am I being too generous to these Thugs?
As much as the Republican Party sucks sometimes, and they really do suck sometimes, I'll take them any day over the Commie Fag Party of Death and Spending.
The Tea Party "Hobbits" have possession of the Ring, and we're not giving it back!!
Nina| 7.29.11 @ 12:30PM
Too generous! If they ran their households like they run this country, they must all be poor! Christmas is being taken away by us tea partiers and Americans who don't want to RAISE the debt?
Nick| 7.29.11 @ 1:38PM
Lullabys, Legends and Lies,
Tooooooooo long!
I would only give senators two terms and representatives 6 terms. Twelve years is long enough. With 18 years, they have too much time to form relationships with lobbyists (legalized bribery) so that they can set up their retirements.
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 7.29.11 @ 2:18PM
Nick, have you no soul? I know they're few and far between, but every now and again, we do find a good one mixed in with all the "Lifers", that we might want to keep around for a little bit. But okay, you talked me into it, I'll vote for your 12 year plan too. Then you're out!! Don't come back!! Don't even visit!! Just go Home!! Get a real job!! Don't let the door hit you on the way out!!
Nick| 7.29.11 @ 2:24PM
Lullabys, Legends and Lies,
But....I've only been here for three years. I still get nine more years! Ha!
p.s. Do I get a retirement plan and medical?
skip| 7.29.11 @ 3:11PM
I am against term limits. The Founding Fathers provided for them through the election process. Voters limit by ending terms through electing replacements. This issue wasn't an oversight on the Founding Fathers part.
A very effective way to limit the election of pathetic and despicable politicians is to repeal the 17th Amendment. Every two years we would vote on those who provide us senators every six years.
The Senate improves. The House improves. Next subject.
We are not smarter than the Founding Fathers. In fact, as we've proven beyond all doubt, we are nowhere near as smart as they were over 200 years ago. What if Reagan wanted to be a senator for 30 years? 'Nope, sorry Ron, you were great as Senate Majority Leader for 8 of your maximum allowed 12 years, but it is time to take a chance on an unknown candidate, move along and get out of the way.'
How about we focus on reestablishing a Constitutional Republic instead? You know, that thing the Founding Fathers actually established?
Stop with this nonsense of limiting even more Liberty in the name of ensuring Liberty.
Margie| 7.29.11 @ 3:30PM
Thanks for the way you explained it. I have to agree with you on this.
The election process is the way we do things, and the problem isn't really the people we elect~ it's the fact that We the People put them there in the first place!
We've been too complacent for too long, and it's caught up with us.
Thankfully, we're waking up now, and I hope it continues.
skip| 7.30.11 @ 9:54PM
Thank you. You explained it well yourself. Ultimate blame rests in the people. Obama and Pelosi are harmless if no one elects them. I hope it is not too little too late. People get the government they deserve.
Margie| 7.30.11 @ 10:21PM
"Politicians don't kill America, the people who elect them do."
Heh, just my lame attempt at "humor".
Appreciate the reply, thanks.
Nick| 7.31.11 @ 9:31AM
Skip,
Yes, we the people deserve all the blame.
But, when the people keep voting for FDR, what do you do then? Wouldn't the country have been better off if FDR could not have run in 1940?
I don't pretend to think term limits would be a cure-all. But, it would keep senators and representatives from acquiring entrenched power. The kind of power one accumulates the longer one remains in D.C.
All the "relationships" those crooks make with the career bureaucrats in all the 17? departments we now have. All the money lobbyists "invest" in candidates to keep them in office so they can vote their way.
Twelve years wouldn't make it worth it to "invest" that much in a single politician. And by the time they were getting real chummy with anyone, they would have to try for a different office.
Anyway, this is just my opinion, of course. I don't claim to know everything about how Washington really works.
But, I do know that Orrin Hatch and Lindsey Grahmnesty must go!
skip| 7.31.11 @ 6:22PM
Hi Nick
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"
There is only liberty or tyranny. What is not liberty is in fact tyranny. There is no in between. Tyranny will always end in slavery.
The Founding Fathers, who by anyone's standards on either the right or the left, agree were the elite of their era, benefiting the most from the social, political, and economic realities of their era, nevertheless risked their lives, risked their fortunes, and risked their sacred honors.
What was worth risking their lives, fortunes, and sacred honors?
Liberty. Liberty is the freedom to enjoy social, political, and economic rights. The Founding Fathers extensively justified Liberty, and the authority for Liberty. They provided a framework of government that can best assure Liberty for all people.
They set up three branches of government, the executive, legislative, and judicial. They established the judical, where federal judges were appointed, and provided they exercise good behavior, or be removed. They established the executive, where the chief executive served 4 year terms, unlimited. They established the legislative, where it was split into two bodies, the lower body served 2 year terms, unlimited, where the upper was determined by the lower and served 6 year terms, unlimited.
Since the Founding Fathers risked so much, this framework was not haphazard but well thought out and justified.
Over time this framework has been ignored and changed, until eventually arriving at the present day. No variations from this framework have been beneficial, but rather detrimental.
Name all the judges removed for lacking good behavior. I can think of 7 from the 1973 Supreme Court that should have been off the top of my head.
How has the 17th Amendment, where the upper legislative body became popularly elected instead of by the lower legislative body, improved the Senate in any way?
How has the 22nd Amendment, limiting the chief executive to two terms, improved the Presidency in any way? FDR was a miserable domestic president, but who is to say we win WWII over two very formidable foes without him? If FDR is deserving of a domestic policy grade of, say, D- (0.7 gpa), and a foreign policy grade of A- (3.7 gpa), do you simply average the two, to arrive at a C+ (2.2 gpa), or weigh the significance of the domestic tragedies against the foreign successes to arrive at an overall B, or whatever? I believe all this pales in comparison to the fact the Founding Fathers rendered all this nuance moot, because they did not provide for term limits.
Instead of moving farther away from the framework of the Founding Fathers, who were so heavily invested in the process they risked no less than literally their very own lives, when really they had nothing to gain and everything to lose - they were already king of the hill - let's move back to what they established.
