Way to go Lindsey Graham. A leader who really is looking further down the road than the pavement beneath his feet.

I present the new GOP anthem.

... and a good opportunity to press him on his ridiculous support of "climate change" legislation is missed; tripped up by fringe assholes and Paulians.

Thanks, guys!

Popcorn, anyone?

Lindsay Graham:

"We're able to access that health care 24 hours a day when we're in Washington," Graham said, leading us to the Attending Physician's Office, a clinic inside the U.S. Capitol. They don’t even have to leave the office.

About half of the members of Congress, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, use the Attending Physician benefit. For $42 a month, they can get all the primary care they need - physical therapy, X-rays, minor surgery, specialists and a pharmacy for emergencies - no appointment needed.

They also get VIP hospital treatment from the best doctors at Bethesda Naval Hospital. And they have a reserved spot at the elite Ward 72 at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, where the late Sen. Strom Thurmond spent a lot of time.

Outpatient care is free. Well, free for them. Your tax dollars pick up the cost.

Graham says in the current climate, it's just not fair.

"If we pass a law that says a public option will be made available, I think people like myself should get out of this plan and go into the public option," he said.

That's unlikely. Congress has voted down all proposals that would switch them to a public option.

Even if you're mad enough to vote out your representatives, they still won't have to stress over health care. Their plan is portable. Until Medicare kicks in, they can keep the generous coverage for themselves and their families at the same low cost, still subsidized by your tax dollars.

But all these nuts want to do is run him out of the GOP.

shaking head.

re: #4 Honorary Yooper

Popcorn, anyone?

Sure. Wait a second...THATS NOT BUTTER!

re: #3 astronmr20

Lots of good "conservative" opportunities are missed because the batshit bonkers battalions are providing more distracting shiny things than an army of lobbyists on the left could possibly hope to create on their own.

You know it's going be a good day when you get Ronulans into a fit. For me, that's practically every day.

re: #3 astronmr20

... and a good opportunity to press him on his ridiculous support of "climate change" legislation is missed; tripped up by fringe assholes and Paulians.

Thanks, guys!

There's nothing ridiculous about Graham's support of climate change legislation. If more Republicans would take their heads out of their nether regions on this subject, we might be able to get some legislation based on reality, that would do something to effectively address the problem. Instead, the vast majority of Republicans are putting out disinformation and anti-science propaganda, to please their paymasters in the Heartland Institute and other industry lobby groups.

Listening to the various shouts, I hear a reference to Soto-my-ear. Is this a relative of Golda Meir?

Am I the only one around here who hopes every member of senate/congress who voted for the stimulus package gets dumped?

re: #11 RogueOne

Am I the only one around here who hopes every member of senate/congress who voted for the stimulus package gets dumped?

No.

re: #9 Charles

There's nothing ridiculous about Graham's support of climate change legislation. If more Republicans would take their heads out of their nether regions on this subject, we might be able to get some legislation based on reality, that would do something to effectively address the problem. Instead, the vast majority of Republicans are putting out disinformation and anti-science propaganda, to please their paymasters in the Heartland Institute and other industry lobby groups.

Regardless of one's opinion of man-caused climate change, the legislation is an obvious money-grab. It does NOTHING to curtail these emissions overall.

re: #11 RogueOne

Am I the only one around here who hopes every member of senate/congress who voted for the stimulus package gets dumped?

Uh, have you noticed that the economy is turning around?

re: #14 Charles

Uh, have you noticed that the economy is turning around?

Charles,

You can't honestly believe it's due to this "stimulus." Really? Am I reading you correctly?

Great Caeser's Ghost are there any "Republicans" left out there? Full disclosure time... I'm a Democrat. I come here because the conversations seem grounded in reality. Truth be told I'd be more favorable to the right if not for social conservatism. My question is... have all the "Rockefeller Republicans" died out or something?

re: #14 Charles

Uh, have you noticed that the economy is turning around?

It's a head fake.

re: #15 astronmr20

Charles,

You can't honestly believe it's due to this "stimulus." Really? Am I reading you correctly?

The stimulus package definitely played a part. But if you'd rather believe there's nothing good at all about Obama, I can see how you'd deny that.

re: #15 astronmr20

You can't honestly believe it's due to this "stimulus." Really? Am I reading you correctly?

Yes. Everycountry on planet earth with a functioning government enacted similar economic stimulus measures. You're living in a fantasy land if you think America is immune to economic reality.

re: #19 Killgore Trout

Yes. Everycountry on planet earth with a functioning government enacted similar economic stimulus measures. You're living in a fantasy land if you think America is immune to economic reality.

It's Obama Derangement Syndrome.

re: #15 astronmr20

Charles,

You can't honestly believe it's due to this "stimulus." Really? Am I reading you correctly?

Even as a libertarian, I felt the 'stimulus package, bank bailout' was the best of a bad set of options if we wanted to keep the current system in place.

I'm not in a mood to deal with a financial and economic meltdown, even if my libertarian instincts rebel at what was done.

Now that the economy has stabilized, what we need to do is find a way to evolve the system into something more robust and away from the current dysfunctional methodology, and do it in such a way that it doesn't bring everything crashing down around our ears.

re: #14 Charles

Uh, have you noticed that the economy is turning around?

To be sure from a financial market perspective. Freeing up the credit markets was a good move.

I'm still very worried that a huge amount of spending on government programs is simply going to shore up state budgets and other government programs that will do nothing in the long run to keep a healthy free economy going. At a recent government conference I attended the consensus among officials from various states was as soon as they figure out how to spend the stimulus it will stop coming - a poor implementation in both cases.

Unemployment and debt are a scary threat to our well being in the long run and more government spending that makes our creditors jumpy and our children debtors does not seem wise.

re: #14 Charles

Uh, have you noticed that the economy is turning around?

An improving economy will be more noticeable when the Chinese admit a contracting economy and our employment numbers rise.

re: #18 Charles

I want to like my president, I really do. I respect the office and pray that he does well by my people and country. But I cannot "like" how he countermands much of what our founding fathers lay down for us. Even if it works out in the long haul, what of our founding principles? Aren't they worth preserving?

re: #20 Charles

The Tea Parties, fox news and right wing blogs lend credibility to this fantasy. Conservatives these days have absolutely no clue about the economic necessity of TARP and stimulus. They've turned their backs on Bush because he understood it.

A woman who had been carrying a sign that condemned “unconstitutional, anti-Christ, socialist, federal, deficit-spending programs” told Graham “God does not compromise” and that he had violated his oath of office by supporting federal ideas, including health care reform that overstep states’ rights.

These are the nutjobs that Bush and Rove cultivated to beat John McCain in SC in the 2000 GOP primaries. Here's Jonah Goldberg writing about it in NR back in 2000:

When Conservatives Goof
Sometimes the conservative movement disgusts me.

By Jonah Goldberg

I think my conservative credentials are pretty good. While there's room to my right, it's more of a crawl space than a vast expanse. I hate all the right things (the French Revolution, post-modernism, positivism, scientism, hyper-rationalism, Clintonism, blame-America-firstism, etc). I revere the right thinkers (the Founders, St. Augustine, Burke, Strauss, Oakeshott, Buckley, Hayek, Kristol the Elder, et al.). I've read the important books (no, really, I have; or at least the important parts) and I love all the stuff I'm supposed to love (America, puppies, limited government, the constitutional order, good old fashioned red-baiting, ice-cold beer as opposed to the "cosmopolitan" European warm stuff). I even come from a good family whose conservative credentials and good service in the cause I would stack against anybody's. Besides, I have paid my dues several times over.

So I feel I have every right to say this: Sometimes the conservative movement disgusts me. Sometimes it's our stupidity, as when Republican congressmen tell the press their internal strategy in lieu of substance and message. "Well if we can just keep the minority vote down, we can pick up a few seats."

That's how I feel about many of the conservatives rallying against John McCain right now. I have not been terribly supportive of the McCain campaign. National Review magazine has been positively brutal. But the sort of moronic, venal, cowardly, and immoral stuff being thrown at McCain from certain segments of the loony Right is sending me his way. At the risk of e-mail-box overflow, I think these people are revealing themselves as fools and they are hurting the conservative movement.

And so should a lot of other people. A church flier in South Carolina calls him the "fag candidate." Literature from a pro-Bush, pro-Life group shows a picture of a baby and reads "this little guy wants you to vote for George W. Bush." McCain supporters get cold calls from unnamed Bush supporters calling him a "baby killer" who "wants to increase abortion on demand." There are flyers "showing" McCain with Saddam Hussein, saying he voted to keep Hussein in office. My e-mail box brims with nastiness and lies of all kinds. I would repeat them but then the nuts would invoke my column as more evidence.

Those are just excerpts...the whole article is quite good. I realize that Goldberg may have recently jumped on the Tea Party express with these exact people, which saddens me, but he had their number in 2000.

re: #16 JasonA

Great Caeser's Ghost are there any "Republicans" left out there? Full disclosure time... I'm a Democrat. I come here because the conversations seem grounded in reality. Truth be told I'd be more favorable to the right if not for social conservatism. My question is... have all the "Rockefeller Republicans" died out or something?

Yeah but most of us are busy producing for the other 53% so we don't get much time to blog or protest.

1/2 /

re: #18 Charles
But if you'd rather believe there's nothing good at all about Obama, I can see how you'd deny that.

