Ryan Choice Is Good News For Democrats
- Print print this page
- Discuss 92 comments, Blog about
Advertisement
In Winston Churchill's memoir of the Second World War, he relates his reaction to the news that the Japanese had attacked Pearl Harbor: "I went to bed and slept the sleep of the saved and thankful."
When I heard the news that Mitt Romney had selected Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan as his running mate, I thought Barack Obama must have done the same.
Because, while the Rabid Right may be patting themselves on the back and admiring the "bold stroke" of choosing Ryan, and the Beltway pundits like to wax rhapsodic over Ryan's "gutsy" budget plan, I can think of nothing Etch A Sketch Romney could have done that's more certain to ensure his eventual defeat.
You know how I know Ryan is a terrible pick? One of his biggest backers was the affable boob Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard, who's frequently seen grinning his way across your TV screen and spouting nonsense, a veritable fountain of specious claptrap The two things Kristol's most famous for urging the GOP to embrace are Sarah Palin and the Iraq War, which he said would "pay for itself." How'd those work out?
Kristol gets props from his buddies in the Beltway media for urging the Republicans to be "bolder" and more "ambitious," as commentator Dylan Byers wrote in Politico. But in reality, he's like the half-bright, overly aggressive major general who's always urging some lunatic charge into the enemy guns that gets a lot of his men killed.
Insiders have been reporting for some time now that the Obama campaign had been trying to tie Romney to Ryan's proposed budget plans. Because here's the thing: Once people find out what's actually in the budget, it's highly unpopular, particularly his proposal to give more huge tax breaks to millionaires and pay for it by turning Medicare into a "voucher" system, where seniors would get coupons to buy insurance from private insurers.
A Washington Post/Kaiser Foundation poll this month asked people whether they favored keeping the current structure of Medicare, or going to a system "in which the government guarantees each senior a fixed amount of money to help them purchase coverage either from traditional Medicare or from a list of private health plans." Fifty-eight percent rejected the change.
You can see why, if you think about it. Given the amount of confusion and the grumbling of senior citizens over trying to choose between the various options in George Dubbya's budget-busting Medicare Part D plan (which Ryan voted for, by the way), I find it unlikely that they're going to welcome the fun and excitement of haggling with dozens of insurance companies over their coverage.
This is especially true since repealing the Affordable Care Act (which Ryan supports) means the insurance companies will once more be free to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions. How many people do you know over 65 who don't have some kind of pre-existing condition?
It gets worse when you look at the rest of the plan. A recent Democracy Corps survey showed that "President Obama's lead against Romney more than doubles when the election is framed as a choice between the two candidates' positions on the Ryan budget - particularly its impact on the most vulnerable." And if the Obama campaign has shown one thing recently, it's that they know how to define an opponent and his positions.
You want to know how bad it gets for the Ryan plan? According to a report in The New York Times, when the pro-Obama SuperPac Priorities USA (they of the infamous "Bain Capital Killed My Wife" ad) was doing focus groups to determine what tack to take, they found that attacks on the Ryan budget plan and Romney's support of it didn't do all that well.
First because no one really knew anything about Ryan or what was in the plan, and second, because once people heard that it called for "ending Medicare as we know it" while giving bigger tax breaks to millionaires, "they refused to believe any politician would do such a thing."
Well, now they're going to hear about the plan, right from the blue-eyed horse's mouth, and the evidence is pretty clear that they're not going to like it at all. Bill Kristol and the Raging Right may think Romney's "boldness" in picking Ryan makes him into Gen. Stormin' Norman Schwarzkopf.
In reality, it may turn out to be more like Custer - except this time, Custer spent the day before Little Big Horn handing out quivers full of arrows for the Indians to shoot him with.
Dusty Rhoades lives, writes and practices law in Carthage. Contact him at dustyr@nc.rr.com.
More like this story
Advertisement
Comments
AFCHIEF 9 months ago
Here is a video making Obama look like a complete idiot. This will be fun watching Ryan debate Biden " your going back in chains".
Paul Ryan: Hiding Spending Doesn't Reduce Spending by AmericanRoadmap
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
Here's a video of Paul Ryan being for stimulus before he was against it:
And I expect Biden to pound him over the head with it.
Long before he became one of the right’s most vocal critics of the idea that government spending could help boost the flagging economy, Rep. Paul Ryan offered a forceful, full-throated defense of stimulus spending — when then-President George W. Bush wanted it in 2002. Ryan has denounced the 2009 Recovery Act signed by President Obama as “a wasteful spending spree” and “failed neo-Keynesian experiment,” and – as The Huffington Post pointed out this morning — dismissed as “sugar-high economics” the idea that government spending, through measures like payroll tax cuts and unemployment benefits, can help shore up a faltering economy. But in 2002, when then-President Bush was seeking a roughly $120 billion package of tax cuts, tax incentives for business and unemployment benefits to jump-start the economy, Ryan offered a vigorous defense of the plan. “What we're trying to accomplish today with the passage of this third stimulus package is to create jobs and help the unemployed,” Ryan said in video that aired today on Up w/ Chris Hayes. The remarks came during a House debate on the measure on Feb. 14, 2002.