Screw term limits. Repeal the 17th Amendment. Repeal the 22nd Amendment. Remove judges failing to exercise good behavior. The Founding Fathers established a Constitutional Republic, so don't tolerate any of this Democracy nonsense. It doesn't work. It never has. It never will. All the Founding Fathers knew it and left us their reasons why they knew it.
Liberty is all or nothing. Term limits restrict liberty. Limiting the number of potential representatives available for me to choose from is taking away some of my liberty. It is already hard enough to find any potential representatives, period. I remain adamant. Even more so, when the idjits rail about the electoral college, another stroke of genius on the part of the Founding Fathers.
Now quit goofing off, and go deal with the divine miss M, who beckons yet again for yet another well earned intellectual whupping. I have been eagerly awaiting it for about 24 hours now.
Nick| 8.1.11 @ 2:23AM
Skip,
I agree with much of what you state.
But, we all give up some liberty for security. Or, else, it's Road Warrior time, and we all fend for ourselves.
The Founders knew this. The Articles of Confederation had the newly formed 13 sovereign states give up some of their sovereignty in a mutual defense pact. Later, the Constitution had them give up more sovereignty to make up a free-trade zone, and make it easier for the federal government to function.
The Founders were not infallible, either. The election of 1800 proved that the election process for the president was flawed and needed correction.
As far as the 17th Article of Amendment goes, I've actually looked into this. The reason for the amendment was that too many states were not filling their senate seats because of split state legislatures. When one party held one house, and another party held the other house, gridlock ensued. Some senate seats went vacant for many years.
But, I think they could've come up with a better solution than the popular election of senators. So, I agree that the 17th Article of Amendment should be repealed.
I do not agree that FDR is why we won WWII. It was because we were Americans and because we could think for ourselves that we beat the nazis and the Japs. The minute their commander was killed, the lower ranks couldn't think for themselves, and surrendered. This, and our tremendous industrial production, made us victorious.
I believe, ultimately, if our families and culture don't change, then nothing will save our great nation. The family is the building block of society, to paraphrase Pope Leo XIII.
This country can't be fixed from the top, down.
That's my two cents, anyway.
Take care!
skip| 8.2.11 @ 3:09PM
You highlight some important points.
One in particular, is the importance of social rights. Liberty is the freedom to enjoy social, political, and economic rights. The political and the economic are primarily in the spotlight, the social not as much, to our detriment.
Witness our chief executive. The son of a father who abandoned him almost immediately. The son of a mother not much better, suspected of being passed around as the 'house lay' at the time he was conceived, and raised primarily by neither mother or father. His social issues have now become interwoven in our national nightmare. Which will only get worse with the tolerance of homosexual unions, not to mention the potential endangerment of our common defense with homosexuals integrated in the military.
The family is the building block of society. This country can't be fixed unless the social rights are considered every bit as important as the political and economic rights of liberty. Conservatives need to take note.
TrueBlue| 7.29.11 @ 4:29PM
Difference of opinion at the time though. The Founding Fathers didn't forsee a time when someone would actually WANT to be a lifelong politician, and certainly didn't expect anyone to make a living off of it. When Congress wasn't in session those guys all went home to real jobs!
Honestly I'm for 2-terms period, regardless of whether it's House, Senate, or Presidency. They already have a precedent for 2-terms with the President. So the House members can only stay 4 years? Oh well, they can always run for the Senate afterwards. If you managed to stay in federal politics the whole time the longest you're in is 24 years, assuming you aren't VP for however many years as well.
Have you considered| 7.29.11 @ 5:02PM
Skip is exactly correct. The lack of term limits was not an oversight. It was thoughtfully intentional. The reason is the fear of the Lame Duck.
Are you aware that Illinois used the last minute lame duck to pass all those tax increases that has even Sears (you know, the Sears Tower) threatening to move?....well unless the state gives them special concessions anyway.
I have posted this many times here as TAS, but again, here are Hamilton's words as found in Federalist #72:
""An avaricious man, who might happen to fill the office, looking forward to a time when he must at all events yield up the emoluments he enjoyed, would feel a propensity, not easy to be resisted by such a man, to make the best use of the opportunity he enjoyed while it lasted, and might not scruple to have recourse to the most corrupt
expedients to make the harvest as abundant as it was transitory; though the same man, probably, with a different prospect before him, might content himself with the regular perquisites of his
situation, and might even be unwilling to risk the consequences of an abuse of his opportunities. His avarice might be a guard upon his avarice. Add to this that the same man might be vain or
ambitious, as well as avaricious. And if he could expect to prolong his honors by his good conduct, he might hesitate to sacrifice his
appetite for them to his appetite for gain. But with the prospect before him of approaching an inevitable annihilation, his avarice would be likely to get the victory over his caution, his vanity, or his ambition.An ambitious man, too, when he found himself seated on the summit of his country's honors, when he looked forward to the time at which he must descend from the exalted eminence for ever, and reflected that no exertion of merit on his part could save him from
the unwelcome reverse; such a man, in such a situation, would be much more violently tempted to embrace a favorable conjuncture for
attempting the prolongation of his power, at every personal hazard, than if he had the probability of answering the same end by doing
his duty."
BD57| 7.29.11 @ 6:47PM
Or we could call on our fairy godparents to save us ....
There's way too much magical thinking going on.
Democrats aren't going to vote for a Balanced Budget Amendment - unless, perhaps, it gets enforced by court-ordered tax increases.
IMO, term limits would be helpful, but that's about it - they're no magic bullet.
This situation gets solved one of two ways:
#1, We have the train wreck, after which we deal with the reality of "We've run out of other people's money."
#2, a majority of voters come to believe there will be a train wreck if something isn't done and that it can't be avoided unless we're all willing to participate, i.e., we can't get out of this by taking it to "somebody else." At that point, the politicians run out ahead of the voters, pretend they're leading & we act to change course.
As long as polls tell us majorities are saying "I think reducing debt/deficits is important, but not so much that I'm willing to see my benefits cut and/or taxes increased," we're nowhere.
R Martin| 7.29.11 @ 10:22AM
“The best congressmen out there are the ones we elected last November.”
