Gov’t, capitalism need each other
Given public anger and fear, that “socialist” Barack Obama could be a lot more radical than he has been. For example, he could be proposing marginal tax rates of 80 percent or higher on the richest Americans, like we had back in the ’50s, and with just a little stoking of public anger at the economic elite, he could probably pass it.
After all, 85 House Republicans — almost half the GOP caucus — bowed to populist sentiment last week by voting in favor of taxing AIG bonuses at 90 percent. That idea began to die only when Obama stepped in to say he didn’t think it was wise or necessary.
Obama does propose to raise the top rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent, largely to help keep the deficit within the lower stratosphere. But that hardly makes him socialist. All he’s doing is letting the Bush tax cuts end, as they were scheduled by Bush to do. As Obama said in his news conference Tuesday, “Let’s go back to the rates that existed … during the Clinton era, when wealthy people were still wealthy and doing just fine.”
Obama could also make himself a popular man —- at least for a while —- by announcing that he was finished trying to bail out Wall Street with hundreds of billions of dollars and that the financial industry should be allowed to collapse into a smoking pile of ruin as punishment for its greed.
There’s a bull market for that kind of populism, and its appeal cuts across the political spectrum. Many on the ideological right distrust any government involvement with business, dismissing arguments that it might be necessary in a crisis. In their purist view, the free market has to be allowed to punish failure, even at the risk of that punishment falling on millions of innocents as well.
Many on the left would be happy to let it fall as well. They’re unhappy that Obama is trying to reinforce the existing economic structure; they don’t like the fact that some of those who got us into this mess are being rewarded for helping us get out of it. And they see a trillion dollars going to prop up Wall Street and they wonder how many poor and middle-class people could be helped with that kind of money.
But Obama isn’t doing that either. He’s trying to use government to save capitalism, understanding that in the modern era, both institutions need each other. Government provides the basic, essential stability that unfettered capitalism cannot. And capitalism provides the prosperity that government cannot.
Obama further understands that it’s not just public faith in capitalism that is being tested in this crisis. Public faith in government has collapsed as well. Obama is trying to resurrect the reputations of both simultaneously, understanding that you can’t save one without the other.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
195 comments Add your comment
Mrs. Godzilla
March 26th, 2009
11:15 am
Dave R
Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
I think that covers it.
Am I missing something?
Does AIG not do business across state lines?
Dave R
March 26th, 2009
11:16 am
Yeah, Bosch, their role is to OBSTRUCT right now. Stop the bleeding so that the patient won’t die. Throw as many monkey wrenches into the works to keep Hope & Change and his merry band of Socialists from destroying this country once and for all.
And joining the government doesn’t mean I was accepting what they did. I fought very hard to remove ordinances that didn’t make any sense (and succeeded) and ultimately reduced the size of the government I served.
So, what’s your point?
Bosch
March 26th, 2009
11:19 am
Dave R.,
The plan is not to regulate wholeheartedly.
And it does say right there in plain English, to regulate commerce between states.
I really don’t want you to go to too much trouble here, because what it all boils down to is pretty simple. The Constitution was framed so that as our nation evolves, laws and regulations can evolve with it.
You can throw out whatever you want, Federalist Papers, etc. It will not change my mind, or make me less assured that what the Obama administration is doing is a good thing for these particular set of circumstances.
G
March 26th, 2009
11:20 am
Observer,
Somehow that moniker just doesn’t suit.
I call for a balance, I did not call for just one. That’s what has
gotten us in this mess.
Please read again, and this time, try to comprehend.
Or maybe this is beyond your grasp?
Dave R
March 26th, 2009
11:22 am
Sorry, Mrs. G, you flunk the course thus far.
To regulate commerce among the several states does not give the Federal government the role of regulating business. That gives them the right to ensure that one state will not unfairly impose a tariff or other such law that would favor one state over another from a commerce-between-states issue.
Bosch
March 26th, 2009
11:22 am
Dave R.,
But Obama isn’t a Socialist. So that kind of thwarts your opinion.