“It's more than just giving someone an unemployment check,” Ryan said of the Bush stimulus bill. “It's also helping those people with their health insurance while they've lost their jobs and more important than just that unemployment check, it's to do what we can to give people a paycheck.” Ryan called such measures “time-tested, proven, bipartisan solutions to get businesses to stop laying off people, to hire people back, and to help those people who have lost their jobs,” and urged congressional Democrats to break ranks and join Republicans in supporting the president’s plan. “I've just recently read in our local Capitol Hill newspaper that members from the majority party in the other body want stimulus. They're breaking with their party leadership and asking for stimulus legislation to pass because in their home states they have a lot of people who are losing their jobs,” Ryan said. “I urge members to drop the demagoguery and to pass this bill to help us work together to get the American people back to work and help those people who've lost their jobs.”
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
http://thepilot.com/users/photos/2012/aug/19/19703/
fugitiveguy 9 months ago
Man, that guy is sharp. I bet the president is glad he won't pair off with him in the debates. Joe better stock up on the imodium.
fugitiveguy 9 months ago
So when BHO flip flops we call it an evolution? No double standard here, right?
AFCHIEF 9 months ago
Here's another, RYAN destroying Wasserman Shultz the liberal mouthpiece.
Paul Ryan Destroys Debbie Wasserman-Schultz in Obamacare Debate by 912erSTL
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
Here are Ryan's votes to increase the deficit, which I'm sure we'll also hear about from Biden:
by dustyrhoades
Note that the many of the people already crowing about Ryan's debate victory over Biden are the same ones who predicted 5 dollar a gallon gas by August (which would doom Obama) then predicting that Obamacare would be overturned by the Supreme Court (which would also doom Obama).
Not a great track record, y'all.
AFCHIEF 9 months ago
Yea I'm sure everyone is enjoys paying more than $1.50 more for a gallon of gas since obama took office.
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
Also, keep this in mind:
Ryan's proposed tax cuts, according to the non partisan Tax Policy Center, will cost $4.3 trillion.
Ryan's spending cuts will supposedly save 1.7 trillion.
Deficit increase: 2.6 trillion.
But somehow, magically, in ways Ryan refuses to specify, a miracle will occur and it'll all work out.
Sure.
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
Yea I'm sure everyone is enjoys paying more than $1.50 more for a gallon of gas since obama took office.
You were still wrong, Chief.
AFCHIEF 9 months ago
DR how am I wrong about the higher gas prices, more of the liberal math
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
Weren't you one of the ones saying it'd be 5 bucks a gallon by now and it'd be a major issue in the campaign?
Neither occurred.
fugitiveguy 9 months ago
Deficit pre Obama 10.6T, Deficit after Obama 4 years-approaching 16T. Its simply time for a change. At the rate we are going our economy and social safety net will implode. Continued gamesmanship and kicking this can down the road has to stop. Its time for a change.
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
Fuggy, you're the one who was whining that you don't get a "reasoned argument." Yet you do nothing to address the figures I've posted about ow Ryan's plans increase the deficit, how the idea he had to turn Medicare into a voucher system is unpopular, or the fact that Ryan's voted to increase the deficit for political gain. You just keep saying "time for a change" without addressing if that change will be for the better, in the face of evidence that it'll make things worse.
Face it, you don't want a reasonable discussion, which is why I don't often bother. What I've posted is for the benefit of undecideds and independents. You and Chief and the rest of the howler monkeys will never be persuaded, because your response to actual arguments and actual facts and actual expert opinions is to change the subject, hand-wave away facts that don't support your side, and make more applications for the day's PeeWee award. .
JRowerdink 9 months ago
Democrats might want to remember the old saying “Be careful what you ask for because you might get it”.
Governor Romney is betting that the American people are intelligent and mature enough to want a real debate about the serious issues facing the country.
President Obama is betting that the voters will respond to politics-as-usual demagoguery.
Time will tell who is right.
John Rowerdink
nothingspecial 9 months ago
Glad you're happy about the choice of Ryan, we on the Right are too. Great of you to help out the Washington Post by including the results of one of their many highly biased polls here too as anything with the name of that rag on it is the second to the last thing a Conservative would everv read otherwise.
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
NS, what in the poll methodology of the Kaiser Family Foundation (who actually did the poll for the WaPo) do you find "highly biased"?
Reasoned question, and I should get a detailed and reasonable critique of the polling back, right?
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
Mr. Rowerdink, were you also one of the people crowing about the selection of Sarah Palin as John McCain's running mate? Just want to be able to assess your track record here.
fatboy 9 months ago
Ryan is good for the Democrats. A lot of them respect him, and will probably jump ship and vote for a better option than they have right now. The current occupent of the White House is not capable to manage a lemonade stand.
justpassingby2 9 months ago
Dusty the hypocrite wanting to assess others track records, priceless! How about your track record of pooping your pants over palin, perry, cain, the other half-wit woman, heck I can't even remember all their names but you dusty wasted a whole column on each because you thought they had a real shot at the nomination! Hilarious!
And predicting gas prices to be $5 a gallon when they are pushing $4 is a lot closer than most all of obama's promises. Bring boys home from Iraq took 3 times as long as he promised. Unemployment rate well above what he promised. The deficit speaks for itself and its only as 'low' as it is because of the tea party. Have you any idea how stupid you look supporting obama and wanting to assess others track record?!?!?!?!!??! Seriously?!?!?!? We knew you had lost a few feet off your fastball years ago but wow, even your knuckler isn't reaching the plate these days. Sad.