Dead right. And we have the Tea Party to thank for that. Without their efforts Pelosi would still be Speaker, Obama would already have whatever debt limit and spending increases he wanted and the country would be racing toward disaster at an even faster pace.
The answer to your question is: Boehner-20 years, McConnell-27, McCain-29. But those guys are pups. Here’s the real deadwood: John Dingell-55 years!, Inouye-51, Conyers-46, Rangel-40, Bill Young-40, Cochran-38, Stark-38, Don Young-38, Leahy-36, Baucus-36, Grassley-36, Harkin-36, George Miller-36, Waxman-36. Those are current members; Robert Byrd served for 57 years, Biden for 37.
I don’t know the best way to impose term limits, but they are obviously necessary. The failure of this congress to address the debt/fiscal plight underscores the obvious conclusion: There is no hope that the people who got us into this mess over decades at the controls have the management ability or the brain power or the political skills to get us out. The entire philosophy of government needs to be changed, and that requires new blood in congress.
Have you considered| 7.30.11 @ 7:25AM
RMartin, so how do you feel about those new 87 freshmen now that only 16 voted against the Boehner plan?
And how do you feel about Allen West calling Tea Party folks, skitzos? This soured me even more against him, but he is not my rep.
As you must know, this bill will now be amended and completely changed by Harry Reid's senate, and the new freshmen will be forced to vote for it, or again be labeled the party of No.
They will cave, and we end up with a Democrat bill.....just like always.
Ken (Old Texican)| 7.29.11 @ 9:43AM
Jerry,
Term-Limits are not a panacea. The "Staffers" go on forever...the same ones...who actually do the work. The same with the bureaucracies...going on forever with their webs of regulations.
See, I never fired my best people. My Congressman, John Culberson, does a great job.
Storage Steve| 7.29.11 @ 11:24AM
I think we should pass Boehner's plan as long as we get to revisit this issue during next years election. The gov't is for the people and by the people so an issue this big needs to be addressed during the election. The one thing I don't want is an extension past 2012. Get the plan to the senate and let them make the next move. If we allow this to be kicked past 2012 we won't have a good passionate debate. If the spendthrifts win in 2012 then we know this country is on its way to socialism. As a voter I just want this to be the main issue of next years elections.
Truncheon| 7.29.11 @ 11:36AM
Oh please. What will contain spending more immediately and objectively?
Running out of borrowing power, or passing a bill?
Nina| 7.29.11 @ 12:21PM
Reid just made me puke in my mouth! Tea partiers, how dare you hold up HIS, and only his is the way to go, budget! Cut spending, limit government, term limits, eroneous grants and loans and whatever to ridiculous companies or schools, just plain wasting money on why fruit flies reproduce! Does it really take a rocket scientist to figure this out? I doubt even a rocket scientist could figure out these idiots!
Who Knows?| 7.29.11 @ 12:32PM
One of the gains from a life of continual disappointments in one’s elected representatives is realistic cynicism.
Back in the 80’s, I was ALREADY old enough to be thus enlightened, but still, I was hopeful about the G-R-H caps as they did work, for a while.
Then, when inexplicitly (it seemed to me), Congress just plain old STOPPED using them!
I just can’t believe the polls, that say it will be bad for the GOP if the USA defaults on its debt, even for a Washington D.C. minute. And, even if, FOR A WHILE, a majority of the American people is conned into thinking it was the Republican’s fault, there is still quite a long time before the next elections for the truth to LOUDLY blast into our collective consciousness.
See near things far, see far things near.
The GOP only controls 25% of the federal government! (Ignore the Supreme Court for now)
Besides, isn’t it about time for a massive JOLT?
Fact---the federal government is ALREADY dysfunctional!
Fact---this has been true for decades!
Fact---the majority of Americans don’t pay much attention to the fools in D.C., so the mice have been playing for a LONG TIME!
Conclusion---we NEED an EMP-like attack, that will get everybody’s attention, because the can can’t be kicked down the road anymore. The “can” is so massive, and filled with “concrete”, that the tiny feet of ALL the congressmen only stub their toes when they kick it.
Given our system of government, it is also common knowledge that we have to wait until AFTER the next election before real change is possible. Well, maybe it’s about time for REAL reality to obliterate IMAGINED reality, so that the correct laws can be enacted, and the terrible ones repudiated.
Want proof we live in an imaginary reality?
Around HALF of the American population isn’t even close to understanding what a destructive president Obama is, even NOW! Of course, the same goes for the Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi crowd!
The Deluded States of America!
Take care of yourself---buy gold.
THE big loser when default happens is the dollar---the most salient symbol of the rot in D.C! Buying and holding gold is NOT about “gold”---it’s a wise and safe way to VOTE, NOW, against the robber barons in D.C., because the un-mighty dollar has ALREADY been abused, beyond its “standard” use for the world.
Obama, Reid, Pelosi, et al---there’s no there, THERE!
So, THERE!
Nina| 7.29.11 @ 12:34PM
Oh but be careful not to "sell" your produce to your neighbors, ya know? Cuz it is a punishable crime to do that if you have a veggie garden to that, did ya know that? I just read it and I'm amazed! I didn't know that I could still be amazed by anything that goes on in Washington anymore.
Louis Jenkins| 7.29.11 @ 12:39PM
Nina:
It doesn't take a rocket scienctist to figure out that a fool is still a fool. The people in DC will spend our money no matter how or by whatever method. They'll dress up the proposal, they'll put lipstick on a pig, or dress the mule in fake jewelry, and ya know, it will still be what it is. A sham, a travisty.
"The Boehner plan and the Reid plan are absolute jokes. The Boehner plan cuts $900 billion over ten years with, shockingly, a whole 2.5% of the savings in 2012. Why cut today when you can pretend to cut in the future? We are on track to add $10 trillion of debt over the next ten years and Boehner’s plan will only add $9.1 trillion to the national debt. That is cutting in Washington DC speak. Harry Reid’s plan is even funnier. His $2.2 trillion in “cuts” includes $1 trillion for wars that won’t be fought and the $375 billion of interest expense that won’t be expended for the wars that won’t be fought. "
Mark30339| 7.29.11 @ 12:48PM
Eratosthenes of Egypt could see the sun and moon were spheres, and that the earth's curved shadow upon the moon implied a sphere also (as well as observations of masts and then ships appearing on the horizon). With spot on assumptions about the nature of sunlight, careful measurements, and some high school geometry, he calculated the circumference of the earth to remarkable accuracy around 240BC. I suppose the flat earth and the welfare state are just giant, man-made, self-delusions.