Excuse me Charles, but where did I say that?

I can deny that the stimulus bill played any part in this recovery by applying basic economic principles, and not by blind Obama hatred.

re: #28 astronmr20

But if you'd rather believe there's nothing good at all about Obama, I can see how you'd deny that.

Excuse me Charles, but where did I say that?

I can deny that the stimulus bill played any part in this recovery by applying basic economic principles, and not by blind Obama hatred.

Which "basic economic principles" are those?

re: #19 Killgore Trout

Yes. Everycountry on planet earth with a functioning government enacted similar economic stimulus measures. You're living in a fantasy land if you think America is immune to economic reality.

For TARP, yes. That's what propped things up and that's what other countries are enacting.

They are NOT enacting pork-spending, dollar bashing orgies like the US "stimulus."

I don't mind the stimulus at all, I think parts of it were perverted by normal Washingtonian corruption, but overall it was needed.

The later bailout of GM/Chrysler was wrong, however most people don't get it that this is a trade war, and other governments all across the globe were subsidizing their auto industries up to two years before the cash for clunkers program ever got voted on here.

re: #24 Equable

I want to like my president, I really do. I respect the office and pray that he does well by my people and country. But I cannot "like" how he countermands much of what our founding fathers lay down for us. Even if it works out in the long haul, what of our founding principles? Aren't they worth preserving?

Ugh. Obama is not destroying our founding principals. That's Paulian and Glenn Beck nonsense.

Sorry, link:

[Link: article.nationalreview.com...]

re: #27 DaddyG

Yeah but most of us are busy producing for the other 53% so we don't get much time to blog or protest.

1/2 /

Your thank you note is in the mail..

Apparently the Secret Service is now looking into another possible threat against the President (there was a swastika and Obama's name carved into a lawn/golf course in Massachusetts...along with a letter "I"...(?))

re: #32 Killgore Trout

Ugh. Obama is not destroying our founding principals. That's Paulian and Glenn Beck nonsense.

I didn't say he was destroying anything. Please don't type words into my mouth. I am not a "Paulian" or "Beckite" in any way. I don't need those nutjobs to give me an opinion, please don't put me into a category like that.

re: #14 Charles

I keep hearing that but it seems to be mostly wishful thinking. I actually appreciate the fact the media seems to be trying to keep from scaring the hell out of people about it. Unemployment continues to rise, no one but Taco Bell and McDonalds is building anything, people are still waiting to find out what is going to happen next, Pelosi is talking about a 2nd stimulus package, etc. I'm a small-business owner and I'm hoping beyond hope that the economy finally starts the turn around but I'm not seeing it. It seems everyday the news is still bad and we're being warned it's still going to get worse before it gets better.

re: #30 astronmr20

They are NOT enacting pork-spending, dollar bashing orgies like the US "stimulus."

Yes they are. They are even doing cash for clunkers, infrastructure spending etc. Search google news for "stimulus" and read about what's going on in India, Germany, China, South Africa, Israel, Uk, France, Russia, etc.

re: #38 Killgore Trout

The U.S. "cash for clunkers" was borrowed from a very successful European program.

re: #14 Charles

Yes. The Dow Jones is now pushing 10 000 at this moment. However the U.S. Dollar is weak, but what do you expect with interest rates effectively at zero?
Whether or not the Stimulus Package is helping is an open question. Each side will spin events until we are all dizzy.

re: #26 funky chicken

Yes, the 2000 election was a bit of a turning point, but I think the "Immigration" arguments of just two years ago was what really set off the emotions and the vehemence flowing. McCain was stung badly by that, and if memory serves me Graham too.

re: #31 Thanos

I don't mind the stimulus at all, I think parts of it were perverted by normal Washingtonian corruption, but overall it was needed.

The later bailout of GM/Chrysler was wrong, however most people don't get it that this is a trade war, and other governments all across the globe were subsidizing their auto industries up to two years before the cash for clunkers program ever got voted on here.

It is very much a trade war, and we were at the losing end of it until that. Of course, when I pointed out how other countries subsidize their auto industries, no one seemed to listen.

re: #38 Killgore Trout

Yes they are. They are even doing cash for clunkers, infrastructure spending etc. Search google news for "stimulus" and read about what's going on in India, Germany, China, South Africa, Israel, Uk, France, Russia, etc.

[Link: news.google.com...]

re: #39 J.S.

Which worked out so well here Chrysler is going to go under and GM is going to need another infusion of cash to continue putting out crappy vehicles.

More Goldberg:

But the policy differences between Bush and McCain are very small. On abortion, the contrast is purely tactical, at least on paper. Both candidates believe there should be allowances for rape, incest, and the life of the mother. The only difference between the two is that McCain would change the platform to say that. Bush wouldn't. On everything except military reform I probably agree with Bush more than McCain, especially in the area of taxes. But the differences between the two are negligible, which makes the attacks on McCain absolutely unwarranted.

More importantly, the candidates are so similar that style becomes more important than substance. And it seems ever clearer that Bush's style is the less preferable. He gained early in the polls because his bromides were poll-tested and focus-grouped. He was the perfectly packaged anti-Clinton for a population that wasn't paying much attention to politics. He may be infinitely more decent and honorable than Bill Clinton, but he is still relying on a Clintonesque kind of politics. His functionaries and lackeys try to make his opponents illegitimate while he crafts his message with the aid of polling data and a finger in the wind. At least when McCain says something you disagree with you know it's his own idea.

So many correspondents write me saying that McCain shouldn't be able to win with the help of Democrats and independents. This would be valid if there was any evidence that Democrats were going his way for tactical anti-Republican reasons. There is none. Republicans who fear a candidate popular outside the base are being silly. Nobody said, "these damn Reagan Democrats are ruining the party!" twenty years ago. Indeed among those Reagan Democrats were nascent GOPers like Jeane Kirkpatrick and William Bennett. McCain has the potential to make the Republican party a real majority party. That was supposed to be the appeal of Bush, why should it now be the curse of McCain?

Paul Gigot writes today in the Wall Street Journal that Bush will deserve his South Carolina victory, if he gets it. This is the first time I can remember disagreeing with Gigot in years. Bush will not own his victory outright, despite having spent down his coffers and his credibility. He will owe dishonorable people a dishonorable debt.

Yep.

re: #33 funky chicken

Sorry, link:

[Link: article.nationalreview.com...]

He needs to go back and reread what he wrote so very long ago.

re: #9 Charles

There's nothing ridiculous about Graham's support of climate change legislation. If more Republicans would take their heads out of their nether regions on this subject, we might be able to get some legislation based on reality, that would do something to effectively address the problem. Instead, the vast majority of Republicans are putting out disinformation and anti-science propaganda, to please their paymasters in the Heartland Institute and other industry lobby groups.

Didn't "cap and trade" begin as a Republican idea that they turned on when Dems said "ok, that sounds like a good idea."?

re: #29 Charles

Which "basic economic principles" are those?

...that more debt won't fix the issue?

That temporary auto clunker programs are just that- temporary- and don't address the issue that there are still too many dealerships in a changing auto and manufacturing market that the Government is too stupid to realize due to blindness from union payoffs from these manufacturers?

That profits and losses are signals in a market economy?

That huge losses in the financial sector signal that that sector needs to shrink?

That buying and insuring toxic assets is only bad in the long-run?

...Just throwing these out there.

re: #48 clonefan

Two years, and this is your first post?

What the hell happened to you?

re: #39 J.S.

The U.S. "cash for clunkers" was borrowed from a very successful European program.

Yes, however, its execution left much to be desired, IMHO. The execution should have done better.

I like to watch these go away.

*stares*

trapdoor in 3..2..1..

re: #26 funky chicken

Those are just excerpts...the whole article is quite good. I realize that Goldberg may have recently jumped on the Tea Party express with these exact people, which saddens me, but he had their number in 2000.

When people like Goldberg and Grahm come off sounding like reasonable moderates you know the world has been turned upside down.

re: #48 clonefan

we forgot to wear our tinfoil hats and the Obama brain-destroying waves got in.

Joooiiinnn usss.

re: #38 Killgore Trout

Yes they are. They are even doing cash for clunkers, infrastructure spending etc. Search google news for "stimulus" and read about what's going on in India, Germany, China, South Africa, Israel, Uk, France, Russia, etc.

And even in their own terms, they are small in scale compared to ours.

re: #56 DaddyG

We're just writing what our Zionist overlords pay us for. Haven't you been paying attention?

/bye now!

Oops I guess I shouldn't have quoted that. Bye now to my own post!

re: #51 Honorary Yooper

I heard (here in Canada) that the program in the States was "too successful"...and they had to put a stop to it...

Quote not the flounce lest it stick to thy face

re: #38 Killgore Trout

I can tell you from a builders standpoint the stimulus crashed our trades. I had multiple apartment complex jobs lined up at the beginning of the year that are all still on hold. Manufacturers who we normally put up buildings for every year are holding off on spending any money until they figure out whats going to happen. People are waiting to find out if they can get part of the pot of gold to help pay for their construction projects.

re: #37 RogueOne

I keep hearing that but it seems to be mostly wishful thinking. I actually appreciate the fact the media seems to be trying to keep from scaring the hell out of people about it. Unemployment continues to rise, no one but Taco Bell and McDonalds is building anything, people are still waiting to find out what is going to happen next, Pelosi is talking about a 2nd stimulus package, etc. I'm a small-business owner and I'm hoping beyond hope that the economy finally starts the turn around but I'm not seeing it. It seems everyday the news is still bad and we're being warned it's still going to get worse before it gets better.

unfortunately it takes alot of time for a full recovery if there is such a thing anyway...I forget the author..but remember the old song/adage...
" I've been down so God damn long, it looks like up to me..."