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
Justpassinggas, you're truly living in a half cracked fantasy world if you really believe my columns about "palin, perry, cain" and "that other half-wit woman" (by which I assume you mean Michelle Bachmann) were anything but mockery.
BTW, justpassinggas, there's something called the "Shift" key you're supposed to use when capitalizing the first letter of someone's name. Look into it and you might temporarily fool people into thinking you're not a half crazed piece of illiterate trailer trash when you post.
Now, while we wait for an answer to the questions I've posed to Mr. Rowerdink and fuggy (I expect the wait will be a long time), here's my favorite Joe Biden zinger. I expect we'll see a few of those directed at your new wingnut man-crush Paul Ryan.
Biden Calls Guiliani "Most Unqualified Ever" by Cristopher Nolan
fugitiveguy 9 months ago
"Fuggy, you're the one who was whining that you don't get a "reasoned argument."
What I gave you blowhard is "the bottom line", if you can't spin it, don't blame me. After all you voted for the slogan master, I did not.
fugitiveguy 9 months ago
"time for a change"
Sorry, I know you prefer "change you can believe in" but it has been way over done.
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
See what I mean? Fuggy complains about not getting a reasoned argument, but isn't willing to engage in one by addressing the facts I laid out. He complains about name calling, and does it himself. Remember that, folks, next time he starts to whine.
Thatcher 9 months ago
Amazing thread. I can't wait for Joe Biden to debate Paul Ryan, on any topic. No notes. Many liberals here seem to view Joe Biden (like Obama) as a god, because he can spout "zingers." Like Indians working at Dunkin' Donuts, etc. Ryan has forgotten more about economics and the federal budget than Biden has ever learned. And liberals know this, which is why they hail Biden's "zingers," meaning lines written by others to cover for when you have no clue what you're talking about. Cheers!
MikeNC 9 months ago
Bush's Stimulus compared to Obama's Stimulus, all together different !! Obama's stimulus was a Big Thank You with a bow on top to UNIONS ! diane
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
I can't wait for Joe Biden to debate Paul Ryan, on any topic.
Me neither. As I've already said, my prediction is that Ryan will be all serious and wonky, Biden will be relaxed and funny and zing him a few times, the pundits (and of course the wingnuts) will hail Ryan as the winner, even as actual economists tear Ryan's figures apart the next day. Then they'll be shocked to find that the polls show that people think Biden was the winner. Because it's the zingers that'll get the airplay.
Search your feelings. You know it to be true.
Search your feelings ... by harbdrive20
nothingspecial 9 months ago
DR, the Kaiser/Washington Post poll question was leading, as you know, which is probably why I believe I have seen you write at least once that pollsters can make a poll sound however they like
fugitiveguy 9 months ago
"He complains about name calling, and does it himself."
I guess you need to give yourself a "peewee"
fugitiveguy 9 months ago
"As I've already said, my prediction is that Ryan will be all serious and wonky,"
So Ryan will actually present facts and address the impending crisis vs Biden who will do his normal buffoon schtick.
Thatcher 9 months ago
"Being serious and wonky": telling the truth. "Being relaxed and funny with 'zingers'": being Joe. America's choice. Cheers!
Thatcher 9 months ago
DR (5 hours, 16 min. ago)-- Put aside whether the Tax Policy Center is non-partisan (we can argue that another day). You have been repeatedly claiming that Ryan's budget increases "the deficit" by $2.6 trillion. A "deficit" is by year. Please post anything, anywhere, where Ryan has proposed enduring $2.6 trillion deficits each year. Your number appears to be an analysis over 10 years involving overall "debt." Obama has had trillion dollar deficits for each year since he became President. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/. Obama has racked up, in 3 1/2 years, deficits which have added $5 trillion in new debt. If Ryan adds only $2.6 trillion over a decade to the debt, vs. Obama already adding $5 trillion in just his first three years, I think I'll take Ryan. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xwv5Eb.... Cheers!
fugitiveguy 9 months ago
"Many liberals here seem to view Joe Biden (like Obama) as a god"
Publicly maybe, in private I bet they know he is a clown.
Thatcher 9 months ago
fugitiveguy-- You are correct about Biden being a clown, as clearly shown in this documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjlTZC.... Cheers!
Bentpan 9 months ago
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
Thatcher 9 months ago
And before posting, all the liberals here who claim Ryan will slash the budget and kill needed programs, how does he do this by doubling Obama's yearly deficits, according to DR? Tax cuts? Not a chance. Quick answer: the claim is nonsense. DR knows it, you know it, and so does anyone with an ounce of common sense. Cheers!
