StrangeSox

I'd say that Pat Buchanan does adequately sum up why Republicans aren't getting the minority vote, just not in the way he intended.

Oh, right, I forgot about that modification.

Student loans are never dischargeable. I think the "free student loans" thing has something to do with deferred interest and ending the free money they were shoveling at the banks to run the program for no good reason.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 15, 2012 -> 09:28 AM) I don't think this is true. As the constitution was written, and for decades after, the role of the federal government was still in dispute. The goal of the constitution was to create the general rules for the emerging nation of collective states. There's a reason it was called the United States of America and not just America. Individual states wanted to retain the majority of the control over its land/citizens. But over 250+ years later that distinction has eroded more and more. There was also a reason they ditched the Articles of Confederation and why the Federal government asserted control in the 1860's. edit: and what seemed like a good idea in 1788 might not exactly be the best way to organize and run a modern country, particularly the most powerful and prosperous one on the planet.

It's a s***ty situation for all sides, it seems. People just aren't buying as much of their processed junk foods as they used to.

There's been some talk on the left about how Republicans only held onto the House because of 2010 gerrymandering. Political scientists at The Monkey Cage and Sam Wang take a look Monkey Cage: Sam Wang makes the case for both a strong incumbency effect but also a significant and historically abnormal gerrymandering benefit:

Bobby Jindal gets it. http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/11/...ers.php?ref=fpa

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 15, 2012 -> 08:07 AM) And what you conveniently and repeatedly forget is that the people saying that, have been very clear that it will happen once the economy starts growing at a strong rate for a few quarters. That hasn't happened yet. Some of them have. Others have insisted that hyperinflation will kick in within months, and they say this every few months.

Twinkies are clogging up our nation's arteries

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Nov 14, 2012 -> 09:12 PM) now THAT is playing hardball That alone should knock down the cbo's projected health care costs. Deficit gone.

Well the Bond Vigilantes talk has been going on since 2009 at least

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Nov 14, 2012 -> 06:13 PM) so what. it's the free stuff era of politics. who will give out the most?! gimme gimme. and Romney only offered free stuff to his rich buddies. not enough of them to win. I just still can't figure out why republicans are losing the minority vote. Truly baffling.

What I heard on the radio last night was that nobody is really sure how much he made when he left McAfee and that the only source of the figures on his wealth were, most likely, McAfee himself. Meaning that they should be taken with a grain of salt.

Romney gets in on the "Obama gave stuff and things to the moochers who aren't Traditional Americans" meme http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/11/...ection-loss.php

Hostess to close up shop if the strike doesn't end by 5PM tomorrow: http://www.chicagotribune.com/sns-rt-hoste...0,4641555.story

Lindsey Graham and John McCain continue their Benghazi Meltdown after Obama vigorously defended Susan Rice in his press conference today: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012...ends-susan-rice

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 14, 2012 -> 03:39 PM) If hyperinflation were about to hit, I don't think you would be seeing this current change in the fed you are seeing now. But when inflation starts to occur due to a recovery, let's not pull the plug on the recovery. Here's the Fed Vice Chair laying out his support for explicit guideposts on when to start shifting Fed policy. Not exactly the same thing as federal budget deficits but definitely related. http://economistsview.typepad.com/economis...guideposts.html

Below the Line: Poverty in America Official figures say 46 million Americans live in poverty. Beyond that, there's little about poverty that Americans can agree on This article investigating poverty in America and what it really is won this month's Sidney Award

that's pretty silly. I don't think hyperinflation will actually hit, but when bond rates do start to creep up as the economy recovers, we can focus on the deficit if that's what politicians are actually concerned about (I don't think they are, but that's a separate issue). In the mean time, I'll continue to ignore bond vigilante warnings that have been made (incorrectly) for years.

It's a short-hand dismissal of a bad argument that's been made for years, yes. There's no reason to point out in detail that it remains a poor argument every time it's brought up.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 14, 2012 -> 02:46 PM) Absolutely there is. When you say things like "any year now", you're saying it'll never happen. Contrary to what you're saying now. Goal posts moving. But my kick was still good. conservative economics has been decrying that hyperinflation is right around the corner literally for years. Saying "any year now" is not saying that it'll never happen, it's saying that it's not going to happen when the economy is still s*** and we have more pressing issues to worry about.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 14, 2012 -> 02:35 PM) Ignore the fact that I replied to your video post...my post wasn't about the video, it's about you and the way you talk on here. Maybe David Frum can make the point in a less-snarky way: The electorate wasn't particularly concerned with the deficit, but the political press and politicians have been focused on.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 14, 2012 -> 02:38 PM) Because the economy, and the overall world economy is in the tank right now is the ONLY reason inflation hasn't hit. It won't stay like this forever is the point they're making, the opposite of the point you're feebly trying to make, over and over, that the world will stay in the tank like this forever. I beg you to stop making that point, because it's not a point at all. It's ignorant and wrong. That's not the point I'm making, and it's pretty silly to take it that way. The point I'm making is an anti-austerity point that we should not be obsessed with budget deficits in the middle of a recession precisely because unemployment (much more important) is low and interest rates are essentially free for the government. Now is the time to borrow to get our economy going again and to do things we should be doing anyway like infrastructure. Nowhere in that argument is the claim that interest rates will never rise or that we should run deficits in perpetuity (though Modern Monetary Theorists would argue that we should). It is an argument about priorities.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 14, 2012 -> 02:32 PM) Again, it's a f***ing inevitability that at some point in the future, unemployment will go down and bond rates will rise. Whether than be 5 years or 10 years, or even 20 years...in the grand scheme of an economy, that's a very short period of time. Sticking your head in the sand and ignoring it because it won't happen in a week is lunacy...and it's part of the kick the can down the road game politicians play that's gotten us where we are. I have some news for you. All of that will happen, and there is nothing wrong with discussing it, or thinking about ways to curb it BEFORE that time arrives. There are more pressing problems right now than the deficit. The major problem, unemployment, directly contributes to the deficit. As we've seen all over Europe and perhaps most analogously in the UK, prematurely forcing austerity measures to close deficits in a weak economy only makes the problems including the deficit worse. It's not inevitable that unemployment will fall if we take measures that actively work against it.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 14, 2012 -> 02:29 PM) The way you talk, especially when you say things like 'any year now', you pretend that inflation and interest rates will never move again. And this...I don't even know how to word this without sounding condescending...but this is just absolute and total insanity. That's like predicting the stock market, or unemployment, or the temperature, will never go down, or up...ever again...but stay exactly the same forever. To even say something like this means you need to remove yourself from the conversation. Because you're doing nothing but detracting from it. If you don't want to have a serious conversation, don't have one. And when you say things like "any year now", like you've been saying, it means you don't want to have a serious conversation. So again, don't have one. Did you bother to watch the video to see his point? edit: "any year now..." is my standard response to ss2k5 and the general "bond vigilantes" argument that has been predicting hyperinflation for years now.