And the GOPers may feel that they are protecting the country by throwing up these roadblocks – but they must understand – they have been voted into the minority because their ideas have already ruined our country.
It’s already happened Dave. I hate to break the bad news to you.
caz1158
March 26th, 2009
11:23 am
Bosch-”pathetic to the core” I agree. But does’nt both sides do this when the other has control. Here’s a simple thought,how about bring together both sides by allowing equal particapation in solving this country’s problems. Sounds to simple I know-so if Obama is really honest about wanting to reach across the isle, these would be the perfect times.
Bosch
March 26th, 2009
11:24 am
Dave R.,
And where exactly did you receive your Jurisprudence degree from that gives you the expertise in Constitutional law?
Bosch
March 26th, 2009
11:25 am
Dave R.,
And am I missing something too? When has Geitner or Obama or anyone in Congress specifically made a plan to regulate all of the private sector – as you say, regulate business?
What’s that? They haven’t? Yeah, okay.
Dave R
March 26th, 2009
11:26 am
So, to sum things up from Bosch,
“I don’t care what logic you use, I don’t care what a written document says, I’m not going to accept it because I FEEL it is better to do things completely against those logical arguments and legal documents”.
I’m sure Mrs. Godzilla and G would buy into this completely.
And you folks think I’M the anarchist.
Bosch
March 26th, 2009
11:27 am
caz,
Obama is doing that – they are refusing to compromise for they have yet come to terms with the fact that they were voted out of the minority and have offered zero alternative solutions except the same policies which have proven to not work – hence the mess we are in now.
Dave R
March 26th, 2009
11:29 am
Bosch, stop trying to channel Chad Harris – he’s been banned.
You don’t need a degree to be an expert on the U.S. Constitution. It really is a short read. Libs can even do it. It is even very clearly written, unless you ignore reality.
Bosch
March 26th, 2009
11:29 am
Dave R.,
Um, no that’s not a quote from me – that would be a projection from you.
Smarter people than you and I who have jurisprudence degrees in law get to interpret the Constitution. We don’t.
Rush Limbaugh
March 26th, 2009
11:30 am
Davo, yes I have(several). Some good and pretty sad really. And yes the Gov’t is complicit in in the orginal creation of them. My point is this…if you are born there does that mean you chose to be there? Does that mean withdrawing any Gov’t support would somehow get everyone there back on the road to being a fine upstanding citizen like you? I don’t think so and we haven’t reached the point as a country where we don’t stop trying to help. Is there abuse of the system? Sure. Does Gov’t manage it as effectively as it could? No. So what is the answer?Both sides of the aisle have had an opportunity to correct it and haven’t done it.One thing is for sure it will not self correct. The Gov’t will have to play a role. Gov’t may be part of the problem but it will also be a part of the solution.
It is easy to point out the problem.
Dave R
March 26th, 2009
11:31 am
Oh, and I see, Bosch. If they haven’t called for regulating ALL business, they’re OK with regulating say 80% of business activities, right?
What percentage would you be willing to allow them to regulate before they get your ire?
Bosch
March 26th, 2009
11:31 am
Dave R.,
So you are an expert in Constitutional Law? According to who? You? You are the authority that deems yourself an expert in Constitutional Law? Wow. I didn’t know someone could do that.
Okay, I now provide myself an expert in Quantum Psychics.
G
March 26th, 2009
11:32 am
Mrs. G,
Sounds like you are definitely not Wannabe Professor Dave’s favorite.
pat
March 26th, 2009
11:33 am
Obama, if left unchecked is going to bankrupt this country in record time. The stimulus which was full of pet projects and pork for social programs and temporary work projects that are not needed isn’t doing or going to do jack monkey.
For crying out loud the President got up on his podium and lambasted AIG for the bonuses that he mandated, by law, by his own signature. If he had actually read it, he sure wouldn’t have gotten on his high-horse because he made them do it. Boy that was embarrassing. This totally washed any confidence I had that he knows what he is doing when he does not even know what he signs into law.