moonchild7 9 months ago
Ryan is such a LIAR and HYPOCRITE. He voted for ALL of Bush's programs...even when they WEREN'T paid for. He is the IDIOT fugitveguy, not President Obama. I watched the little "clip" you provided. Paul Ryan said, "BLAH, BLAH, BLAH...." as President Obama looked on. You cut off the Presidents response. Here's the best one I've read to date. Paul Ryan has apparently told the media that he loves the music of "Rage Against the Machine". From an article that Tom Morello, guitarist for "Rage Against the Machine" and a Harvard College graduate, wrote for Rolling Stone mag: "Paul Ryan's love of Rage Against the Machine is amusing because he is the embodiment of the machine that our music has been raging against for two decades. ...Paul Ryan is cluless about his favorite band. Ryan claims that he like's Rage's sound, but not the lyrics. Well, I don't care for Paul Ryan's sound or his lyrics.....I clearly see that Ryan has a whole lotta rage in him: A rage against women, a rage against immigrants, a rage against workers, a rage against gays, a rage against the poor, a rage against the environment. Basically, the only thing he's not against is the privileged elite he's groveling in front of for campaign contributions." You guys think this moronic.selfish, LIAR will "out-debate" VP Joe Biden? Ryan's TOAST.
bufordsplay 9 months ago
And how many votes did Obama's budget get? By the way, if tax cuts cost the government money then how much is it costing the government to let anyone keep any of their money?
bufordsplay 9 months ago
Oh and by the way Dusty, insuring someone who is already sick is not insurance.......
Thatcher 9 months ago
MC7-- Great to see you here! Never limit a man's rage. Ryan also rages against children. Especially disabled children. And disabled veterans. He hates those guys. And he hates his mom. This man knows no bounds. He must be stopped, before it is too late. Thanks for letting us know. Cheers!
fugitiveguy 9 months ago
"Liar, hypocrite, idiot". Expert analysis from our own MC7. BTW, I didn't post the video of which you speak. Thats ok, no one expects accuracy from you. As someone posted a day or so ago, you likely convince more people to vote Republican than any conservative on here. Also you project a lot of ANGER and HATE while you pontificate about the ANGER and HATE espoused by others. :)
fugitiveguy 9 months ago
" .....I clearly see that Ryan has a whole lotta rage in him: "
yes, yes, go ahead and post that video where he goes nuts, lets see that rage
fugitiveguy 9 months ago
"Mr Nagy It is way past time to to stop this foolishness, Mr. Rhoades is an embarrassment to the Pilot and our Community"
I never want to see DR censored in any form. I am for diversity on these here boards. He and MC are good ambassadors for conservatism.
Bentpan 9 months ago
BTW DR and MC7 The nc legislature will never have a republican majority, Amendment One will be defeated, Chick-Fil-A will be driven to Bankruptcy, the 2010 midterm elections those lowlife conservative will be crushed and the TEA party is dead. You two treat stupidity as a virtue.
MikeNC 9 months ago
Ah Moochild: The White House had to take the master of Gaffs, Biden, off the campaign trail and send him to the wood shed, leaving Obama on the campaign trail, all by his lonesome, less than three months before the election. Not to mention that Obama's team tried to let Obama speak naturally, without a telepromter, and that didn't work out too well, either. He's back on promter. Yeh, you all got some real communicators, running for re election. PS, I'm sure Ryan still likes appreciates their music, just as I still consider Jane Fonda, one of the greatest actresses of all time. We forgive them, for their misguided direction in politics. Diane
Bentpan 9 months ago
fugitiveguy "He and MC are good ambassadors for conservatism. " ....Can't really argue with that, but DRs' columns are still embarrassing, one likes to view their local paper as a beacon of enlightenment and that DRs' columns are deemed fit to print reflects badly on us all.
moonchild7 9 months ago
While Waste, Fraud and Abuse does exhist within the "Halls of Government" and also the many programs that said government provides, GOVERNMENT provides jobs for: Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Social Workers, Policemen, Firemen, Truck Drivers, Scientists, Accountants, Lawyers, Judges, and on and on and on. Changes need to be made and will be made but hopefully not in the manner that the RIGHTWINGED ONES want. The TEAPOTTERS, just like Ayn Rand, want all of that PRIVATIZED. That's more of a disaster than can be even imagined. Already people are experiencing help from the AHC, and Medicare will be saving more and more. President Obama's so-called "Theft" of Medicare is another LIE the TEAPOTS love to tell. They reduced payments to providers (Health Ins. Companies.). Eventually, the AHC and probably Medicade will be combined. It just can't happen that quickly because when it does, a lot of people (gov. employees) will be losing their jobs. What will they do since most of those jobs are "administrative" and computers will do most of the work? The massive decline in Gov. Services that those TEAPOTTERS want axed and at the rate they want it would be an even bigger disaster. The Healh Care Industry along with Health Insurance Co. had their chance to provide affordable coverage for all of us but they didn't. Their CEO's needed MILLION DOLLAR Salaries while the POOR and DISABLED were either denied coverage or just couldn't afford it. I hope we take them all over and do away with them. They deserve it. Take that Ayn Rand...and OH, apparently when it came time for Ayn Rand to receive her Social Security check and Medicare Card, she didn't turn them down. HYPOCRICY RULES the REPUBLICAN PARTY.
