StrangeSox

TVA Announces Job, Capital Spending Cuts After Q2 Loss Damn it, this means they're never going to finish my project out there. Between this and the SONGS fiasco with their steam generators, these will be "on hold" forever.

The Buffet Rule is a token political move to start the ball rolling on tax reforms or, more bluntly, to provide a cudgel to beat Republicans for opposing raising taxes on the rich while advocating for spending cuts for the poor. It's never been presented as a panacea.

Not being happy with spending and taxation levels still doesn't excuse not raising the arbitrary debt ceiling to pay for goods and services already delivered, sending the US government into default.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 7, 2012 -> 06:47 AM) Because the original purpose of the federal government wasn't national security or anything. Partially but not "the" original purpose. I think there was something about providing for the general welfare... But so what? If it's really an ineffective waste of trillions of dollars, shouldn't we stop doing it?

Using that logic, we better end the War on Terror and the War on Drugs, too!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 6, 2012 -> 07:00 PM) They all are QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 5, 2012 -> 06:57 PM) I'm confused why Republicans here still make these sorts of posts.

The Nazi party in France got 20% in the first round.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 6, 2012 -> 11:34 AM) You mean France that is about the third or forth domino of Europe going bankrupt? No thanks. Sarkozy out, Hollande in. First leftist head of French gov since 95.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 6, 2012 -> 11:34 AM) You mean France that is about the third or forth domino of Europe going bankrupt? No thanks. Yep, and entirely due to a universal health care system!

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 6, 2012 -> 08:54 AM) I have, and you can buy insurance. And besides that, you can get care. To say you can't is a strawman. See, the thing is, many people can't buy insurance. But you know this, you are just making a bad faith argument. It's pathetic that many poor americans have to rely on once-a-year clinics run by groups like doctors without borders if they can get non-emergency care at all. Best system in the world!

I wish we had a real, modern health care system like France instead of the pro-corporate insurance reform we got which will likely be struck down in a couple of months. I'm still keeping my fingers crossed that your insistence that ppaca will bankrupt the insurance industry and leave us with single payer are true!

Also, a France joke? Is this 2004?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 5, 2012 -> 07:38 PM) Why, you all got what you wanted, except becoming f***ing robots for the government. Line up for your chip. Oh, right, health care is not far enough left, we're not a marxist state (yet), and we haven't become France. If you like that style so damn much, go live there and leave us the hell alone. Oui Oui. Hitting the sauce early tonight?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 5, 2012 -> 07:04 PM) Because we are all insane. Nah. But it's not like Obama doesn't catch plenty of s*** here from me, balta, bs etc. granted it is from the left, but theres not unwavering praise.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ May 5, 2012 -> 06:06 PM) oh, but that's ok, because that's not an important issue right? so i should still vote Obama. because i mean Romney is a total radical and he would hurt worker rights. oh wait. so will Obama. looks like a lose lose for your pro-labor ideals. but thats OK, because Obama has compromised and is being a moderate, and that's all that matters. I'm confused why Republicans here still make these sorts of posts.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 5, 2012 -> 06:01 PM) Yeah, he's a Centrist Democrat who will favor so-called Free Trade over domestic, union jobs when it comes down to it. He's established that many times. Of course, that's not a message that gets publicized. And 68 Democrats in Congress aren't going to matter unless you can somehow get the Republican Majority to come out against a "Free trade" proposal that makes big money for big business and hurts worker rights. He's a crappy neoliberal like Clinton.

I like the "purging the traitors" rhetoric in a post meant to defend against calls of increasing ideological extremism. We need more alan wests in congress!

I couldn't believe noah went back out there.

"Ambition" here is symbolized by a beast of burden tricked with a prize it will never claim into serving the sloth of its rider, a fitting analogy for the lot of most workers in America. Welfare payments offer a relief and alternative to unrewarding servitude. A good cartoon.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 4, 2012 -> 06:27 PM) Of course it is. Like I said...our ENTIRE political system is insane. That's not our political system as much as it is our Constitution.

Lobbying is free speech.