Remind me not to stick any vital parts into a sock puppet while stinky is around to enforce the law. I could loose a limb that way.

48. *Deleted Whiner*

We decided not to go into Bat Country

(And apologies, I've been on a Hunter S. Thompson kick of late, and that quote seems so apropos)

It's a multi-flounce day! Just had another one in the 'Hot Air Comments' thread too.

re: #24 Equable

I want to like my president, I really do. I respect the office and pray that he does well by my people and country. But I cannot "like" how he countermands much of what our founding fathers lay down for us. Even if it works out in the long haul, what of our founding principles? Aren't they worth preserving?

Please, please explain this to me.
I really don't understand what people mean when they say the President is trashing our founding principles.
What has changed from last year?

Economists React: ‘Crash for Clunkers’ in Retail Sales

re: #37 RogueOne

Fundamentally important processes have been set in motion. For example, American's are now saving again - the savings rate over the past several years had collapsed down to nothing. Also, fewer imports means smaller trade deficits. These things had to happen, Obama or not.

Every G20 government follows Keynes to some degree. All of them. Even the Japanese (or, maybe especially the Japanese.) While there are parts of the stimulus package with which I didn't agree, the concept was simply business as expected. Like Thanos I believe the auto bailout (including the CfC program) was a mistake... yet from the fall of 2008 it became clear that major government intervention was going to be needed to stave off not just financial system collapse but the ordinary business of lending and borrowing among average Americans.

re: #65 Charles

LGF - Now with Patented Multi-Flounce Capabilities and capacitive touch-screen.

re: #60 Thanos

Quote not the flounce lest it stick to thy face

What's interesting is how many of these flouncers have so few comments for the length of time they were here. There's a former lizardoid who keeps a listing of the banned. At least 1/4 to 1/3 of that list is made up of sock puppets.

re: #54 Conservative Moonbat

When people like Goldberg and Grahm come off sounding like reasonable moderates you know the world has been turned upside down.

What? Lindsay Graham is a very reasonable guy. I saw him on MTP with Dick Gregory this weekend, and he came off as much more informed that Carl Levin.

Goldberg is a smart guy and well read. He was not a supporter of the fringe back in 2000. Like I said, I'm sad that he defends them now.

re: #65 Charles

It's a multi-flounce day! Just had another one in the 'Hit Air Comments' thread too.

I hate to sound really stuid, but what is a "flounce?"

It's "stupid" stupid.

SCIMF

re: #72 StillAMarine

I hate to sound really stuid, but what is a "flounce?"

Stuid?

re: #59 J.S.

I heard (here in Canada) that the program in the States was "too successful"...and they had to put a stop to it...

The problems we had in execution had more to do with the paperwork and the length of time it took for dealers to get the money. That could've been handled much better, IMHO.

re: #65 Charles

It's a multi-flounce day! Just had another one in the 'Hit Air Comments' thread too.

If you really want to bait them, a discussion of this NYT article might do the trick - we've got scary science, God and what they'll read as scientific confirmation of their doomsday stuff: [Link: www.nytimes.com...]

re: #61 RogueOne

Some areas and states are going to remain recessed in real estate for a while to come. That comes from Bush's watch and a speculative bubble. Those areas will turn around, but later. Here in KC area it was taking 3 weeks earlier in year to sell a home, now they are turning around much more quickly. ( during the year prior to 2008 houses would turn around in 1-4 days after hitting market, that's a bit too hot.)

I saw construction all over on my trip from KC to Branson and back last weekend as well.

re: #75 Honorary Yooper

The problems we had in execution had more to do with the paperwork and the length of time it took for dealers to get the money. That could've been handled much better, IMHO.

The problem was the program itself, not the execution.

re: #72 StillAMarine

I hate to sound really stuid, but what is a "flounce?"

Urban Dictionary

I gotta feeling that tonight’s gonna be a flounce night
That tonight’s gonna be a flounce night
That tonight’s gonna be a two flounce night
(apologies to the Black Eyed Peas)

re: #68 freetoken

The Japanese approach destroyed their economy for an entire decade. The debt we are incurring due to the stimulus package is unsustainable, something people on both sides of the aisle quickly admit. The stimulus package could have been much better focused and cut in half and had just as much of an impact as the bloated bill they passed.

Regarding the stimulus money.
I hope to not say too much, but I've gotta say it.
I have been involved (on and off) with some of the infrastructure stimulus money here in Utah. From what I've seen (and been a part of), the projects I've been involved with were hastily thrown together (not "shovel ready") by UDOT resulting in significant time loss and on-site construction problems and delays (that = money). Contractors got in way over their heads bc they had no idea what they were getting into as far as paperwork, federal specs, etc and the talk around the office is that some of these contractors will actually lose money on these projects. Also, in the rush to find employees, the contractors hired (and later revealed in emails that they hired) illegal aliens, an issue which is now being dealt with by the fed's civil rights people. I'm obviously not saying that this is typical of how the stimulus money has been dealt with... it just feels typical of what happens when federal money is involved.

re: #77 Thanos

Oh Noes... time traveling Higgs Bosons!

re: #79 Honorary Yooper

Thank you.
BTW the "stupid referred to me, not anyone else.

re: #77 Thanos

Some areas and states are going to remain recessed in real estate for a while to come. That comes from Bush's watch and a speculative bubble.

The Bush white house warned about the orgy of sub-lending and desktop-underwriting-- and it's contribution to upward-spiraling home prices and toxic assets on no less than 15 separate occasions.

re: #78 astronmr20

The problem was the program itself, not the execution.

Whatever. Other countries have supported their industries for years, and we in the US let ours to rot with no help. Why do we keep shooting ourselves in the foot?

re: #83 freetoken

Oh Noes... time traveling Higgs Bosons!

I actually emailed that to LVQ for his take. I couldn't find the paper that they're referencing available to read.

It's an interesting concept, but things like that worry me. The science is way more complicated than the write-up, so even if those aren't crackpots that were interviewed, the whole "God doesn't like it" thing opens a door that should remain closed.

The scare-videos about LHC are hysterical, though.

re: #85 astronmr20

The Bush white house warned about the orgy of sub-lending and desktop-underwriting-- and it's contribution to upward-spiraling home prices and toxic assets on no less than 15 separate occasions.

Yes they did, and people like Barney Frank paid them no heed. Then, instead of being listened to, the Bush Administration had to fix the problem it warned about earlier.

Looks like a couple of rutilus collumi.

Have to get CATO to check that.

;)

re: #86 Honorary Yooper

Whatever. Other countries have supported their industries for years, and we in the US let ours to rot with no help. Why do we keep shooting ourselves in the foot?

Because we are so afraid of teh!ebil socialists...

re: #66 webevintage

Please, please explain this to me.
I really don't understand what people mean when they say the President is trashing our founding principles.
What has changed from last year?

Well for one, we were never supposed to have "Czars" that are hand-picked, not elected, not open to public scrutiny before they are hired and are given carte blanche to write policy. That's one aspect that makes me very uncomfortable.

Van Jones is a perfect example, was a disasterous choice, and while I regret the source of the information given about him the fact remains that his ideology has zero place in American policy.

And what is also unfortunate is that there are those who would lump me into a "Paulian", racist or "Beckite" category because I wouldn't want that cat writing anything that would affect my daily life.

And before anybody tells me I have ODS - just don't. I am entitled to disagree with what he is doing, and I don't disagree with him wholesale. I disagree with certain things here and there and agree with others.

re: #83 freetoken

Oh Noes... time traveling Higgs Bosons!

That article could have (and probably should have) been from the Onion.

re: #83 freetoken

Going to Branson seems like traveling back in time.

re: #77 Thanos

My state happens to be in fairly good shape considering the plight of our surrounding states. We've been very lucky considering the amount of businesses in our line of work that have gone under already. Just because it could be worse doesn't mean I should feel good about how the economy is being handled. "Trust us, It could be worse" isn't a very good campaign slogan to run on next year.

re: #91 Equable

Well for one, we were never supposed to have "Czars" that are hand-picked, not elected, not open to public scrutiny before they are hired and are given carte blanche to write policy. That's one aspect that makes me very uncomfortable.

Van Jones is a perfect example, was a disasterous choice, and while I regret the source of the information given about him the fact remains that his ideology has zero place in American policy.

And what is also unfortunate is that there are those who would lump me into a "Paulian", racist or "Beckite" category because I wouldn't want that cat writing anything that would affect my daily life.

And before anybody tells me I have ODS - just don't. I am entitled to disagree with what he is doing, and I don't disagree with him wholesale. I disagree with certain things here and there and agree with others.

Obama didn't invent the Czars thing, you know. IIRC, Regan had the first Czar for the "War on Drugs".