Thatcher 9 months ago
Did Ayn Rand (or anyone else) pay into Social Security and Medicare her entire life? Did the feds make her do so? And now that she is receiving a small portion of what she was forced to pay in, your complaint is what? Cheers!
fergie 9 months ago
Okay - first, let me say to Thatcher...Ayn Rand died in 1957, so she's not collecting anything anymore. She signed up for Medicare after her own wealth was spent for cancer treatments, and she had no insurance. Second, someone needs to help me with some math. fugitiveguy said the deficit was $10.6 trillion when Obama took office, now it's $16 trillion. I believe that difference is $5.4 trillion to the negative, meaning the deficit has increased $5.4 trillion during Obama's presidency. The problem I'm having is this: When President Clinton left office, surplus was + $236 billion When Bush left office, deficit was - $10.3 trillion
Even if I disregard the surplus he inherited and only calculate using the deficit he left, I surmise that Bush created, then increased the deficit by $5.15 trillion per term, or $1.29 T per year. Obama, on the other hand, increased the Bush deficit by $5.4 T, or $1.8 over 3 years. Frankly, it appears to me, when looking at this math, that Bush must be a little ahead of Obama, because we still have to add the $236 billion surplus to Bush's expenditures. Can someone please explain to me how, then, has Obama outspent all the other presidents? Oh, one other question - what did the money that created and increased the deficit go for during the Bush administration?
moonchild7 9 months ago
Sorry fugitiveguy, I made a mistake (different than a LIE) and can't seem to be able to tell the difference between several of you. AFCHIEF, I guess I have to apologise to you too since I DIDN'T reference the clip as yours. Here's an Ayn Rand quote Thatcher (she died in 1982): "If any civilization is to survive, it is the morality of altruism that men have to reject." And it seems the Jesuits at Georgetown U don't like Mr. Ryan's budget either, even though Mr. Ryan says that his Catholic faith shaped his budget proposals. From the Faculty at Georgetown U: "We would be remiss in our duty to you and our students if we did not challange your continuing misuse of Catholic Teaching to defend a budget plan that decimates food programs for struggling families, radically weakens protections for the elderly and sick and gives tax breaks to the wealthiest few...." Gee Thatcher, seems Tom Morello and myself aren't the only ones who think Mr. Ryan's rather "MEAN". So according to MS. Rand and Mr Ryan we need to start "ridding ourselves" of all of these "good for nothings". Let's see, the Catholics used to LOVE burning people at the stake. Shall we start televising them?
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
Can someone please explain to me how, then, has Obama outspent all the other presidents?
Federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s. Even hapless Herbert Hoover managed to increase spending more than Obama has.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1
BTW DR and MC7 The nc legislature will never have a republican majority, Amendment One will be defeated, Chick-Fil-A will be driven to Bankruptcy, the 2010 midterm elections those lowlife conservative will be crushed and the TEA party is dead.
None of which I have ever claimed. You're making stuff up again.
Bentpan 9 months ago
fergie 2 minutes ago I believe that difference is $5.4 trillion to the negative, meaning the deficit has increased $5.4 trillion during Obama's presidency. The problem I'm having is this: When President Clinton left office, surplus was + $236 billion When Bush left office, deficit was - $10.3 trillion ....................... You're confusing budget deficit ( Clintons $236Billion Surplus which BTW was acheved by raiding SS and leaving a deadbeat IOU which every president since L B Johnson has done including Bush) Total Deficit has been steadily accumalating since WW II. The real Deficit is our debts present and promised and that figure is in the nieghborhood of $22.5 Billion or in other words we owe $60,000 +/- for every man woman and child in America. This kind of selfish reckless waste of our childrens future must stop and while both parties are guilty but it appears only republicans are willing to change
Thatcher 9 months ago
Good Lord, fergie! I was responding to MC7's post about Ayn Rand...which is why I included "anyone else" who paid into Medicare and Social Security. You knew this, right? And you say that Bush increased "...the deficit $5.15 trillion per term." Really? Do you know what a deficit is? Do you know what a "term" is? I rarely get angry, but I got really hot when I read your ridiculous post. You need to study math, and you need to take courses in economics. What was the national debt when you claim that Clinton had a yearly surplus of $236 billion? Google it. Then google the difference between a yearly "deficit" and the national "debt." You have no idea what you are talking about. Your last post: absurd. Cheers!
nothingspecial 9 months ago
Now the president is the most frugal spender in recent history. Wasn't he also just barely missed for Pope last time?
Seen the cover of Newsweek?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/08/19/niall-ferguson-on-why-barack-obama-needs-to-go.html
I agree Democrats could use some good news, I just don't really think they deserve any at this point after the past three years of scorched earth.
fergie 9 months ago
Bentpan: "You're confusing budget deficit..." What am I confusing it with? "The real Deficit is our debts present and promised and that figure is in the nieghborhood of $22.5 Billion" - well, $22.5 billion is a lot less money than $16 trillion, so we must not be as bad off as we thought, huh? I still don't understand what the money went for during Bush's 2 terms.
Thatcher 9 months ago
And while I'm going to bed now, I look forward to waking up tomorrow with you schooling me in deficits, debt, and economics. Like your last post. Cheers!
Thatcher 9 months ago
GOOD LORD! I try to go to bed, post my last post, then fergie posts that our "real Deficit" is only "$22.5 billion." I'm sure this fellow will be pulling for Biden when he debates Ryan. Facts don't matter. And I don't think this guy could ever come up with a "zinger" to cover up his lack of knowledge. Cheers!