Clint.| 7.29.11 @ 1:16PM
Ha, Ha,Ha, Ha !
Now, Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee, William Yeomans is attempting to Smear Up & Marginalize We Tea Party Patriots, by calling Us Terrorists.
http://www.politico.com/news/s.....60202.html
We Tea Party Patriots Have Drivin' The Democrap Alynskyites Zany Crazed Unhinged.
Carry On.
Nick| 7.29.11 @ 1:34PM
Mr. Hillyer,
I'm still waiting for you to explain why any conservative would support Boehner's liberal plan, when it creates a super committee that can gut the military or raise taxes WITH ONLY SEVEN VOTES!!?
Stirling| 7.29.11 @ 2:02PM
move to a farm?? Did you know/realize that WA. is trying to put thru' regs. that require ANY operator of farm equipment to have a CDL license and which will require them to keep records of logged hours, etc. just like a Commercial Driver??
There seems little hope for this Nation.
Ore Gone| 7.29.11 @ 3:08PM
Wow!! The insanity is rampant. That is the craziest thing I have heard in a long time. Every state law and regulation that affects any citizen should be voted on in the general election and passed by a majority of the registered voters. That would slow the insanity to a crawl. That is just plain stupid. I may have to move but it sounds like WA is worse than this rat hole.
SandyFromState57| 7.29.11 @ 2:08PM
I am wondering, and would love the challenge and feedback re: What would we do if the Libs get their way? Should we divide the country: Lefties to California and Right people to the right? Why should those who don't pay taxes and those who spend other people's money continue to ruin Our America? Our Country has worked for 200 years. Socialism has been proven not to work. Why should we ALL drink the kool-aid and be poor and answering to the Left Elite?
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 7.29.11 @ 2:24PM
Split it right down the middle, right at the Great Mississippi River, Commies to the Left, Sane People to the right. I could live with that!! Maybe my Great State of New York would be worth living in again!! I'd miss Texas though? They're alright by me!!
Oldefarte| 7.29.11 @ 3:51PM
As a lifelong Republican voter [and also an ardent admirer of this tea party movement, until now], I am simply fed up with the stupidity exhibited here from these asinine comments from these supposidly tea party members/supporters/block-heads. Same are simply DUMB-AS-A-STUMP hardheadiness [and a refusal to see the whole/entire picture of this situation]. As fellow conservatives, we all want substantial budget/debt cuts/reductions and relief from this historical defecit/debt spending from mostly Democrats [though Republicans are minorily guilty as well, though solely concerning military/intelligence buildups, as opposed to Democrats' much larger welfare expendatures]. I'll repeat, WE CONSERVATIVES ALL WANT SUBSTANTIAL SPENDING CUTS, but these morons here slandering Quin, myself and anyone who disagrees with their obstinate political positions either ignore or are too stupid to understand the total circumstances involved. If the credit rating agencies downgrade the governmental notes/paper decreasing their credit worthyiness, the WHOLE GD US ECONOMY [AND EACH INDIVIDUAL STATES'] has a good probability of crashing to depression levels and beyond. Our governmental bonds will become suspect to the rest of their world [and our dollars are the reserves of most countries economy], the Chinese/Japanese etc who hold the majority of our debt could decide to sell same and put their money elsewhere [spiking/quadripling interest rates, wiping out residential/commercial real estate values completely, credit card interest rates would skyrocket and cards would be immediately cancelled by banks, major banks and the stock markets could collapse,etc]. In general, IT AIN'T JUST THE SPENDING CEILING/GOVERNMENTAL SPENDING THAT'S AT STAKE HERE, DUMMIES! As he said, the Democrats may have already won this battle thanks to the pig-headed TP'ers, and if so THEY/TP will/should be blamed for the financial carnage that results, since the Republicans tried with two seperate plans and failed due to [1] the Democrats and [2] the Tea Party. I hope all of you idiots here are overjoyed with yourselves when this devastation starts [the GD stock market dropped 200 points yesterday, and a 5000+ point drop will be nothing once this stalemate envelopes financially]. This defecit/debt crisis did not happen over night and has been evolving for decades, and will not be solved overnight also [but will take years to substantilly cut spending]. As you TP'ers rightfully said, the 2010 congressional turnaround was solely due to yur political efforts, but you're absolutely incorrect in your MY-WAY-OR-THE-HIGHWAY approach concerning this spending battle and a compromise [the Boehner plan or the CCB plan] is needed now. Your wanting it all right now is what your obvious leader previously referred to as ACTING STUIPIDLY. Oh and also, tea partiers, read the following article concerning the Democrats' attitude about your TP movement and think about who your friends really are[and who your enemies are as well]:
"....The Democratic National Committee today unveiled a new initiative to brand the Republican Party as synonymous with the Tea Party movement.A DNC document laid out what it says are the plans of the "Republican Tea Party," among them repealing the health care bill, privatizing Social Security, ending Medicare in its current form, extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and abolishing the Departments of Education and Energy. They call the ten-point platform the "Republican Tea Party Contract on America."(Most Republicans do support repealing health care and extending the Bush tax cuts, though the other positions here have far more limited support within the party.) DNC Chair Tim Kaine pushed the initiative at a press conference today, saying "the Republican Party agenda has become the tea party agenda, and vice versa." Democrats hope that by linking the Tea Party to the OP they will convince moderate voters who might have considered voting Republican that the party is too extreme.
Republican National Committee spokesperson Katie Wright responded to the DNC effort with a statement saying Democrats have an "arrogant agenda" and arguing that their "strategy for this summer appears be attacking voters as opposed to listening to them."The Democratic initiative is designed to help blunt expected GOP gains in the November midterm elections. The name of their document, the "Republican Tea Party Contract on America," is meant to evoke memories of Republicans' 1994 "Contract With America" that helped the GOP win control of Congress. Republicans are planning a new version of that document before the November elections. Minnesota Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann recently started a Tea Party Caucus in the House, which attracted 28 Republicans. Some members of the GOP appear to be wary of being linked too closely to the movement, though they hope to harness Tea Party enthusiasm in the midterms.