What about the more fair-weather variety of libertarians, who have the sense to remember that Ron Paul's not in their party? Surely Graham makes a distinction there.

re: #93 Thanos

Going to Branson seems like traveling back in time.

That's a hell of an evil clown in the middle of the image.

re: #94 RogueOne

My state happens to be in fairly good shape considering the plight of our surrounding states. We've been very lucky considering the amount of businesses in our line of work that have gone under already. Just because it could be worse doesn't mean I should feel good about how the economy is being handled. "Trust us, It could be worse" isn't a very good campaign slogan to run on next year.

No it's not, but "we're doomed" isn't going to win either.

re: #95 ~Fianna

Precisely, I don't like the idea of "Czars" or hand-picked officials. I'd prefer to have people elected either by the people or our congress. I'd imagine that it would be a logistical nightmare and probably a waste of money, but again - I am just uncomfortable with the idea.

re: #76 ~Fianna

If you really want to bait them, a discussion of this NYT article might do the trick - we've got scary science, God and what they'll read as scientific confirmation of their doomsday stuff: [Link: www.nytimes.com...]

Dude.

re: #86 Honorary Yooper

Whatever. Other countries have supported their industries for years, and we in the US let ours to rot with no help. Why do we keep shooting ourselves in the foot?

I understand what you mean, but the issue is somewhat conflated. Cash for clunkers was not really "supporting an industry."

I think what you are referring to is how companies like Honda and Toyota can get their steel for cheap from government subsidies, correct?

re: #82 bosforus

Personally, I oppose government spending that has the sole purpose of stimulating the economy. I prefer tax cuts because I believe private citizens and businesses make better choices with money. Did the stimulus package work? I think it is yes and no. It put more money into he economy, but I don't see any long-term revenue being generated from it. No new businesses, no new industries, no new investments. In other words it can work, but they blew it, as government always will.

re: #97 Honorary Yooper

That's a hell of an evil clown in the middle of the image.

Yes, there are always scary clowns in the borderline between science and superstition.

re: #88 Honorary Yooper

Yes they did, and people like Barney Frank paid them no heed. Then, instead of being listened to, the Bush Administration had to fix the problem it warned about earlier.

Yup.
And they still get blamed for it, even on this board.

It's amazing, really.

A couple of you mentioned this story in the Ocean Thread. Here's a brief follow-up from Politico.

Islam group ridicules Muslim 'spies' claim

Four Republican lawmakers have accused the most prominent Islamic advocacy group in Washington of trying to plant "spies" as interns on Capitol Hill.
...
The proclamation from the four Republicans came in advance of a book, entitled "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld that's Conspiring to Islamize America," which includes a forward by Myrick. The author of the book, Dave Gaubatz, an anti-Islam activist who wrote last year that “a vote for Hussein Obama is a vote for Sharia Law.”
...
There was some confusion on Capitol Hill yesterday, when the public schedule on televisions in the complex noted that the lawmakers would make "public a national security threat on Capitol Hill." Staffers from the four Republican offices would not reveal in advance what this national security threat was.

I know many in these parts hold CAIR in particularly low regard but, on the surface, this panicky "national security threat" scaremongering feels a bit like BNP/EDL territory to me.

re: #99 Equable

Precisely, I don't like the idea of "Czars" or hand-picked officials. I'd prefer to have people elected either by the people or our congress. I'd imagine that it would be a logistical nightmare and probably a waste of money, but again - I am just uncomfortable with the idea.

Are you aware that we've had presidential appointees in this country for many years? Do you think it's feasible for every single government official to be elected?

re: #91 Equable

Well for one, we were never supposed to have "Czars" that are hand-picked, not elected, not open to public scrutiny before they are hired and are given carte blanche to write policy. That's one aspect that makes me very uncomfortable.

Van Jones is a perfect example, was a disasterous choice, and while I regret the source of the information given about him the fact remains that his ideology has zero place in American policy.

And what is also unfortunate is that there are those who would lump me into a "Paulian", racist or "Beckite" category because I wouldn't want that cat writing anything that would affect my daily life.

And before anybody tells me I have ODS - just don't. I am entitled to disagree with what he is doing, and I don't disagree with him wholesale. I disagree with certain things here and there and agree with others.

All presidents have had "Czars"

re: #102 Baier

I am of the same opinion. It put money in people's pockets... until they spent it. And that seems to be the end of it.

re: #95 ~Fianna

Obama didn't invent the Czars thing, you know. IIRC, Regan had the first Czar for the "War on Drugs".

Nixon had Czars, I think every president has going back to days of Paulian fantasy. The term "czar" was first used during the Carter Administration.

re: #91 Equable

Czars are really just advisors, more or less. I don't see what the fuss is.

I found this video very ugly. There is no way a moderate republican could feel welcome in an environment like that. The party is going to continue to struggle to keep anyone but paleo-cons and theo-cons, because the rest of us aren't wanted.

re: #99 Equable

Precisely, I don't like the idea of "Czars" or hand-picked officials.

Political appointees are nothing new. The practice has been with us our entire history. Welcome to reality.

re: #82 bosforus
A lot of what I've discussed with colleagues (bureaucrats who have to implement not the politicians who legislate their "good ideas") from various states is how the stimulus money has been used to shore up failing state budgets and increased medicare and unemployment costs. The majority of the funds are not going to shovel ready infrastructure. Here in Atlanta the money given to MARTA was immediately put into shoring up existing budget shortfalls.

That kind of shoring up can hurt states and local municipalities by masking their severe management issues and delaying the inevitable. In the long run if and when the private economy starts to heat up that leaves states (whos tax income already lags private recoveries) in a less competative position to retain and attract the talent that is needed to run the many social and infrastructure programs they are responsible for.

Talent and resources draining at the same time just as citizens and the economy needs the support of local and state government is not going to be a pretty thing.

re: #105 simoom

I know many in these parts hold CAIR in particularly low regard but, on the surface, this panicky "national security threat" scaremongering feels a bit like BNP/EDL territory to me.

Yeah, I'm pretty wary of that one too.

re: #99 Equable

Precisely, I don't like the idea of "Czars" or hand-picked officials. I'd prefer to have people elected either by the people or our congress. I'd imagine that it would be a logistical nightmare and probably a waste of money, but again - I am just uncomfortable with the idea.

Czars are really advisers or deputy advisers. A little known fact is that Van Jones was a deputy adviser under the Council of Environmental Quality and was part of legislation signed into law by Richard Nixon.

re: #92 ArchangelMichael

That article could have (and probably should have) been from the Onion.

That was my take until I re-read the institutions the scientists in question are at. Both of them are "real" research places and their papers are up on a Cornell website... neither of those screams "crackpot". I have a feeling that the problem comes from the Times write-up, not from the scientists themselves.

Looking at the other papers they authored (still can't find the ones referenced in the Journal), the papers look like real science done by real scientists.

Theoretical physicists ponder weird things for a living. That's what makes them so interesting.

re: #106 Charles

Naah I don't think it's feasible. I said a little while ago it'd be a logistical nightmare. I guess a "head's up" about who is appointed to handle aspects of my daily life would be nice. But what is paramount is that there is accountability before and after they are hired. Again, in my opinion Van Jones was not a wise choice and he would have been a part of writing gargantuan policy.

His whole idea that the "green movement" would have been a stepping stone to radical change in America gave me the willies.

re: #36 Equable

I didn't say he was destroying anything. Please don't type words into my mouth. I am not a "Paulian" or "Beckite" in any way. I don't need those nutjobs to give me an opinion, please don't put me into a category like that.

You will never have to worry about it as soon as you give up their talking point of Obama undoing the work of the founding fathers.

Semi Off Topic but interesting (at least to me):

We *might* be heading towards another Maunder Minimum.

Wiki information on the Maunder Minimum here.

I'm not sure if people have been tracking the current Solar Minimum, but so far this year we've had 224 days without sunspots with 77 days to go.
(2008 had 260 days and 2007 had about 160 days without sunspots)

re: #40 StillAMarine

Yes. The Dow Jones is now pushing 10 000 at this moment. However the U.S. Dollar is weak, but what do you expect with interest rates effectively at zero?
Whether or not the Stimulus Package is helping is an open question. Each side will spin events until we are all dizzy.

The AM gold fixing on LBMA was $1,066. The PM fixing was $1,059.5.

re: #93 Thanos

Going to Branson seems like traveling back in time.

My last trip to Dollywood (Pideon Forge TN) got me wondering who was still making that many tube tops and marlboros. American industry isn't dead yet.

re: #117 Equable

As long as we allow foreign interests to undercut our own market, then "Green" jobs in America are going nowhere.

re: #118 bratwurst

You will never have to worry about it as soon as you give up their talking point of Obama undoing the work of the founding fathers.

Well if if makes you feel better then go right ahead and label me as such. The only reason I even watch Beck is because I am amused by his Jim Carey-esque mannerisms. And as far as Ron Paul is concerned, I think the man is a disgrace.

I didn't mean to cause such a furor over the Czar matter; all I am suggesting is a bit more clarity on who these people are before they are hired no matter who is in charge.

re: #117 Equable

Appointments have to get Senate approval, so we do get a "heads up".

re: #99 Equable

Precisely, I don't like the idea of "Czars" or hand-picked officials. I'd prefer to have people elected either by the people or our congress. I'd imagine that it would be a logistical nightmare and probably a waste of money, but again - I am just uncomfortable with the idea.