Bottom line, if obama gets his way, within 6 months of his presidency he would have spent over 5.3 trillion dollars! There is absolutely no way to spin that to make it sound right, especially when most of it is being spent for social programs that drastically grow the size of government. If we borrow more than we can pay back in interest, we are bankrupt. His plans take us dangerously close to that.
Bush was an irresponsible spender, but obama makes him look like an amateur.
Bosch
March 26th, 2009
11:33 am
WHAT? Hold on. Make that Quantum Physics.
Quantum Psychics.
Bud Wiser
March 26th, 2009
11:33 am
Oh yeah, G, praise some troll who strokes your back, but you still cannot respond to any noteworthy or significant (relevant) issues.
The prototypical liberal, you simply choose always one of the only two options available to the mentally challenged: 1. insult someone(always first choice for the limited intelligence), or 2. avoid the subject at hand altogether.
I’d say you have already assumed the Chadonian Mantle of Ignorance, but I do not want to make disparaging remarks about our Special Olympian trolls, much as Obama made about those with limited physical capabilities when trying to describe his bowling skills. His alleged wisdom about his ’solution’ to our current woes also is even rankling members of his own party.
As always, the “Ins” squabble while the “Outs” regroup.
Politics as usual, I’d say.
Bosch
March 26th, 2009
11:34 am
Oh, and I would also need to add that I “proclaim” myself an expert in Quantum Physics instead of “provide” myself and expert……
pat
March 26th, 2009
11:34 am
If congress apoints more power to Geitner, watch the hell out…
G
March 26th, 2009
11:34 am
>>And you folks think I’M the anarchist.<<
No, Dave, you are the antichrist.
caz1158
March 26th, 2009
11:37 am
Bosch-That sounds great and all,but you and I both know thats not the case,in regards to allowing equal particapation in solving the problems. Why do ya think that is??
Bosch
March 26th, 2009
11:39 am
caz,
Again, because the GOP isn’t compromising. They have given zero, again, zero, alternatives – the only plans they have come out with are the same old plans that have ruined our economy.
That’s not a compromise. That’s just dumb.
Dave R
March 26th, 2009
11:40 am
Trust me, G. If I were the antichrist, you wouldn’t be typing on a keyboard right now.
Bosch
March 26th, 2009
11:41 am
Oh, my God, I’ve made myself get the giggles thinking about Quantum Psychics.
Observer
March 26th, 2009
11:41 am
JAY – I’m curious. Why is it that you banned Commie (a move I agree with FWIW) for personal attacks but you let “G” blather on with tasteless personal attacks all day every day. The most recent example: referring to a poster as “the antichrist” at 11:34.
Your inconsistency is quite revealing. Good day all. I have a meeting in the capitalist world where we treat each other with far more civility.
G
March 26th, 2009
11:43 am
Budunwiser,
>>Oh yeah, G, praise some troll who strokes your back,<<
There now, don’t be jealous.
I just happen to appreciate intelligence.
And so far, sweetcakes, you haven’t exhibited any.
Copyleft
March 26th, 2009
11:43 am
I see Dave R is still pushing his favored (and uninformed) interpretation of the Constitution as “obviously true, and certainly more accurate than thos idiots who actually STUDIED it for a living and got degrees.”
Yay for the common man! Long may he spew!
G
March 26th, 2009
11:44 am
Non-Observer,
You’re just upset because I called you out on your mistake.
Have a good day!
Bosch
March 26th, 2009
11:45 am
Dave R.,
I thought the Anti-Christ was supposed to be a charming, charasmatic guy who could charm the pants off people.
I’d kind of take that as a complement.
AmVet
March 26th, 2009
11:46 am
“You don’t need a degree to be an expert on the U.S. Constitution.”
THAT explains why for over 220 years that silly United States Supreme Court and countless brilliant minds have wrangled and agonized over interpreting it properly.
Geez, all that work for nothing…
Billy like others before me, I Iaud your earlier post.