A DNC official told Politico that "We are going to use this from now until the election as a pre-emptive strike against GOP's August rebranding effort, and as a response to the new contract we expect them to come out with this fall...."
Drunken Sailor| 7.29.11 @ 4:16PM
O.F.
I understand your frustration but even if we do pass a ceiling increase we may still be downgraded. There is talk that until we show a willingness to change our spending habits, the market will still be jumpy. Personally, I think Boehners plan is a start. Would like to see more savings over that 10 year period but until we get control of both houses of Congress that is easier said than done.
A Balrog of Morgoth| 7.31.11 @ 5:27AM
A wall of text and gibberish, signifying nothing.
The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 7.29.11 @ 7:26PM
I have a secret plan, my no where to be seen gay trolls. Unfortunately my plan involves playing golf. Did you see that story out there that I am getting no sleep? Did you believe it? Anybody who was a community organizer in Chicago can sleep like a baby no matter what kind of chaos is going on over where "those people" live. Now if I had to sleep where the common folk live I would sleep with one eye open but I don't. By the way, Harry Reid's bill is dead on arrival. He can't even get a bill passed in the Senate. Boehner got two out of the House, I got however many I need out of the executive and that goofball Reid can't even get one out of the Senate. Sure the CBO has scored Cut Cap and Balance and Boehner's compromise but that stupid CBO won't score my wild claims, speeches, press conferences or the crease in my pants. Show some creativity CBO. I am used to getting help with my vague plans. Look what Reid and Pelosi did with the stimulus spending and ObamaCare. We community organizers can't be bothered with mere numbers. Detroit didn't get the way it did by people paying attention to numbers. I am a concepts person not a responsible leader. I wish people would understand that. Plus when I put my budget out and it went down 97-0 my feelings were really hurt. Those Democratic Senators sure are a bunch of phonies. Well I'll be on the golf course when they think I am sleeping. High speed rail to budgetary collapse, baby.
skip| 7.29.11 @ 9:12PM
If you are going to be brutally honest, why don't you refer to yourself as:
The One Who Walks Like 'Epstein' on 'Welcome Back, Kotter'?
The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 7.29.11 @ 11:29PM
I'm a loser, skip. Make that Welcome Back, Carter and you have something. The only problem with Jimma was that the really smart white people progressives didn't like his Southern accent and military background. I can say the most stupid thing and these really smart white people progressives think I am a genius. I know I don't much look like Peter Sellers but my life follows that "Being There" story line pretty closely. He was a gardener and I was a community organizer. I guess if he gardened like I organized there would a garden full of dead plants but you get the idea. Anyway the next thing you know and I am a Senator. I didn't do a damn thing and the next thing you know I am President. It always tickles me to hear those same really smart white people progressives ragging on Palin and Bachmann for being stupid. Life is a box of chocolates sometimes. We will be energy independent in a couple weeks as soon as I solve the debt crisis. I am ordering new credit cards. Gosh I'm smart.
skip| 7.30.11 @ 11:59AM
And much too modest. With that stroke of genius CAFE proclamation, combined with Cash For Clunkers, on top of reorganizing the debt structure, with the coup de grace anointing the unions majority ownership, the automobile industry is now the paradigm for all industries. Yet you humbly forego any mention. And that's nothing, really. Stemming the rise of the oceans just doesn't get enough credit. It is so brilliant it is not possible to ever receive enough credit. Sort of like how the recession meant there was less money coming in so that meant spending even more. Only in reverse. Wow, excuse me, I have to go prostrate myself immediately...
The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 7.30.11 @ 12:23PM
You are starting to sound like one of those really smart white people progressives, Skip. You get me in all my brilliance. If you can make yourself just a touch race obsessed then you have arrived. It kind of feels like that scene in the TV program "Kung Fu". When you can take this worthlessly inflated dollar bill from my hand then you can leave. Wait till they get a load of my human analogue of the cash for clunkers program. Death panels indeed. You know when you irresponsibly walk away from the debt ceiling talks, the golf is better. Gitmo for the Tea Party, baby.
skip| 7.30.11 @ 2:44PM
I hate your phreeking honky half. Pheeeeew. Thank you! Holding that in was phreeking killing me bro. You would be more perfect than that Nazarene dude without the half we shall speak no more of. That dude was all caucasian anyway. Imagine all the pollution generated in that town in Pennsylvania where that dude was born. Not that it matters anymore. Just one more industry you don't have to worry about. You are every bit as American born as that dude. If only you were born 2000 years ago, by now your followers would have fixed everything ruined by the half we shall speak no more of. Crap. How can I really ignore that phreeking half of yours and yet not berate it for the world's ills? Not to mention the half of you we shall not speak of again but, can you imagine how cool your 'walk' to the podium would be? Not to mention the walk to 'Fund Raiser One', I mean 'Air Force One', and Fund Raiser Two', I mean 'Marine One', would be, if you didn't have that phreeking half I hate we speak not of? It would be 'Epstein, 'Boom Boom', and 'Barbarino' all wrapped into one! It would be so awesome! And 'Horshack' too! Can't forget him! That phreeking half we speak not of is ruining everything! Wait, that's not a criticism or anything, is it? Half of you doesn't hate the other half, does it? Crap crap crap crap phreeking crap. I have to go prostrate myself immediately again...
The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 7.30.11 @ 3:44PM
That's what I am talking about, Skip. The half we know and love threw the half don't speak of anymore under the bus with Grandma a long time ago. If I only give my loyalty to that worthless bum that scrammed out of my life faster than a New Mexico roadrunner cause he had the proper amount of melanin, I think you can see where I'm coming from. Mom of course wasn't that dependable either but she was one of those really smart white people progressives and really didn't deserve the time of day. Sure Grandma raised me but she was just a typical white person. That is why I co-wrote "Dreams of My Mama's Baby Daddy". Want to hear something cool? I am one of a very small number of African Americans who have slave owner ancestors but no slaves. I still got into only that best schools with you wouldn't believe how low a GPA and SAT scores. None of this helps me on the golf course though or as President. I owe everything I am to those crease in the pants really smart white people progressives who gullible doesn't give full justice to. Cheap renewable energy for everybody, baby.