BTW you can admit that the modern GOP is insane and dysfunctional without rejecting conservative ideology in toto.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 4, 2012 -> 05:44 PM) It's insane to target oil subsidies because the same people will foot the bill...whether it's through those tax subsidies or at the pump. It comes down to the same outcome, just in two different ways...and as I said, accomplishes nothing. So why not just completely subsidize them then? For this to be true, you'd have to have 100% tax incidence. Either way, bad policy is not necessarily insane policy. You have a point that literally nothing will get done. This is now a quibble over effective political strategy, not really whether something is "insane" or not. However, one aspect of the GOP insanity is their unprecedented obstructionism. Both parties have ratched it up over the past decade+, but it shot up exponentially in 2009. The night of Obama's inauguration, GOP leaders got together and worked out a strategy on how to oppose anything and everything Obama and the Democrats proposed. As much as the Democrats disliked Bush, he never faced complete opposition to every proposal, even if those proposals were previously-Democratic ideas. The reaction to Obama has been unique. I'm asking you to point out anything comparably insane. So far, you've got that they want to eliminate oil subsidies for companies making record profits. This is supposedly insane because the subsidy amount will be completely passed through to the customer (if they can charge a higher price equivalent to the subsidy difference, why aren't they doing that right now?) and because the whole tax system needs to be overhauled. The Republicans on the committee even voted against Simpson-Bowles, which was a very right-friendly proposal. You can argue that it's ineffective to focus on these small items like the Buffet tax or the oil subsidies or even that they're bad policy, but they're not insane policies in the same way that garbage like anti-gay hatred and the Norquist pledge are. Those are categorically non-sane, unreasonable absolutionist policy positions.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 4, 2012 -> 05:13 PM) Well right, but that's the easy scenario. The questions is more about what happens at the 10 week, 15 week, 20 week mark. And then you have people like SS that think it's a crime against humanity that women are asked to wait 24 hours before making a decision (the horror!) or how terrible it is that we make women (and men) responsible for their actions by making THEM pay for the procedure out of their own pocket (again, the horror!) I think it's pretty s***ty to throw up ever-more barriers to a woman's choice on her own reproductive health, yes. This can really impact women in more rural states where abortion services are limited, as they now how to drive a long distance to the clinic and then stay over night. In increases the financial burden and will affect poor women the most. It's also pretty damn insulting to assume that a woman who has chosen to have an abortion hasn't thought about it already. This is also true of the various mandatory sonogram laws and forced rape-wand laws except that those add an extra-special shame and humiliation factor via completely unnecessary procedures. 'We Have No Choice': One Woman's Ordeal with Texas' New Sonogram LawThe painful decision to terminate a pregnancy is now—thanks to Texas' harsh new law—just the beginning of the torment. edit: thanks for the reminder, made my annual donation to PP!

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 4, 2012 -> 04:39 PM) It's merely your opinion that the "entire" GOP is insane, but you're trying to state it as a fact. I'd argue that there are just as many crazy liberals running around out there, but because you believe what they believe, you don't see it as "insane". I think it's totally "insane" to spend like liberals want to spend...openly and freely, debt on top of debt. Most (if not "all") liberals feel Obama isn't spending enough. That, to me...is what's insane. So, as shown, depending on your point of view, the opposing party can easily be seen as "insane". Now...if anyone really bothered to think about it...I'd probably have to say it's not the GOP or the DNC that's insane...it's the voters. It's the sheep followers that keep voting these people into office, only to receive more of the same in return. Not all points of view are equally valid, of course. How about that article I've linked co-written by someone from AEI, a pro-corporate conservative think tank? How is this "insane" to want to stop oil subsidies, which would be a relatively easy fix? You can advocate for starting somewhere as a starting point for tax reform. Promoting one thing does not mean that you are ignoring everything else. Is this comparably "insane" to the anti-gay bigotry from the GOP? Or the absolutely-no-tax-revenues-increase-EVER pledge that most of them sign? Eliminating oil subsidies is a part of fixing the tax code. Do you think it'd be more pragmatic to address what may possibly stand a chance of passing Congress instead of only proposing huge reform packages that have no hope of passing? Is there anything comparably insane to the GOP candidates saying they'd turn down a budget deal that was 10-1 spending cuts vs. revenue increase? Is there anything comparably insane to the opposition to the Grand Bargain proposals that Boehner and Obama tried to work out over the summer but were stridently opposed by House members? Comparable to being one of if not the only major political party in the developed world the rejects the entire field of climate science outright?