Thatcher 9 months ago
Liberals who call fergie out on his bogus numbers? 0. Cheers!
fergie 9 months ago
Thatcher: The Ayn Rand comment was in response to your "And now that she is receiving a small portion of what she was forced to pay in, your complaint is what?" You use the word "now" which means "in the present" as far as I know, meaning you insinuated that Rand was receiving benefits NOW. Also, I DO know what a deficit is - it's when you spend more than what you have to spend. I DO know what a "term" is - when referring to the presidency, it's 4 years per TERM. And, I DID NOT say that Clinton had a "YEARLY" surplus of $236 billion, I said he LEFT a surplus of $236 billion, (which I Googled to verify, thank you very much). Further, I DO know that the national debt and a budget surplus are two different things, it's required accounting that they are kept separate. Do YOU know why this is required? (I know you'll Google it to find out) It's because TRUST FUNDS have to be kept separate from the national budget...do you know why? (I know you'll Google that, too). How quickly and easily you get so angy and "really hot!" Is it because you finally realize that Obama isn't the only one who spent money, or is it because you can't answer my final question? By the way, I've had a couple of courses in economics, and I've taught math, so I'll be happy to help you understand some of this stuff if you like. Cheers to you, too!
fergie 9 months ago
@Thatcher again...That 22.5 billion figure isn't mine - Look more closely, Thatcher, there are quotation marks at the beginning of that sentence and at the end of it - THAT means I'm repeating/quoting something bentpan said to me....my comment starts AFTER the quotation, as I'm replying to him. You really must be terribly upset! Why do you think I'm a "He?" Is it something I said, or do you just assume that females don't or won't engage in political discussions? I can really tell you're a member of the Ryan pack - he doesn't recognize the female race either - unless he needs to drag his mother up on stage to bolster his lie about not touching Medicare....was that enough of a zinger for ya? I've got tons more!
JRowerdink 9 months ago
Dusty...Actually, I thought Sarah Palin was a lousy choice and I still do. You jumped to the wrong conclusion, just like you normally do.
BTW, Obama's choice of Joe Biden isn't looking too great either.
John Rowerdink
JRowerdink 9 months ago
fergie....Good grief...If you're going to try to respond to budgetary questions, at least learn the difference between the budget deficit and the national debt. You're not mixing apples and oranges, you're mixing grapes and watermelons. The budget deficits under President Obama are far more than under any other president. If you understood what a budget deficit is, you would know that.
John Rowerdink
Bentpan 9 months ago
fergie 8 hours, 47 minutes ago Bentpan: "You're confusing budget deficit..." What am I confusing it with? "The real Deficit is our debts present and promised and that figure is in the nieghborhood of $22.5 Billion" - well, $22.5 billion is a lot less money than $16 trillion Fergie "billion" is obviously a typo, It was 22.5 Trillion but you knew that, didn't you? However it does my heart good to watch liberals like yourself desperately grasping at straws to prop up your flawed talking points.
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
Gee, John, you've got a pretty extensive record online, what with being the head of the Republican Men's club. Can't findl you ever mentioning that about Caribou Barbie before. Must be like that thing where suddenly no one in the county that went overwhelmingly for Bush will say they supported him now. Fair weather friends indeed...
Noluv4thugs 9 months ago
Ryan is going to crush Biden. Going to be the best TV leading up to November!! Biden can't hardly talk when he has a prompter. Hearing Biden talk numbers is going to be priceless. The comedic value will be up there with some of the funniest moments in TV history. And DR I am proud to say I supported Bush and am also proud of how he is keeping his nose out of things unlike other past presidents.......especially considering there is a lot he could be critical of.
Courseaire 9 months ago
Grammar is Important - Capitol letters are the difference between: ‘Helping your Uncle Jack off a horse” and ‘Helping your uncle jack off a horse”.
moonchild7 9 months ago
I really don't like admiting to this but maybe Dick Cheney was right, "Deficits don't matter". All of you spouting numbers, numbers and more numbers made me want to look some of those numbers up. So, I went to the "Historical Charts" at the OMB regarding our Budget "Surpluses vs our Deficits" and guess what? It looks like Cheney might be right. Since 1940 we've only had Budget surpluses 13 times, and guess when they were? 1947, 1948, 1949, 1950, 1951, 1956, 1957, 1958, 1969, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001. So, children, How many of those surpluses were under a DEMOCRATIC President? Like about 10: FDR, Truman, Johnson and Clinton. National Debt? Who cares? The WORLD owes us and they know it. We aren't goin' anywhere and you Republicans are only using all of those numbers as a Political Ploy. The DUMB people out there and there are lots of them won't/don't know the difference and will think it's the END of the WORLD. It's not so STOP it.
justpassingby2 9 months ago
...were anything but mockery...
I sure can count on ole dusty to make my points for me (little bait never hurt)! The country is struggling and you cut and paste yourself half to death trying to to sound important and be taken seriously, yet you wrote how many columns of pure mockery? My point about you from day one proven again by your own responses! You are a non-thinking hypocrite who believes in nothing.