John II| 7.30.11 @ 5:32PM
That reminds me. I haven't seen "Being There" since it came out in 1979, when interest rates had reached what they're likely to be before Professor Obama has hit the lecture circuit. I shall have to correct that oversight.
For now, though, back to "Them!" (1954), the first and only good giant-insect horror flick, a cautionary political allegory in which desert ants the size of Winnebagos insinuate themselves (Them!) into the underground workings of the LA sewer system, thus anticipating the future governance of the state of California and similar lefty anthills.
skip| 7.30.11 @ 7:20PM
Arrrrrgh!
Now you made me have to add "The Blob" (1958) to my 'unwieldy' ever growing list that is either a blessing or a curse I don't know which.
To take my mind off the nation's troubles, and wondering why there is simply no written warnings or any other evidence anybody could ever find useful on the subject, and since reading '1984' and 'Animal Farm' didn't take my mind off it, and neither did reading the biographies of Hitler, Stalin, or Mao, or even the 'Federalist Papers' for that matter, I too am going to check out 'Being There', if only to study a president smar - I mean - the resulting sensual pleasure similar to that which Charlemagne no doubt provided to Beaty in another life.
Oops, only doing this of course after further genuflection -no! -prostration on The Anointed One's personal disquisition to me - me! - before ever daring to waste his time again. I feel like I am floating when pouring over his words. I must have more. It's sort of like what Sister Sara - I mean - ...she... ...experienced... ...when...oops! Gotta go...
John II| 7.30.11 @ 9:35PM
Well, I don't know what to say, Skip. "The Blob" (I mean, the 1958 version, not the irredeemable 1988 version) was apparently intended as drive-in theatre fare for horny teenagers--but the kids did indeed poke their heads up from the back seats to study the emergence of Steve McQueen as the new James Dean, the latter of whom had already died after replacing the short-lived John Garfield as the eminement box-office draw until his own untimely demise in an auto accident, followed by McQueen's rather untimely demise at the age of 50 from weird chemical responses to his race-car enthusiasms.
Yet I think it's important, culturally, to note that (a) there has been no singular replacement for Steve McQueen in the past 31 years and (b) the only ones who realize this development in film history are no-account weeny film-buffs such as myself.
It's also important to realize that Steve McQueen starred (with the also short-lived Natalie Wood) in a wonderful and tough romance titled "Love with the Proper Stranger" (1963), in which it is simply assumed, ten years before Roe v. Wade, that abortion is an unspeakable abomination. I mean, in 1963, cool people understood all this.
Perhaps 1963 or 1964 can be identified as the dread turning point in the Americano psyche.
Anyhow, back to "Them!" (1954). I am savoring it slowly. Well--actually, I am frequently being distracted from it by household chores. My wife went shopping today, so I was stuck with the wash and the dinner, in deference to She-who-must-be-obeyed and our lovely daughter, the fifth of our chilluns. Soon they shall ALL be married, and I shall be retired, so that I can get into a really, really SERIOUS study of the cinematic arts. At which point, I shall report.
skip| 7.30.11 @ 10:29PM
Aaaaahhhhhh!
Cinematic overload! Cinematic overload! Wood is waaaaaaay more than Beaty sensuality-wise. What am I thinking?
You are killing me. Yet kill me you must. I must have reports. As I stated, articulately, earlier, the list of movies I crave a one sentence commentary on from one John II is growing to an unwieldy length as every additional cinematic reference inspires several to a half dozen more even as increasingly I'm undecided as to whether one John II has blessed or cursed this initially innocent lark of mine.
Another thing that just kills me is Bullitt (1968). The love / hate thing I have for that beautiful Mustang airborn on the streets of San Francisco. While I can never tire of gazing upon a car of such magnificance, what I want to do to those film spawners responsible for damaging such a work of art is unprintable, which come to think of it describes my feelings for pretty much all Californians. Maybe I should watch "Them!" and daydream...
After, of course, more prostration before seeking more enlightenment from The One Who Has Been Really Patient With The Two Of Us...
After I add about a dozen more films to that confounded list...
Margie| 7.31.11 @ 8:17PM
How about "Creature from the Black Lagoon"?
I saw it when I was just a wee lass. And I'm talking like so little that the only thing I remember is that monster carrying someone into the lagoon and disappearing under the water.
It scared me, and I knew it was phony, but looked forward to more campy old sci-fi flicks.
Camp is so much better than the loud, special effects sci-fi stuff of today, IMNSHO.
I love film Noir too. And give me an old black & white Bogey romance (or not) flick any day of the week.
Gotta get our Net Flix back.
Occam's Tool| 7.29.11 @ 7:52PM
Can I ask what will happen if we don't pass a budget and don't raise the debt ceiling? I doubt the sky will fall.
BackToBasics| 7.29.11 @ 9:33PM
It is interesting to see that no matter what outcome the elections produce in the HOUSE and SENATE, whether Republicans have a majority or not, whether many Tea Party approved candidates win or not, whether Republicanss take over the House AND Senate as in 1994 for the first time in 42 years or not, whether we have Reagan as a president or not, there are always weak-kneed Republicans leaders at the top positions of the legislative branches. These republican leaders ALWAYS get OUTPLAYED by the Democrats.
"for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light."
Luke 16:8b
....not that Repubs are exactly "children of light" but relative to Democrats, they are.
And it makes Reagan's accomplishments all the more amazing since he only had a Republican Senate for the first 4 of his 8 years. It also shows the critical need for a strong, gutsy conservative president.
POST American| 7.29.11 @ 11:10PM
-----Chicken feed DIS-traction ALERT!-----
---CUT TO THE CHASE---
Now declassified:
State Dept. Memoranda 200 (1975)
Then US ambassador to RED China, Bush Sr.
stating openly the 'agenda' ---RED China to
be set up as the industrial base for the world
and at the top of the New World Order pyramid,
with the US to be deindustrialised and brought
down to third world 'service' economy status.