You sir, have said more in a few paragraphs than the strict Constipationalists and legal scholars here will say in a month. Or a season. Or a year…
G
March 26th, 2009
11:47 am
Dave, Christ is way more powerful than the antichrist, so yes, I would be.
caz1158
March 26th, 2009
11:48 am
Bosch-Compromise does’nt mean particapation. That’s what I asked about,again.
caz1158
March 26th, 2009
11:50 am
Bosch-Also being involved in the process might actually bring upon idea’s. But one needs to be part of the process.
PJ
March 26th, 2009
11:52 am
Yeah, instead of providing answers to problems Republicans put up stone walls and go to Brittney Spears concerts. Just say no to everything and maybe we’ll get back in power. Call the President names and we will look like mature gown ups. Let has been’s and the disgraced like Chenny tell the American People we’re not safe since they left Washington. Let conservative radio and talk show host run the party, they know what’s best. Remove and add no more Amendments to the Constitution so that our thinking remains in the 18th century. Keep the poor poor and the rich rich and America will be just fine.
Happy Day Are Here Again!
AmVet
March 26th, 2009
11:54 am
More bad news for the anti-environment conservatives and the enviro-rapers;
WASHINGTON – For the second time this year, the Senate has passed a long-delayed bill to set aside more than 2 million acres in nine states as protected wilderness, from a California mountain range to a forest in Virginia.
The 77-20 vote on Thursday sends the bill to the House, where final legislative approval could come as early as next week.
The Senate first approved the measure in January, but the House rejected it last week amid a partisan dispute over gun rights. The gun issue was not raised during Senate debate.
The legislation – a package of nearly 170 separate bills – would confer the government’s highest level of protection on land ranging from California’s Sierra Nevada mountain range and Oregon’s Mount Hood to Rocky Mountain National Park in Colorado and parts of the Jefferson National Forest in Virginia.
Land in Idaho’s Owyhee canyons, Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore in Michigan and Zion National Park in Utah also would win designation as wilderness, and more than 1,000 miles of rivers in nearly a dozen states would gain protections. The proposals would expand wilderness designation – which blocks nearly all development – into areas that now are not protected.
Supporters called the legislation among the most important conservation bills debated in Congress in decades.
Bosch
March 26th, 2009
11:59 am
caz,
I don’t think the House/Senate Dems have banned the GOPers from entering the Capital Building or banned them from discussions. The point is, their solutions are the same old thing.
Dave R.,
I think this post got dropped, but none of Obama’s plans involved the government taking over the private sector – no business, no industry, no nothing – they are not stopping them from operating, they are putting rules in place – there is absolutely NO PLAN whatsoever for them to take over permanently. NONE. ZILCH.
Later gators!
Midori
March 26th, 2009
12:04 pm
been real busy, and wanted to stop by and say hi to Bosch, Mrs. G, AmVet and Taxpayer.
Billy – I echo similar applause for your wonderful thoughts.
G — your’e a real trip. I just love reading your bantering with the knuckledraggers. keep up the good work.
Same to PJ
Jay: I’m real disapppointed. I see Chad, Commie and Sir Trash have been banned.
I’m disappointed because you let Commie go on and on — unabated. I should think you would have put an end to the nonsense before you had to take such drastic measures.
Dave R
March 26th, 2009
12:08 pm
AmVet, as usual, you provide nothing but attack and sarcasm when intelligence is needed. That, however, you cannot provide.
The Constitution was largely (although not entirely) well regulated until the 1930’s when Socialists and liberals were voted and appointed into positions of power. Then, the unraveling began in earnest. Since that time, we’ve had 80 years of creeping Socialism brought on by the control of Democrats for 65% of the judicial appointment process (Democrat President in power), which ensured that the Constitution would be interpreted to be anything they wanted it to be – liberally.
Sorry, folks, but you fail the course as a group. You like groups anyway, so you should all be lumped together as is.
Bosch doesn’t like my interpretation of his post, but offers no alternative to my original premise except for, “I don’t care what it says”.
G just calls people names. and has self-inflicted orgasms when Hope & Change speaks.
Mrs. Godzilla just adds no thought to any discussion – just misdirection.
Midori just adds hugs – nothing else.
AmVet just attacks the poster and issues sarcasm.