You are electing them. When you vote for President, it is with the knowledge that he will be "hand-picking" a cabinet and a host of advisors (whether they are called Czars or not) and judicial appointments.

Don't like who So-and-so might pick to fill these positions? Don't vote for them.

re: #99 Equable

Precisely, I don't like the idea of "Czars" or hand-picked officials. I'd prefer to have people elected either by the people or our congress. I'd imagine that it would be a logistical nightmare and probably a waste of money, but again - I am just uncomfortable with the idea.

So when everyone starting with Reagan did it, you also accused them of undermining the founding fathers...right?

re: #81 RogueOne

The Japanese suffered/created a tremendous bubble, but that had some very important demographic drivers (not the least of which is the limited land available.) Yes, there is a fundamental weakness to the Keynes approach - when populations stop growing and start shrinking the concept of "stimulus" gets turn on its head as any borrowing has to be paid back by fewer and fewer people.

However, that is not the problem that the US faces. We have a growing population (and it will continue to do so by anybody's expectations.) We have adequate resources to grow, somewhat (though as LVQ would remind us - not without delayed costs that are often ignored.)

This is really the dividing line between the Paulians and the traditional Republicans (on a theoretical basis.) The Paulians being "Austrians" abhor the approach our government has taken for the past 70 years or so, while the traditional GOP (along with most in the Democratic party and most "independents") accept if not totally embrace modern (by which I mean FDR and following) fiscal and monetary policies.

That is because in the real world what matters is what works. Not dogmatic propositions a la Von Mises, but what actual works. And for three quarters of a century the governments of the world have been experimenting with applying economic theories, and during that time material and intellectual wealth, along with population, has boomed.

The future is always unknown (regardless of the LHC's time traveling boson particle) and there is a real problem that population decreases will upset the whole cart for some (Japanese, Italians, Russians, etc.) but for nations that are still substantially growing populations (like ours) the government can keep using that growth to expand spending as needed.

re: #123 Equable

He can appoint whomever he wants to. No clarity needed. Of course if he appoints nutjobs or people who were caught on camera saying nasty things abotu the US, there will be political consequences.

That's it.

re: #30 astronmr20

Most countries have much better thought out safety nets that cushion the blow of economic disaster for average hard working people. You might be right if you say they go too far in ordinary times, but in crazy times they don't need to do much more, the system is already ready to compensate.

Ours is not. Hence the constant extension of unemployment benefits and the like.

re: #11 RogueOne

Am I the only one around here who hopes every member of senate/congress who voted for the stimulus package gets dumped?

Increasing government spending is the classic means of responding to an economic downturn. It's been done during every recession I can remember, which is quite a few, and for considerably longer than that.

At issue this time around is only the size of the package, and the slow rate at which it has been disbursed. To date, only about 30% of the original funding has been allocated - and considerably less than that has actually been spent, at which time it provides it's stimulating effect. One could certainly make a good argument, if the economy shows continued signs of improvement, that the remaining funds - which are all fictitious anyway, in that they're borrowed against the future - be "returned" and their significant share of the deficit eliminated, giving the economy yet another boost as the reduction in borrowing improves the bond market and the private lending sector.

As things stand now, we're nearing the point where continued hoarding of the stimulus package begins to look like a gigantic Democrat-controlled slush fund ripe for use during the midterm election season, in addition to being a huge stone around the economy's neck.

But stimulus itself is a long standing tool deployed during recessions.

re: #126 bratwurst

So when everyone starting with Reagan did it, you also accused them of undermining the founding fathers...right?

FDR at least

re: #123 Equable

I didn't mean to cause such a furor over the Czar matter; all I am suggesting is a bit more clarity on who these people are before they are hired no matter who is in charge.

That is very different from saying the President of the United States is undermining the founding fathers. Give up the inflammatory rhetoric and our country will be better off.

re: #37 RogueOne

And the grand opening for my new store is two weeks from now, I'll let you know how it goes.

re: #99 Equable

Precisely, I don't like the idea of "Czars" or hand-picked officials. I'd prefer to have people elected either by the people or our congress. I'd imagine that it would be a logistical nightmare and probably a waste of money, but again - I am just uncomfortable with the idea.

What part of the chant "Elections have consequences" that Republicans recited continuously through Bush's two terms don't you get? These same czars for the most part were here during his terms, and yes, some were here even during his father's term. They are just lame gov't bureaucrats, nothing more, nothing less, and they are still accountable to the laws and constitution.

re: #102 Baier

Personally, I oppose government spending that has the sole purpose of stimulating the economy. I prefer tax cuts because I believe private citizens and businesses make better choices with money. Did the stimulus package work? I think it is yes and no. It put more money into he economy, but I don't see any long-term revenue being generated from it. No new businesses, no new industries, no new investments. In other words it can work, but they blew it, as government always will.

I'd normally agree with you, but I do believe that the economic crisis was such that people would not have spent money. instead they would continue pulling money out of the economy and the velocity of currency would have continue to slow down, and we would have found ourselves falling deeper into a deflationary trap.

Right now, we're starting to see road projects starting up tied to the Stimulus package, and contrary to popular belief, the stimulus money hasn't all been spent. IIRC it's designed to be spent out into 2011, particularly with road and infrastrcture construction and rebuilding.

What the stimulus package and bailouts did was make people not so fearful that they totally stopped spending. THe economic crisis was as much a crisis in confidence as it was a real economic crisis, which is why it was so dangerous, if you didn't address the confidence issue, AND address the very real bank issues, then we were going to lose the economy, at least in it's current form.

Oh brother.

Last night on the Sean Hannity show... a full hour devoted to Jerome Corsi, the World Nut Daily fanatic who has appeared several times on the white supremacist radio show Political Cesspool, and is a prime promoter of the Birther insanity.

My note to the lady who said "God does not compromise". As soon as he's on the ballot, we'll see about voting "no compromise". What a whack job.

I hope no one would label me Paulian because I want the Federal Government to limit its largesse (with our money) to a very conservative degree of interference with markets. The obsession with redistributing weath is what helped us get into this mess in the first place (sub-prime loans) and it didn't help that the unintended consequence of people using their homes like ATMs or flipping property for speculative purposes made things worse.

The founding principle we're getting away from is limited central government. Mind you the choice between a Democratic controlled behemoth vs. a republican controlled behemoth is not what I'm arguing. I am arguing we need to limit social and economic engineering of any kind. Right now speaking restraint to power the Dems are going to get it from me on the economic side and the Republicans are going to get it from me on the state religion crap.

re: #134 Thanos

I do get it Thanos. What is wrong with wanting more public review? It becomes an expensive and ridiculous political morass when we have vaudeville jackasses like Beck and his ilk finding the facts about the bad choices (like Van Jones) and distracts my President.

re: #139 Equable

My apologies, that last bit should have said "... and destracting my President".

re: #99 Equable

Precisely, I don't like the idea of "Czars" or hand-picked officials. I'd prefer to have people elected either by the people or our congress. I'd imagine that it would be a logistical nightmare and probably a waste of money, but again - I am just uncomfortable with the idea.

I worked for "government", and I can tell you that it's impossible to run a governmental entity of any size without the head honcho being able to appoint those who share his "vision" for what needs to be done.

"The obsession with redistributing weath is what helped us get into this mess in the first place."

How is that redistributive? The government doesn't even provide the loans.

re: #137 Rightwingconspirator

My note to the lady who said "God does not compromise". As soon as he's on the ballot, we'll see about voting "no compromise". What a whack job.

God is not a natural born US citizen so he cant run for President.

re: #136 Charles

He is also the last major promoter of "abiotic" oil. Corsi knows a good story when he sees one, and when oil was hitting new highs in 2008 he couldn't resist it.

re: #140 Equable

GOD I SUCK! "... distracting my President."

Someone shoot me please.

Gun news, featured in the new Marine Times.

Torrizo Electromagnetic Accelerator Rail Gun 6000

The Torrizo Electromagnetic Accelerator Rail Gun 6000 (TEMAG 6000) is a new innovation in rail gun technology. Typical rail guns are manufactured with extreme precision and long barrels to obtain the accuracy and firepower of an explosive-propelled projectile. The TEMAG 6000 uses electromagnetic force created by a magnetic field induced by a large pulse of current that propels a projectile at extremely high speeds. The muzzle velocity of the TEMAG 6000 is approximately 6000 meters/sec. The TEMAG 6000 gun uses a pair of rails that extend along the length of the firing chamber and each has at least one wire passing there through it. At least one toroidal magnet encompasses the rails as does a solenoid magnet. The wires within the rails, the toroidal magnet and the solenoid magnet are each electrically coupled to an electrical source with electrical communication established by a switch-trigger. A magnetically sensitive round held within the firing chamber is initially accelerated by the rails The current flowing through the rails sets up a magnetic field between them and through the projectile perpendicularly to the current in it. This results in the rails and the projectile pushing each other and in the acceleration of the projectile along the rails. The projectile is then further accelerated by the toroidal magnet and again further accelerated by the solenoid magnet prior to being discharged from the firing chamber.

The model the Marines are looking at fires a .22 which impacts with the force of a .50 and has 3-4 times the range of a conventional rifle.

re: #145 Equable

GOD I SUCK! "... distracting my President."

Someone shoot me please.