All this contingent on China 'aggressively'
promoting EUGENICS and extermination
programs for its own population.
----------YOU NOW STAND INFORMED---------
Oldefarte| 7.30.11 @ 1:09PM
"What a day for the Tea Party people. Did you see that? America's parks and fairgrounds were lost in a sea of man-boobs. They were venting their anger and rage against taxes, which, of course, in most cases for them went down. Protesting their taxes went down — but you know, why let the truth spoil a perfectly good Klan rally." —Bill Maher
"Well, tomorrow in Nashville, Sarah Palin will speak at the Tea Party Convention. Tickets are $550 apiece. Where are they getting this tea, Starbucks?" —Jay Leno
"The Tea Party nation announced last week that Sarah Palin will headline what is being called the first national Tea Party convention in February. It is expected to be the nation's largest ever gathering of misspelled signs." —Seth Meyers
"At a Tea Party rally in Boston yesterday, Sarah Palin praised the crowd for winning that Senate race in Massachusetts. She said: 'Shoot, look at what you did in January. You shook up the United States Senate.' Unfortunately, no one heard the Senate thing, because after she said 'shoot,' 300 guns went off. " —Jimmy Fallon
"Federal taxes last year when down for 98 percent of people, but when asked about this, only 12 percent of the Teabaggers thought this was the case. 88 percent of them had it wrong. And a spokesman for the Teabaggers said, 'We don't want to just be taxed less. We want to be taxed less by a white guy." —Bill Maher
Michael L. Hauschild| 7.30.11 @ 6:43PM
How fast and how far you have fallen. Do you realize that in order to make your points you had to quote three of the most despicable hateful people in the world? You brought to this exchange Bill Maher twice, Jimmy Fallon and Seth Meyers; three of the most despicable people to ridicule conservatives? Do you realize that you brought them here to ridicule Sarah Palin? Well old man, those are your allies. I hope you are proud.
D Roamer | 7.30.11 @ 8:00PM
The more denigrations piled on Palin and the Tea Party, the more enthused I become. May their Party increase.
Margie| 7.30.11 @ 1:25PM
Just a thought~
If you look here and read, it seems the majority of TEA partiers are for a third party.
I always thought that was a small number though.
It would be really interesting to find out just how many across the country are wanting same.
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 7.30.11 @ 7:25PM
It's just a negotiation ploy Margie!! We're trying, and succeeding at making the Republican Party return to its principles, that's all. We all remember what happened in 1992, when we just couldn't vote for George "Read my Lips" Bush, so we voted for the guy that made fiscal sense to us, Ross Perot. And by doing so, we succeeded in getting Bill "F***ing" Clinton elected instead, and that Ball & Chain he tugs around, that he calls his Wife!! So what we're doing this time is, we're just forcing the Republicans into their proper place, by threatening to do, what we'll be unable to do come November 2012, voting for a third Party, and guarantying the re-election of President Obama for "Fore More Years", so he can finish the job he started, which is, The Total Destruction Of The Greatest Country In The History Of The World!! That is his plan, isn't it?
Don't tell them that this is the plan, okay? Just keep it between you and me, okay? Shhh, quiet!!
Margie| 7.30.11 @ 10:36PM
"Read My Lips: No Third Party!"
Hey LLL's~
OK, I'm hush hush mush mush as Curtis Sliwa would say.
BTW~ I voted for GHWB in '92. I realized then that voted for Perot would be contributing the delinquency of a minor named Billy Boy Clintoon.
I confess, that was the first time I ever voted. I will never cast my vote for a Socialist Communist~ I know too much about them.
I'll never be the fool who is too proud to cast my vote for the only opposition party to those guys.
And I'm impervious to flame throwing by the holier-than-thou proclaimers of principle.
As far as I'm concerned, anybody that's willing to sit home and pout has absolutely no right to complain about anything.
They're like the draft dodgers of the 60's IMHO!
Maybe they should run away to Canada.
LOL.
POST American| 7.30.11 @ 9:42PM
---------------BOTTOM LINE-------------------
"We're run, esentially, by a private gang,
a mafia if you will, formed a long time ago.
The Milner and Cecil Rhodes groups,
their aim was to take over ALL the resources
of the world. The plan was this
centralization, elimination of human culture.
ALL to be exploited and run for this elite by a secret society.
Most people DON'T realize this,
that a war was declared on them over a century ago.
And all this implementing this
agenda under the planks of the
Communist Manifesto. ALL run by the world's
TOP banking (USURY) families.
The US's only job is to be taxpayer for the
UN, and enforcer during this transition phase.
After that you were planned to be bankrupted,
lasting a couple of decades after that,
and then final destruction. "
-ALAN WATT
(Brian Gerrish interview NOW on Youtube)
'Republican'? 'Democrat?' ------RRRRRRight.
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 7.30.11 @ 10:08PM
We're run by a Mafia formed long ago, huh? One Hundred years ago you say? And the plan was to centralize, and then eliminate Human Culture? So first, they had to build that culture, and then destroy it at a later point, so that they could run what they created after it was destroyed!! Wow!!
So the War started 100 years ago, on the planks of the Communist manifesto? So long ago that, Russia had yet to fall to the Communist Manifesto, and to then be reborn as the U.S.S.R., only to collapse again in 1989, after half a Century of Cold War. Am I following this correctly?
So while all this is going on, the U.S. Taxpayer is being forced to pay for the United Nation, although 100 years ago, that didn't exist either, but I digress, nonetheless we started paying for the transition to the Banker run World at some point between the Communist Manifesto, and the fall of Communism in Russia, let's just say sometime during the 1940's.
So now the Communist Bankers have destroyed us, after they first built us up, so that they could control what remains, until they finally decide to destroy it all again!! Did I get that all right?
Who knew? What a diabolical, confusing plan they created 100 years ago!! My God, what have they done? God Damn You Communist Bankers!!