You each FEEL you’re right, but cannot point to any document that backs up your FEELINGS. We are SUPPOSED to be a nation of LAWS, not of MAN. The highest LAW is the United States Constitution. Or it is supposed to be.
Read it sometime WITHOUT preconceived notions. Read it without FEELINGS.
Taxpayer
March 26th, 2009
12:10 pm
Hi Midori,
I just got back in from the rain myself.
I see Bosch and G have been having fun tromping a troll. I liked that Quantum Psychics degree. You folks are on a roll today.
RW-(the original)
March 26th, 2009
12:10 pm
Bosch,
What the administration is asking to be given the power to do essentially puts them in control of the entire private business sector whether they take them over in the traditional sense or not. They are asking to be allowed to intervene in financial companies other than banks, but they define “other financial companies” as any business that can affect the economy.
I’d like to see a WHOLE lot more definition of their limits before they get that kind of power.
Midori
March 26th, 2009
12:13 pm
Well Dave —
I’d hug you but I fear you’d take it the wrong way.
RW-(the original)
March 26th, 2009
12:17 pm
I see there have been more
crying jagscomplaints over people teasing Barry for his TelePrompter crutch, but I’m beginning to understand it watching his fake town hall meeting.First off the reason it’s become such a running gag isn’t because he uses it for major speeches it’s because he can’t even do a five minute opening statement for a press conference without it.
Back to my point, a woman from Georgia asked him when he was bringing the jobs back from offshore and then gushed over him for awhile. He started talking about the banks and the credit crisis, housing and the banks again. After fifteen minutes of babbling I started getting dizzy and my head started bouncing off my desk. He still hadn’t mentioned jobs and probably never did. I guess they’re scared that if they let him loose without the Prompter he’ll speechify for six or seven hours like his buddies Fidel and Hugo.
caz1158
March 26th, 2009
12:18 pm
Bosch-Now THAT was a pathetic answer! One I might expect from others here.Sad thing is we all know why equal particapation is’nt ever offered under normal circumstances. But these are defineatley not normal situations or times.
AmVet
March 26th, 2009
12:19 pm
No worries Sunspot Dave,
Everybody will just defer to your “expertise” on the US Constitution going forward, OK?
And if this legal scholar thing doesn’t work out for you, you can always become an armchair climatological “expert”.
Personally I like your “advice” for the GOP to “Just Say No”. To everything.
It would seem that is exactly what has gotten you “conservatives” in the sorry mess you currently face. Two consecutive electoral humiliations because they can’t come up with any rational, relevant alternatives on a wide array of issues.
Nancy must love you.
And in this scenario, more of the same is better for this nation.
This ain’t your grandfather’s GOP!
Got 0 Plans.
Got 0 Prospects.
AmVet
March 26th, 2009
12:25 pm
No Commie? No GHT Superstar? No Chad?
Have they been banished to the blogging Land of Nod?
Methinks they may not be the last…
Mrs. Godzilla
March 26th, 2009
12:26 pm
Dave R
I don’t buy it.
You post:
To regulate commerce among the several states does not give the Federal government the role of regulating business. That gives them the right to ensure that one state will not unfairly impose a tariff or other such law that would favor one state over another from a commerce-between-states issue.
Interesting.
Sombody better tell the government that ’cause we have been regulating banks and food producers and drug makers for years ……
Taxpayer
March 26th, 2009
12:27 pm
Let’s submit the troll’s name to Obama just in case he needs to offer up someone for that coveted position of Justice of the Supremes. But, can he sing.
Billy
March 26th, 2009
12:27 pm
RW — How exactly is he supposed to answer her? What plan can he have for bringing jobs back from overseas that won’t cause your brethren to eviscerate him for interfering with business or raising taxes? The only way I know of to bring jobs back form overseas is to make it profitable for the companies to do so. So…how about maintaining a high corporate tax rate and then offering breaks for companies that keep jobs at home? That’s what I’d like to see.
bugger
March 26th, 2009
12:30 pm
Obama is not trying to save capitalism, he is trying to control it. Capitalism does not need saving, it needs to cool down for a while. In fact even the bipartisian office of Mgt. and Budjet says the economy would probably emerge from the recession stronger if we were not to artifically prop it up.