*bang*

re: #126 bratwurst

So when everyone starting with Reagan did it, you also accused them of undermining the founding fathers...right?

Everyone since Nixon. (Possibly skipping Ford.)

Also, the term was used as early as WWI.
[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

Honestly, if I were Lindsay Graham, I'd consider switching parties if the 2010 elections bring in a bunch of people like Michelle Bachman. Graham may find himself in a position much like Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman found themselves in, where they were basically outcast by the extreme elements of the democrat party.

We'll see what happens over the next couple of years. Graham could possibly even be a strong presidential contender as a democrat if the Code Pink contingent loses more of their power in the dem party.

I still believe the Code Pink types influence primary elections for the dems just like the GOP fringe nuts can sway some GOP primaries.

It's kinda sad for both parties, IMHO.

re: #147 ohpleaseno

*bang*

Thank you!

re: #141 reine.de.tout

I worked for "government", and I can tell you that it's impossible to run a governmental entity of any size without the head honcho being able to appoint those who share his "vision" for what needs to be done.

As a bureaucrat (I say that in the kindest sense of the word) I often pray that the politicians (I say that in the meanest sense of the word) will keep us out of their plans and let us implement government in the best way possible. Let's face it no one wants to hear from their tax authority or child services but when they are needed we can at least make them as efficient as possible. I have yet to see substantive legislation that will actually help government entities cut red tape and make the process of delivering services more efficient and cost effective. That has to come from an executive and be carried out by empowered executives.

Having said that Obama has made some very amateur nominations based on shared ideology and good intentions.

re: #119 bloodstar

Semi Off Topic but interesting (at least to me):

We *might* be heading towards another Maunder Minimum.

Wiki information on the Maunder Minimum here.

I'm not sure if people have been tracking the current Solar Minimum, but so far this year we've had 224 days without sunspots with 77 days to go.
(2008 had 260 days and 2007 had about 160 days without sunspots)

CLIMATE DENIER!!!1!!

//

Just kidding. :)

re: #143 ArchangelMichael

Thats OK, we need compromise in the Oval Office, the legislature and Judicial branches. Besides I'm sure he could supply one from Hawaii.
J/K folks!!! I NOT a birther.

Look at this crap! I don't believe this. New World Order black helicopter craziness, right out in the open on Fox News.

re: #145 Equable

Someone shoot me please.

BANG!

You are welcome.

re: #146 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Gun news, featured in the new Marine Times.

Torrizo Electromagnetic Accelerator Rail Gun 6000

The model the Marines are looking at fires a .22 which impacts with the force of a .50 and has 3-4 times the range of a conventional rifle.

The rails in such a gun would be wrecked by friction after a couple of shots. I hope they don't think this is ready for prime time as anything other than a fire one (small) magazine and then throw-away sniper rifle.

re: #136 Charles

And Corsi has a Ph.D in political science from Harvard...(now, there's an alumni...lol)

re: #138 DaddyG

Well then the challenge you have is identifying what you want to cut out of the budget. Then you have to sell it to the people who will be cut.

***

Continuing my rambling from just above... it strikes me that few of these people who are so critical of GWB and Obama for their large deficits also don't rail on RR's legacy. RR came into office, like Obama, at the front end of a very serious recession. RR talked the game of balanced budgets, but in practice he was all for stimulus spending, only his stimulus was centered on different national priorities.

RR expanded defense spending significantly, and that was a direct stimulus to the Southern California aerospace industry. I know because I benefited from it. Deficits ballooned, but that didn't seem to stop the spending.

re: #151 DaddyG

DaddyG articulated my sentiment rather succinctly.

re: #155 DaddyG

BANG!

You are welcome.

already shot him. thanks for the backup.

re: #142 dugmartsch

"The obsession with redistributing weath is what helped us get into this mess in the first place."

How is that redistributive? The government doesn't even provide the loans.

Well, the government forced private entities to provide the loans against prior business practice. My Dad's a CPA and business owner, and he said he knew for years that WaMu would go down hard just because they were the most aggressive big bank in the sub-prime mortgage market. They got an A+ from the government for their efforts, of course. And that was during the GW Bush administration.

So, yes, the Bush Admin warned verbally about the subprime stuff, but they did nothing to stop it. The policies were implemented under WJC, but I remember lots of times where GW Bush rhetorically supported "ownership culture" or whatever he called it.

re: #154 Charles

Yeah I saw that and damn near choked on my Newcastle. Just mention UFOs and you have another William Cooper.

re: #154 Charles

Wheee!

re: #156 ArchangelMichael

The rails in such a gun would be wrecked by friction after a couple of shots. I hope they don't think this is ready for prime time as anything other than a fire one (small) magazine and then throw-away sniper rifle.

No mention other than they've looked at them in tests and have been impressed so far.

re: #87 ~Fianna

I actually emailed that to LVQ for his take. I couldn't find the paper that they're referencing available to read.

It's an interesting concept, but things like that worry me. The science is way more complicated than the write-up, so even if those aren't crackpots that were interviewed, the whole "God doesn't like it" thing opens a door that should remain closed.

The scare-videos about LHC are hysterical, though.

I'm pretty sure that they meant "God" in the same way that Einstein referred to God: an anthropomorphism of nature, not a literal Judeo-Christian God.

Sorry if I disappointed, this isn't SoCon bait, and is actually an interesting idea.

re: #163 Killgore Trout

Hey Trout, that is my trademarked one-liner. Pay my royalties please sir.

re: #154 Charles

lol

re: #151 DaddyG

As a bureaucrat (I say that in the kindest sense of the word) I often pray that the politicians (I say that in the meanest sense of the word) will keep us out of their plans and let us implement government in the best way possible. Let's face it no one wants to hear from their tax authority or child services but when they are needed we can at least make them as efficient as possible. I have yet to see substantive legislation that will actually help government entities cut red tape and make the process of delivering services more efficient and cost effective. That has to come from an executive and be carried out by empowered executives.

Having said that Obama has made some very amateur nominations based on shared ideology and good intentions.

As a former career bureaucrat, I have no disagreement with anything you said. My biggest "peeve" - the legislature's continuous requirements for agencies to "self-study" and report in on how to reduce red tape - the red tape, of course, produced by the very things required by the laws the legislature passes!

re: #160 ohpleaseno

already shot him. thanks for the backup.

Always doubletap.

re: #169 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Always doubletap.

Time to nut up or shut up.

re: #166 Equable

Wheee!

re: #169 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Always doubletap.

That's advice better served for the bathroom I've always found.

re: #171 Killgore Trout

So if I get the analogy right... the strawberry is... Barney Frank?

re: #171 Killgore Trout

[Link: www.albinoblacksheep.com...]

re: #164 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

No mention other than they've looked at them in tests and have been impressed so far.

Although I guess it's possible if they dial down the speed to be comparable to conventional rifles that the rails could last longer.

re: #139 Equable

I do get it Thanos. What is wrong with wanting more public review? It becomes an expensive and ridiculous political morass when we have vaudeville jackasses like Beck and his ilk finding the facts about the bad choices (like Van Jones) and distracts my President.

Lizards found out about Jones in July.

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

re: #135 bloodstar

I work in markeeting for some of the biggest US (and worldwide) retail brands and I can tell you first hand, people still are not spending. If consumer spending was the goal of the stimulus, I can tell you it was an epic failure.

re: #175 ArchangelMichael

Although I guess it's possible if they dial down the speed to be comparable to conventional rifles that the rails could last longer.

One would assume there is a differnce between operational velocity and maximum velocity and that with work, you could maximize force and longevity.

re: #146 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Exactly one year ago today, the First Marine Expeditionary Force in Iraq signed off on an "urgent operational need" for an airborne tactical laser that could, in the words of the formal request, create "instantaneous burst-combustion of insurgent clothing, a rapid death through violent trauma, and more probably a morbid combination of both."

According to the Marines’ laser request, obtained by DANGER ROOM, this so-called Precision Airborne Standoff Directed Energy Weapon (PASDEW) wouldn’t just be an improved killed machine. It would also have particularly devastating psychological effects. Such weapons, when used against people, "can be compared to long range blow torches or precision flame throwers, with corresponding psychological advantages for [Coalition Forces] CF."

In other words, the lasers don’t just kill people, but they kill people in really gruesome, frightening ways — particularly because the beam from such weapons, like the Advanced Tactical Laser, is invisible to the human eye. That means you could have three guys standing around, and one of them suddenly burst into flames

[Link: www.wired.com...]

The Marines are certainly interested in exotic weapons...

As for a laser that makes you burst into flames and die a screaming, horribly agonizing cinematic death? Uh, I'll pass on that.

re: #176 MandyManners

Lizards found out about Jones in July.

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Well dang I didn't see that article. Thanks Mandy, I just wish more middle-of-the-road media sources such as this site got such blanket coverage as the hop-along Beck.

re: #158 freetoken

Well then the challenge you have is identifying what you want to cut out of the budget. Then you have to sell it to the people who will be cut.

Yes... and we are doing just that in our state (which is healthier than most states of comparable size and has a balanced budget amendment). The state employees have been very quick to take furloughs so their colleagues can keep their jobs, identify waste to eliminate it and avoid millions upon millions in tax burden on our citizens. It has been hard work but it does come with a sense of purpose. The people we serve are our own families and neighbors.