MikeNC 9 months ago
dustyrhoades 1 day, 1 hour ago ...What I've posted is for the benefit of undecideds and independents. Yea, Right...YOU advocating for the "Benefit" of undecided's and independents. That's laughable....That would necessitate you actually steering them in an open and honest direction; not down your version of strict part loyalty and ideology at all costs. These costs seems to be negative costs for most Americans for some time now. You made one of many ideological statement recently which incites hate and perceived racism in Moore County which you seem to relish and enjoy the negative fallout it brings. Surprisingly it seems; right along with some others whom I thought had a more reasonable approach to addressing the public with facts. I will admit that you won overall Dusty with your 'Entertainment, page clicks and eyeballs on the printed version of the Pilot.' That's the botton line folks.' It does seem to be the bottom line as it appears that some have caved into this type mentality which I thought they wanted to avoid from these comment sections. I was wrong and you were correct! ....Mike
Words for you to be proud of I guess in your mission to help the independants and undecided make a rational and intelligent decision this November...dustyrhoades 4 days, 6 hours ago ....I totally agree that the Right would cheerfully put black people back in chains to keep them from voting. But they can't do that, so they try to suppress their votes any other way they can. Now THAT'S entertainment. That's also page clicks on the website, and eyeballs on the printed page. That's the bottom line, folks.
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
Certainly more help to them than your constant stream of proven lies, Miane.
moonchild7 9 months ago
MikeNC, What is your definiton of a "Legitimate Rape?"
RmeMP 9 months ago
Here moonbeam, can I answer?
"Legitimate rape", being one in which a person has forced penetration against their will; unlike say, "the Duke lacrosse case" - where a worthless piece of excrement ruins the lives of several young men and the liberal media facilitated it!!!
Does that definition work for you?
Bentpan 9 months ago
dustyrhoades 58 minutes ago Certainly more help to them than your constant stream of proven lies, Miane ....................
Chubby actualy thinks he has credibility. Rhoades saying it over and over again does not make your assertions any more true, We all consider the source and unfortunately for you, chubby, we all know exactly who and what you are, Unfortunately an accurate detailed description would at best be deleted.
MikeNC 9 months ago
How do you define the legality of the 'little people' blowing up bridges this week MC. Do you still advocate that action for the upcoming revolution against the evil rich in America? Them business's that popped up on their own because of infrastructure will sure suffer without all them bridges. I find Representative Akin's comments deplorable and barbaric. He ought to step down immediately, but I can say that for quite a few other politician's on both sides. Your side has some fruitcakes as well who hang tightly onto their reins for the power and fiscal perks rather than doing the right thing. Right is right; wrong is wrong. Mike
Bentpan 9 months ago
RmeMP 10 minutes ago Knowing MC7 she probably still believes the Duke Lacrosse players guilty and that they just bought their way out, Because after all they're families are successful, rich and white, so they must be guilty.
Thatcher 9 months ago
Glad to see that some folks here, over the past 24 hours, appear to have actually researched the difference between a yearly deficit and the national debt. And they have stopped posting on this subject. Good for you! I give you credit for finding the answer yourselves. Cheers!
Bentpan 9 months ago
JRowerdink 11 hours, 51 minutes ago Dusty...Actually, I thought Sarah Palin was a lousy choice and I still do.................. Mr Rowerdink the lousy choice was the RINO McCain, had Palin or an equilivent hard conservative not been chosen McCains' inevitable defeat would have been much greater. The choice of Palin as a running mate was the only thing that saved McCain from a total Rout. The TEA party is here to stay, Old school establishment republicans need to get with the program or get off.
nothingspecial 9 months ago
You're so right, Bentpan. Palin's only fault was that the Democrats were willing and able to destroy her with personal attacks, as they have a history of doing. That is why Mitt and Ryan were actually good choices because they were least likely to be destroyed by the combined Obama/Chicago/Media attack machine.
The President can't hold a candle to either George W. or Sarah.
geoffcutler 9 months ago
G otta go with the last two John, sorry. McCain was the problem. Palin was a breath of fresh air compared with the rhinos, of which McCain is one. Immigration, for example.
The_AnonymusProfit 9 months ago
@ JRowerdink. Usually you say some bright things but your plain comment is absurd. Try not to be an establishment stamp.
fugitiveguy 9 months ago
Courseaire-importance of grammar-funniest thing I have ever read on this site. Keep em coming!
MikeNC 9 months ago
dustyrhoades 5 hours, 43 minutes ago ...Certainly more help to them than your constant stream of proven lies, Miane.
Sorry DR, but you offer no actual help to anyone. There are no lies coming from Diane or myself and you know it. Your just allowed to repeat such fodder and when people hear it enough, some will believe it; and that's your intention. If and when we make some small glitch in what we say...It's honest; not ideological to intend to persuade someone from the actual truth. When you say that you are for the benefit of the undecideds and independants; what is actually reality is that you hope to turn any person who believes in a direction other than your own to go against their present thought process by any means that you can muster up ....Mike
moonchild7 9 months ago
For You MikeNC: "And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that the people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is natural manure."-Thomas Jefferson. I've said it before MikeNC. I was an anti-war protestor in the 70's. I was in the streets with thousands of others practicing our rights to be heard, to protest our involvement in an unjust war. My "arms" were anti-war posters. Some people had rocks and there were also more drastic activites. I wasn't involved with any of those but our government (NIXON) was rotten and that governent heard plenty from those of us brave enough to make a stand against it. We ended the war. Didn't our country begin with a REVOLUTION? Please go read a few history books.