This however swept under the rug as the new administration realized that a “CRISIS” was just what they needed to get everything they wanted to implement packaged under a stimulus program.
DB, Gwinnettian
March 26th, 2009
12:36 pm
RW @ 12.17, if using a teleprompter with the word “nuclear” spelled phonetically in five-inch-high letters was what it took to spare us from Bush’s repeated bungling of that word, I swear–honest! cross my heart!–I’d never have griped about it.
Dave R
March 26th, 2009
12:39 pm
My point exactly, Mrs. G. They’ve been regulating all these businesses for years, when they shouldn’t have – Constitutionally. At least you get it that the government does regulate businesses; Bosch doesn’t quite seem to have a handle on that particular.
Just because they have been allowed to do so, doesn’t mean they’re doing things Constitutionally.
If the Framers were alive today, they’d probably kill themselves, or maybe go back and cancel the Revolution – for all the good it did.
Or maybe they’d just start another one . . .
It’s the next logical progression against tyranny.
Dave R
March 26th, 2009
12:40 pm
Billy, how about implementing the FairTax, and watching EVERY large corporation bring their jobs back here?
DB, Gwinnettian
March 26th, 2009
12:41 pm
“In fact even the bipartisian office of Mgt. and Budjet says the economy would probably emerge from the recession stronger if we were not to artifically prop it up.”
Cite, please.
RW-(the original)
March 26th, 2009
12:42 pm
Billy,
First off he could have attempted to answer her at all, but obviously he has no answer to that question so he babbled on for what seemed like hours. Maybe he should have just fallen back on his “this is hard work” answer he kept using Tuesday. Bush’s third term?
RW-(the original)
March 26th, 2009
12:43 pm
Db,
Ever heard Jimmah Carter say “nuclear?”
danjonglee
March 26th, 2009
12:43 pm
Job loss….chaos at the boarder…depression…agitation…Europe mad at US…carbon tax…
RW-(the original)
March 26th, 2009
12:44 pm
Sorry about the “b” there, DB. No slight was intended.
Taxpayer
March 26th, 2009
12:48 pm
Never, ever misunderestimate Bush’s ability to thwart linguists — world wide even.
DebbieDoRight
March 26th, 2009
12:50 pm
Nor can it be said that these Democrats are merely scapegoating the private sector to deflect blame for the politicians’ share of the mortgage debacle (If the italics option doesn’t work, please forgive me!! I’m trying this out for the first time and I’m NOT computer programmer savvy!!)
OK here’s my comment: I find comments like this incredibly scary!! I’m amazed that there are people out there who think that this economic mess that we’re in is the fault of ONLY defaulted mortgages!! I mean, look around the Atlanta Suburb area and this should put a dent in that argument!! I was in Cobb County the other day, (off of Atlanta Road), and saw all these newly built EMPTY homes sitting unsold!! I also saw a lot of empty lots that used to have middle class houses on them, that are propped for new homes to be built, that no ground has been broken beyond the signs being put up and the teleservices outlets being stumped!!
Come on!! It wasn’t just defaulted MORTGAGES!! We also have to filter in the fact that dozens of real estate speculators who borrowed millions from the banks to buy existing land from homeowners, then had to pay builders to build the homes, which are now sitting empty, have their share in this crisis too. Also, let’s not forget about “Stockbrokers gone wild!” who found a loophole in the system and played the American public better than Mozart played his last concerto.
Corporal
March 26th, 2009
12:50 pm
Mr. Godzilla:
I call him Mr. “T T T” .
Mrs. Godzilla
March 26th, 2009
12:51 pm
Dave R
well, well, well
All these years the entire government and all our elected officials have been acting unconstitutionally and been getting away with it.
Wonder how all those Presidents, and Senators and Representatives and
Secretarys and all them other government types missed that since 1776? Both Democrats and Republicans! Ane Whigs and Bull Mooses and Mugwumps….too! Holy Cow!