The agencies that are the most difficult to get on board are the ones who's budgets depend on matching federal dollars. It is hard to drive better management in organizations that are rewarded to having larger budgets or who have a tap into an essentially bottomless federal feed bag.

re: #180 Equable

Well dang I didn't see that article. Thanks Mandy, I just wish more middle-of-the-road media sources such as this site got such blanket coverage as the hop-along Beck.

I bet they read LGF.

re: #177 Baier

The stim helped Wall street far more than Miain street. Some say thats just how it takes time to flow through but hey left wing arguments for trickle down make me laugh and laugh. Note for the next stim-aim at main street.

re: #23 researchok

An improving economy will be more noticeable when the Chinese admit a contracting economy and our employment numbers rise.

Let's be content with healing the sick, not raising the dead.

re: #182 MandyManners

I honestly wouldn't doubt it. And I wish they had the gonads to bring on people like Charles (hell, many of the posters here for that matter) more often so that they can see what the real thinking America is about.

re: #179 celticdragon

[Link: www.wired.com...]

The Marines are certainly interested in exotic weapons...

As for a laser that makes you burst into flames and die a screaming, horribly agonizing cinematic death? Uh, I'll pass on that.

I dont know. I can see where that would be useful.

re: #186 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Heh! I was thinking more along the lines of not wanting that pointed at me.

I could care less if an IED bomb guy got smoked with one.

re: #177 Baier

I work in markeeting for some of the biggest US (and worldwide) retail brands and I can tell you first hand, people still are not spending. If consumer spending was the goal of the stimulus, I can tell you it was an epic failure.

Amen.

Mr. faith is employed (knock wood), but I am not. So we aren't buying anything we don't truly need. We know a LOT of people in our boat, or who are saving because they feel insecure in their jobs.

People do still seem to be eating at mid-range restaurants, though.

re: #177 Baier

I work in markeeting for some of the biggest US (and worldwide) retail brands and I can tell you first hand, people still are not spending. If consumer spending was the goal of the stimulus, I can tell you it was an epic failure.

It honestly doesn't help when Fox News and conservative writers push apocalyptic economic stories so frequently.

re: #187 celticdragon

Heh! I was thinking more along the lines of not wanting that pointed at me.

I could care less if an IED bomb guy got smoked with one.

Here is an idea! Equip it with a device to sniff out explosives then provide each legal store and shipment with a "friendly ID" chip. Then just start sweeping!

re: #169 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Double tap is passe since body armor. But I should not post its replacement. You'd like it though...

re: #149 funky chicken

We're not talking about things in the future, we're talking about things as they are now. The Republican party is currently overrun with crazy, and trying to force out the last few bastions of sanity. The equivalence you're trying to draw with Joe Lieberman is just false. Ned Lamont is a totally respectable liberal dude, who you may disagree with on policy, but is 100% sane. He isn't pushing junk science, he's not advocating that crazy make-believe gets taught to schoolkids (yet somehow worrying about indoctrination from the other side of the isle), and not affiliating himself with bigots and crazies.

He got his support because Connecticut is a very liberal place and Liberman is a not so liberal guy who supported a president who was radioactive to liberals. Not because he was pushing for newborns to get implanted with RFID chips or some other comparably crazy thing that passes for a not awful idea in Republican leaders (like teaching creationism in a science class instead of the 'Things Fools Believe' class.)

The Democratic party has nothing on Republican crazy right now.

re: #91 Equable

Well for one, we were never supposed to have "Czars" that are hand-picked, not elected, not open to public scrutiny before they are hired and are given carte blanche to write policy. That's one aspect that makes me very uncomfortable.

Van Jones is a perfect example, was a disasterous choice, and while I regret the source of the information given about him the fact remains that his ideology has zero place in American policy.

His "green" ideology? Because that's what he was hired for...
(unless he was part of the super!secret commie department that planned to take over by calling Republicans assholes. / )

But really? the Czars advisers that every President has had (we just started with the silly Czar name in the 20th cen.) is one of the reasons you feel that the President is undermining the founding principles of this country?
They are allowed under Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution. Obama has done nothing wrong, nor has he appointed more then the previous administration.

and I am not being sarcastic or combative, I really do want to try and understand this fear some folks have about our founding principles and how this administration above all others is working to pull them apart.

re: #190 DaddyG

Here is an idea! Equip it with a device to sniff out explosives then provide each legal store and shipment with a "friendly ID" chip. Then just start sweeping!

You mean a sentry gun, kinda like the ones you see in the extended version of Aliens.

Actually, the idea was under development under the Future Combat Systems Program that was (mercifully) terminated last Spring by SecDef Gates. (The program was a disaster, especially wrt the manned future vehicles part).

The surviving parts of FCS have been swept into the Brigade Combat Team Modernization (BCT) or some such, and sentry guns, "box of missiles" and other remote, unmanned robotic weapons may still be forthcoming.

re: #192 dugmartsch

Lamont may be sane, but a lot of his supporters were from the wacky fringe. That's what won him the primary, IMHO.

Lieberman won the general election because the wacky fringe can't usually carry a general election.

re: #127 freetoken

That is because in the real world what matters is what works. Not dogmatic propositions a la Von Mises, but what actual works.

Exactly. The problem is those who voted for this bill didn't even consider what works and what doesn't, the only concern seemed to be how much money could they get away with spending. It hasn't stopped the bleeding unemployment, it hasn't increased anyones paycheck (anyone who isn't a fed/state employee), it hasn't boosted consumerism, it hasn't done anything but add to our debt. I don't understand how anyone can stand there and say "boy, thank god for that stimulus package" (not that I think you are). They rushed it through on the basis of "never let a good crisis go to waste" without reading it or considering what would be the most effective ways of actually stimulating a national economy. 2 reasons why they should be tossed out on their asses. The only way this could have been more poorly designed and implemented is if they intentionally tried to screw it up instead of just being incompetent.

Someone made a point earlier about how it's encouraged people to save their money like never before but people are putting money into their savings to prepare for losing their jobs. IMHO, it's been a disaster that we'll be paying for forever.

re: #161 funky chicken

Well, the government forced private entities to provide the loans against prior business practice. My Dad's a CPA and business owner, and he said he knew for years that WaMu would go down hard just because they were the most aggressive big bank in the sub-prime mortgage market. They got an A+ from the government for their efforts, of course. And that was during the GW Bush administration.

So, yes, the Bush Admin warned verbally about the subprime stuff, but they did nothing to stop it. The policies were implemented under WJC, but I remember lots of times where GW Bush rhetorically supported "ownership culture" or whatever he called it.

So you mean the CRA right? It's a late 70's law. It forced banks to make loans in areas where they'd previously refused to lend, and tried to make sure that the terms given to qualified applicants across races and creeds weren't unnecessarily onerous. Especially if it was just because you lived in a crappy place, but were otherwise perfectly qualified to get a loan. It's not a great law (a little too open to interpretation for my taste), but it never forced a single bank to make a bad loan, never mentions sub-prime, and doesn't seem to have anything to do with the current financial crisis. It's also not redistributive, as the loans aren't subsidized by the government in any way. Forcing companies that lend money to lend it to qualified poor people isn't redistributing money from rich people to poor people.

So for thirty years this law didn't make banks make crazy sub-prime loans to poor people but then in 02-07 is suddenly starts making banks make crazy loans to poor people? Seems specious. Fannie and Freddie also didn't start buying sub-prime CDO's until late in the game, and if they hadn't bought the stuff, there were lots of other buyers. Congress basically said "why is government so stupid this is easy money" and then Fannie and Freddie started buying away.

The problem was regulation and leverage. I'm also for limited central government, but one of the best ways to do that is with good regulations that prevent catastrophes that then allow whomever is in power at the time to grab lots of new emergency powers that never seem to disappear.

re: #161 funky chicken

Well, the government forced private entities to provide the loans against prior business practice. supported "ownership culture" or whatever he called it.

Would you care to explain how the government forced private entities? I am in regulatory compliance with an international bank and I know of no such regulation. If you're referring to CRA, you might want to look it up.

re: #16 JasonA

My question is... have all the "Rockefeller Republicans" died out or something?

No, they got primaried by the Club for Growth. Or they switched parties.

Honestly, in any other generation would a Jim Webb be Democrat?

Lindsey Graham is one of my senators, and while I by no means agree with him on all issues, I can promise you that a confirmed bachelor who speaks with a lisp could not get elected in South Carolina unless he had some keen political instincts, and he is one of the only Republicans that appears to understand the concepts of demographics and majority rule. Every day 1,000 old Republicans die and 5,000 new Democrats are born and scare-mongering about czars and ACORN and socialism is not going to grow the party any.

These no-compromise wack jobs are going to ideologically purify this country into one party rule if they keep this up. Democrats have their off-their meds groups too, but they march and display their puppets and then they crawl on back to their drum circle. They don't get to sit at the grown up table, much less run the party, as appears to be happening with the Republicans.

re: #196 RogueOne

Exactly. The problem is those who voted for this bill didn't even consider what works and what doesn't, the only concern seemed to be how much money could they get away with spending. It hasn't stopped the bleeding unemployment, it hasn't increased anyones paycheck (anyone who isn't a fed/state employee), it hasn't boosted consumerism, it hasn't done anything but add to our debt. I don't understand how anyone can stand there and say "boy, thank god for that stimulus package" (not that I think you are). They rushed it through on the basis of "never let a good crisis go to waste" without reading it or considering what would be the most effective ways of actually stimulating a national economy. 2 reasons why they should be tossed out on their asses. The only way this could have been more poorly designed and implemented is if they intentionally tried to screw it up instead of just being incompetent.