Michael L. Hauschild| 7.30.11 @ 11:49PM
Few can rationally argue against the statement “Everything that the democrats have done and everything that the republicans have allowed has placed us in this situation.” At the calling of the Nation the Tea PARTY stepped forward to shine light on the problem and champion the electorate that demanded that the Tea PARTY draw the line. The finger pointers are so ignorant that they conveniently neglect to mention in their rants that The Tea PARTY (taxed enough already) was not even in existence till just before the last election. Despite that fact the Tea PARTY placed in office an incredible number of representatives, representatives so uniquely honest that they actually perform their duties as they campaigned and as they promised, the powers that be are so dysfunctional that they have to maintain the Royal trapping of a “whipping boy.”
What you have wrought with your sacred cows of the beltway is now going to bite you in the ass. Those that are stupid (no other word fits) and wish to blame the only group that has the sense to perceive the danger of “business as usual” will pay the price in 2012. They wish to demonize the very people that have given them (now they refuse to share) any say whatsoever. The selfish, the stupid, and the guilty now have the timidity to suggest that the Tea Party, who only wants their share of Republic representation, who are the only faction smart enough to perceive both the problem and the solution, and the only ones to stand proud and accept the responsibility for our dilemma even thought the paint is not dry on their offices are now to be blamed.
Well, blame away, that is my real name I am a Tea PARTY Patriot and I have broad shoulders.
Margie| 7.31.11 @ 4:37PM
Thus says the pompous ass who confessed he voted for McCain, same as me.
Yet who has the gall to blast me for some phony story about how it's all MY fault we are where we are.
You're not standing proud, Michael.
You're a liar.
You don't look good by demeaning and trying to falsely define me, or anyone else simply because they vote Republican.
What you want is a third party~ you've got an agenda. And you third party people are nasty and insulting and despicable.
The truth~ you aren't ANY different then me, liar.
I want what's best for my country too.
And YOU don't get to say otherwise.
If you don't plan on voting Republican in 2012, then YOU'RE part of the problem.
No matter how high falutin' you think you sound.
So brag on, but you aren't God and you aren't the only special precious soul that wants what's best for our country.
Elgordo| 7.31.11 @ 7:41AM
THE HILL By Gautham Nagesh - 07/30/11 ..........
Obama: House Republicans wasted 'precious days' with Boehner plan.......
President Obama used his his weekly address to call out House Republicans for holding up the process of getting "our fiscal house in order."....
HOW DARE HE CRITICIZE HOUSE REPUBLICANS, HE, OBAMA, GOT US IN THIS FISCAL MESS ....
WE'RE GOING TO LOSE OUR TRIPLE A RATING BECAUSE OF OBAMA'S EXCESSIVE SPENDING ....
Diane Valencen | 7.31.11 @ 9:53AM
One of the biggest problems that American Progressives and American conservatives have is a lack of communication. Nowhere is that more apparent than in the past few years with the Heath care bill and now with the debt ceiling crisis. I don't know what conservatives want and this is a big part of the problem. Over the course of the rest of the day, I will be posting this question on 100 conservative blogs as well as at media outlets in comments:
"It is 2013, you have a supermajority in both the House and the Senate and a true conservative GOP president. What are the top ten things that you would want to see come out of government in the two years you would have certainty that a conservative agenda will be carried out?"
Your options are open. You can respond at the post for this question at our blog or if you're not comfortable going to a liberal blog you can post your answers inline here and they'll be retrieved by a member of my crack staff.
Diane Valencen
Editorial Page Editor
[q c p n!]
Patrick| 7.31.11 @ 8:25PM
Diane, you have GOT to be kidding me. If the left weren't so busy kicking conservative speakers off of campus speaking events, they might get a bit more clued in.
But here's a start: on 2013 agenda. Repeal Obamacare; enact Cut, Cap and Balance. get on a path to cap Federal Govt spending to 18% of GDP in total. Tax Reform - lower tax rates and pay for it with loophole closures. Entitlement reform, more flexibility, choice. Reduce regulations. Drill, drill, drill, including pursuit of our massive shale oil resources and revive nuclear via Yucca mtn restart. Refute the "CO2 causes global warming" myth. School choice. Obey the 10th amendment. End TSA crotch feels. Repeal Frank-Dodd and other onerous regulations. End EPA abuses.
Michael L. Hauschild| 7.31.11 @ 10:50AM
Here is the new debt deal, just announced.
http://nation.foxnews.com/debt.....-debt-deal
Two point eight (2.8) trillion “reduction” over ten years; one trillion over ten years guaranteed (guarantee expires with the next electioin, or sooner if Obama decides), 1.8 trillion (over ten years again) to be decided by a “Super Committee” that is filled with earmark lifetime politicians in full blown earmark withdrawal. Well, flatulence, there you go, your new hero Bill Maher is so happy, Obama is licking his lips with his new campaign slush fund, and your new Super Committee will keep warm this winter burning the Constitution.
Clint| 7.31.11 @ 11:13AM
We Are In A Media War.
Examine The Agenda Of The Various Long Knives, Who Are Attempting To Smear Up & Marginalize The Tea Party.
We Have The Usual Suspects: Democraps, Their MainStream Media Agendists, The RINO-CINO GOP Ruling Elite And Their Flunkies.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here & Now.
Stand & Fight.
Mike| 8.1.11 @ 4:10AM
The Tea Party Rebellion Digs In On This Hill.
http://www.summer-products.com
http://www.ainibag.com
size| 8.1.11 @ 5:15AM
They wish to demonize the very people that have given them (now they refuse to share) any say whatsoever.
http://www.jerseys-hats-store.com
http://www.honey-gifts.com
POST American| 8.2.11 @ 3:18AM
----Speaking of the reigning, usurping
Globalist estabishment----AS the FAKE 'Left'/'Right'
'Super Congress', a veritable Council of 13
(ie a Soviet) is declared:
"Understand, this is an ILLEGAL coup,
These men are now -WANTED- men, and they
know it. They're like criminals who've looted
a string of banks and killed some cops.
They're the most dangerous kind of criminal
because they've been exposed and they're going for broke."
-ALEX JONES
(yesterday)
------------------THIS IS TREASON--------------------
Alex Jones and Alan Watt -ARE- the press.
---------------HUAC meets NUREMBERG------------
---------------------IS the answer------------------------
It's THAT serious.
REALLY
TRULY!