Nezumi 9 months ago
Great stuff, Courseaire!
Thatcher 9 months ago
MC7-- I just love you and your posts. You and I agree on virtually nothing, except loving our kids. I'd like to buy you lunch sometime. It would be fun. Let me know! Cheers!
MikeNC 9 months ago
Like I said MC...ever since you made that advocation for bridge demolition a couple months back; anything you say goes in one ear and out the other. Your meaningless to the positive welfare of this country as far as I'm concerned. It's been the liberties and rights that this country affords to all which prevents the need for armed insurrection and your desired revolution. If someone wants a piece of the pie and realize success in our beautiful country, all they have to do is put fourth a bit of effort and they will obtain it. Many would just like a job and realize the piece that they can get through hard, honest work. Those occupying buddies of yours just want some freebies. I'm sure you would be on board with all the wealth earned by others being put into one huge account and divy it up amongst the occupy'ers and free loaders. Put away your history books and realize what America has been all about for a long time to include today....Mike
Courseaire 9 months ago
MikeNC - You sure respond to MC7's comments quite a lot considering they go in one ear and out the other. I would've thought you'd just ignore them. Seems you pay more attention to them then you say. Just say'n.
MikeNC 9 months ago
Your right Courseare...My Bad, but sometimes I just have to post for the benefit of the undecided's and independents. Thanks for bringing that to my attention however...Mike
JD 9 months ago
I just have to post for the benefit of the undecided's and independents.
To help along with that idea...
The Republican platform committee approved the draft on Tuesday that calls for a constitutional ban on abortion without exception for rape victims, Politico reports.
excerpt: the Republican platform committee approved an abortion plank that includes no exemptions for rape, incest or even to save the life of the mother.
So if a zygote becomes a person under the 14th Amendment, then if a woman is raped and impregnated and gets an abortion...she would be charged with murder, her rapist might be charged with rape (if she can prove it, and he is caught)...and she would receive a longer prison sentence than her rapist.
Eric Rudolph would be proud.
JimRussell44 9 months ago
Would you agree, MikeNC, that the people who receive some sort of government assistance are not all doing so for the same reason? Would you agree that some are lazy, shiftless, no good freeloaders who are taking advantage of the system. Would you agree that some actually need temporary help to get through a rough patch. Can we agree that people receiving government assistance are of every ethnicity? Would you concede that there are people who receive government assistance that are not poor? Do we agree or disagree on the need for some level of government assistance? Or do we think that all assistance should come from the private sector, from places like churches, for instance? I would like to have a discussion where we lay out our views and parameters concerning assistance for the "needy", where we define who we think should receive help, from who that help should come, how long the help should last and what should be done once the help ends for those who are not back on their feet. This seems like an important topic for you, so I hope that you will approach it as I will, with honesty and an open mind.
MikeNC 9 months ago
I mentioned the freeloaders in this country who are abusing our system. They know whom they are. The people who need and recieve assistance for good reason also know who they are. God bless and help them. Assistance is necessary for many. Part of the problem is that the identification of those who actually need or do not need assistance cannot be relied upon. Our society is becoming dependant on entitlemment programs; whether they are actually entitled or not. Seems like the attitude is that it is just too hard to figure it out; so let's just give the stuff out and expect the evil rich to ante up the coin to make it happen. The Entitlement syndrome we currently have will either be fixed or we will be overwhelmed with it....Mike
dustyrhoades 9 months ago
Your right Courseare...My Bad, but sometimes I just have to post for the benefit of the undecided's and independents.
Be it also noted that while Lyin' Miane claim not to care about anything I have to say, they quote me obsessively.
And describing your constant stream of proven untruths as "glitches" is the funniest thing I've heard all day.
JimRussell44 9 months ago
Today, I overheard some people talking and they said they knew some people who have access to some real secret Washington stuff. They claim that Romney only wants to be president because Ann said his picture would look good on the $1000.00 bill they intend to place into circulation once he's elected. Plans have also been drawn up for the complete remodeling and expansion of the White House, needed because there will not be enough room for all the family during the Christmas holidays and the place really doesn't reflect the Romney "style". This stuff must be true since I heard people saying it. Thought I should let everyone know.
JimRussell44 9 months ago
Well MikeNC, looks like you agree that we have some people scamming the government assistance programs and others that really need it. This is a good start. We agree on something. You didn't address whether you agree that some people who are not poor are receiving this government assistance or if the assistance should come from only private sector charities (although your comment: "God Bless and help them" could be construed to mean you think churches should be handling the assistance needed). You state that being able to identify those that actually NEED help is so difficult that the government just hands out the assistance to whoever ask for it, thus creating the problem in the first place. I agree with you on this point, although I do think the government makes SOME effort to prevent it from happening, don't you agree? And so we both also agree that we have assistance programs that need to be fixed or they will ruin us. We are well on our way to completing step #1 in the problem solving process, that being to identify the problem. One of the remaining items, in my mind, is assistance given to people who are not poor. I'm not referring to those who fraudulently apply for welfare, I'm talking about things like price supports for crops or special tax rates used as incentives to build a plant. Do you agree that these types of things are also government assistance? Once we agree on this item, we can move on to step #2, finding possible solutions to these problems.