Someone made a point earlier about how it's encouraged people to save their money like never before but people are putting money into their savings to prepare for losing their jobs. IMHO, it's been a disaster that we'll be paying for forever.

There are a couple of things that ring hollow with your post

1) The dems SURELY would rather have that 1.5 trillion (Tarp, Stimulus, bailouts) to spend on health care reform. The HELP bill would be paid for with change left over.

2) Unemployment went from almost losing 700,000 jobs per month to now 250,000 per month. I don't know if you know of this awesome principle called inertia (objects in motion stay in motion, object at rest stays at rest, yadda yadda yadda) BUT anyone who thought the stimulus would magically END unemployment is drinking a particularly awesome strain of Wild Turkey.

3)If your house is burning down would you rather have the firefighters outside debating whether to use the extinguishers, the foam, or the hoses or do would you want them to try putting out the fire with what they hopes works best and try something else if it doesn't. They chose the wrong stuff, your house burns down. They do nothing and debate, your house burns down. They try something and it works they save your house.

re: #197 dugmartsch

Thanks Dugmartsch. I am so sick and tired of hearing the CRA/Fannie May bullshit.

re: #196 RogueOne

It hasn't stopped the bleeding unemployment, it hasn't increased anyones paycheck (anyone who isn't a fed/state employee),

Well, I take it from that statement you despise anyone who works for a government entity. Regardless, if they lose their job they are still unemployed, and would subsequently stop buying an assortment of goods and services. Now, maybe you think that is a good idea too?

Also, you are going against what is currently taught in economics (from my understanding) - that government spending is indeed part of the GDP.

Furthermore, I don't know how you determine that "it hasn't done anything"? That kind of granularity of knowledge seems unlikely.

Finally, I was the one who mentioned savings. I did not say people were saving like never before. Quite the contrary, the savings rate is still very low compared to traditional 20th century standards. All that has happened is that the savings rate has at least gone up from being essentially zero (or even negative) into the small positive numbers. And that is good.

re: #139 Equable

I do get it Thanos. What is wrong with wanting more public review? It becomes an expensive and ridiculous political morass when we have vaudeville jackasses like Beck and his ilk finding the facts about the bad choices (like Van Jones) and distracts my President.

Were you asking for "more public review" while Bush was in office? Why not?

re: #201 TheQuis

#1. They don't need more money when they can continue to print out whatever they want.
#2. Unemployment has risen every month. The losses have slowed thanks to millions losing their unemployment and giving up. I've read others who point out that if you add those numbers in real unemployment is pushing 17%.
#3. I can make an easy argument that we would be better off had they done nothing. If your house was burning and the fire dept. was using their water to fill the neighborhood pools would you still consider the use of that water a success?

Let me reiterate my point again, the stimulus bill was poorly thought out, crafted, and implemented. The people we send to washington to do what's best for our country should have to pay the price for their incompetence. It doesn't matter which party they belong to. They failed dramatically on the most important economic issue in 30 years.

re: #203 freetoken

Well, I take it from that statement you despise anyone who works for a government entity.

You're trying to read between the lines a little too hard. My point is the only sector of the economy that is growing are the state/federal payrolls. Not a real good avenue of success for those of us who are footing the bill.

re: #127 freetoken

Well said.

Not able to upding this but I would if I could.

William

re: #26 funky chicken

Those are just excerpts...the whole article is quite good. I realize that Goldberg may have recently jumped on the Tea Party express with these exact people, which saddens me, but he had their number in 2000.

Sadly, Goldberg is now defending Glenn Beck. Because he's popular.

Is this guy actually a Ron Pauler? This same story appears on other blogs where he is just titled a "Tea Party" type.

re: #209 Hening

You didn't watch the video did you?

re: #165 Athens Runaway

I'm pretty sure that they meant "God" in the same way that Einstein referred to God: an anthropomorphism of nature, not a literal Judeo-Christian God.

Sorry if I disappointed, this isn't SoCon bait, and is actually an interesting idea.

Oh, you're completely right... but the SoCons are going to take it as bait.

The problem with popular media covering science is that the person writing the article doesn't fully understand what they're talking about and most of the people reading it don't understand even the basic ideas, so you have a big game of telephone with lots of room for interpretation.

re: #200 countrockulot

Lindsey Graham is one of my senators, and while I by no means agree with him on all issues, I can promise you that a confirmed bachelor who speaks with a lisp could not get elected in South Carolina unless he had some keen political instincts, and he is one of the only Republicans that appears to understand the concepts of demographics and majority rule. Every day 1,000 old Republicans die and 5,000 new Democrats are born and scare-mongering about czars and ACORN and socialism is not going to grow the party any.

These no-compromise wack jobs are going to ideologically purify this country into one party rule if they keep this up. Democrats have their off-their meds groups too, but they march and display their puppets and then they crawl on back to their drum circle. They don't get to sit at the grown up table, much less run the party, as appears to be happening with the Republicans.

From where I'm sitting, you've summed it up in a nutshell. Yes, we had the Code Pinkies and the ELF/ALF bomb things for the Earth crowd, but no Democratic politician outside of San Fran or New York is pandering to them. They don't have a voice on the DNC, nor are they instrumental in working to get out the base on Election Day. Most registered Dems think those people are crazy or weird and wish they'd go somewhere else. Frankly, most of those people probably aren't even registered Dem because the D party isn't liberal enough. They're often Greens.

There used to be equivalent off-shoot parties for the uber-conservative and religious, like the IAP or the Constitution party, but those groups seem to be getting folded up in to the voice of the Republican base and becoming the front-and-center demographic that the Party is courting.

re: #212 ~Fianna

Sorry you don't get off that clean - up until 2006 there were crossovers and support from management in your party. Most notably in the immigration marches where you had Dem Pols and operatives marching with Answer, Code Pink, and UFPJ. They decided they had a shot at the bigtime however, and after those marches and their backlash, they distanced the crazies and cut off their funding.

re: #18 Charles

The stimulus package definitely played a part. But if you'd rather believe there's nothing good at all about Obama, I can see how you'd deny that.

Considering that relatively little of the stimulus money has been spent yet (there was an article to that effect on MSNBC yesterday I believe), I really have my doubts that the stimulus package played much of a role.

re: #24 Equable

I want to like my president, I really do. I respect the office and pray that he does well by my people and country. But I cannot "like" how he countermands much of what our founding fathers lay down for us. Even if it works out in the long haul, what of our founding principles? Aren't they worth preserving?

What founding principals are those that Obama is "countermanding"?
I'm not being snarky, I'm interested.
Just what exactly has he done that is counter to the what... the Constitution?
Or counter to the the ideals of our Founding Fathers (which, I have to admit, I don't know what ideals they had that they expressed, specifically, in general sure)

re: #109 ArchangelMichael

Nixon had Czars, I think every president has going back to days of Paulian fantasy. The term "czar" was first used during the Carter Administration.

Harry Truman had his "kitchen cabinet", jut did not call them CZARS

History repeats itself. The democrats were the party of southern white men from 1860-1932, and the GOP won 14 of 18 presidential elections. Now the GOP fills that role, and the Dems will win most presidential elections until the GOP can broaden its appeal. I saw that the democrats now represent most of the richest congressional districts, which once supported the GOP. This is because the GOP's culture war and war on science has alienated educated professionals.

re: #19 Killgore Trout

Sorry Kilgore..not so much. Germany _did not_ and is reaping the reward. As are several other members of the G20 who didn't buy into the Anglo Axis "go into debt to get rich" meme. Too many people have read the first part of "rich Dad, Poor Dad" and not the whole text.

re: #200 countrockulot

These no-compromise wack jobs are going to ideologically purify this country into one party rule if they keep this up. Democrats have their off-their meds groups too, but they march and display their puppets and then they crawl on back to their drum circle. They don't get to sit at the grown up table, much less run the party, as appears to be happening with the Republicans.

Exactly what drum circle do you think Pelosi and Reid dance at? They _run_ the Democrats just as well as the radical right has now grabbed the GOP. The radical Left Wing of the Democrat party runs that party. After all Markos et al paid for it.

> Graham said he’s not going anywhere and instead would grow the party, defending his conservative credentials on such issues as abortion and guns...

Beyond all the shouting and rage, what a conservative movement needs is people who want to stem the bleeding of the economy and shrink the size of government bureaucracy. Talking about abortion doesn't buy anybody points against that. The anti-abortion plank is the first thing that should be ejected from the GOP platform. We have much more important fish to fry, and it only serves as a divisive distraction.

Getting us hopelessly in debt and building up a bureaucrat-run monolith to control every facet of our lives is the exact opposite of conservative and libertarian ideals. Anti-abortion talk is just an easy bribe that non-conservative GOP fixtures like Graham think they can throw to a rabid fringe base that will keep them in office long enough to sell out the regular guy. (And it's only talk, by the way, but the rabid base is pretty oblivious to the pattern of empty promises, so it works.)