I’m outraged! I’m going right out and getting my pitchfork sharpened!
Would a tiki torch do for when we storm the capital and the White House
to take all those criminals into custody? We’ll have to dig up the dead ones….
DebbieDoRight
March 26th, 2009
12:51 pm
Hmmm it came out in ALL italics!! Italics!!! BOLD Oh well….. at least I got the smiley part right!!!
Corporal
March 26th, 2009
12:51 pm
To Rush Limbaugh:
Then do us both a favor and skip my posts.
Corporal
March 26th, 2009
12:54 pm
Mr. G:
Very simple:
Matthew 24:24
“For there shall arise false Christs (Hebrew Messiah), and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.”
DB, Gwinnettian
March 26th, 2009
12:54 pm
RW @ 12.43, matter of fact, I have heard some old bits where Carter clearly struggled with the word; but it came out sounding kind of like “Nook-EE-yer”.
For what it’s worth, Robert F. Kennedy pronounces it “Nucyouler” so it knows no political ideology, that’s for sure.
As for the lowercase thing, funny, I’d thought about switching to “dB” (as in decibels, and a pretty decent indie-rock band from years past) — anyway, no worries.
Copyleft
March 26th, 2009
1:00 pm
“Constitutional” You keep using that word. I do not think it means, what you think it means.
DaveR, the Congress DOES have the power to regulate business. It’s in the Constitution. The fact that you don’t see it suggests you need glasses… maybe some education would help?
DB, Gwinnettian
March 26th, 2009
1:01 pm
DDR @ 12.50, what’s really frightening is knowing in my heart that the housing bubble probably hasn’t finished deflating. That the ATL metro isn’t positioned to take quite as bad a fall as some other areas is fairly cold comfort.
Mrs. Godzilla
March 26th, 2009
1:03 pm
Corporal
Have I missed a post by my husband? Mind you it’s the middle of the night where he is……
Here something that’s also very simple but true:
Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. ….B. Obama
AmVet
March 26th, 2009
1:04 pm
Dialects and mispronunciations are one thing.
But consistently mangling one’s native tongue with inexcusable errors in syntax and grammar is altogether a different problem for the leader of the free world.
The man was, and is, as Ms. Maines, noted, an embarrassment.
DB, Gwinnettian
March 26th, 2009
1:07 pm
Whiner’s “piano wire” concerns in proper perspective.
I started making left-wing political cartoons one month after 9/11. At that time, most people weren’t exactly pumped to hear someone making fun of the whole idea of a “War on Terror” and calling President Bush an idiot. I got my share of nasty emails.
I also received death threats. (I soon learned this comes with the territory.) I set up a special folder in my email program where I dumped all the creepy junk: the missives from the guy who fantasized about sodomizing me with a grenade launcher; the guy who said he was gonna personally beat the sh-t out of me; the guy who asked inappropriate questions about my wife, etc. etc.
Anyway, my point is: Did I go around crying about all these threats? NO. Did I punk out like a little baby and stop making cartoons? NO. Did I go whine to Congress about “Boo-hoo, I can’t tell you who got the bonuses, they might receive a nasty email”? NO. I took a deep breath and rolled up my sleeves and — after a strange phone call in the middle of the night — got my number de-listed and went about my business like a champ.
And mind you, when I received these threats, I wasn’t working in some high-security office building and living in a fancy gated community with no sidewalks where you need a passcode just to go to the golf course. Hardly. I was a schlub in a bathrobe living in a third-story Brooklyn walk-up. The only way I could’ve been a softer target would be if I was made out of Yoplait.
[...]
Here’s my proposal to all AIG bigwigs: You give me the money you made at AIG and I’ll shoulder the impossible burden you’re living with. Any takers?
Billy
March 26th, 2009
1:07 pm
Dave, the FairTax will NEVER fly. It simply won’t work. The numbers don’t add up. And even if they did, it’s dependent on people actually spending money on things. I believe the FairTax is a surefire way to ensure that most people buy little more than the bare essentials.
Plus, I believe that tax rates should be progressive. I shouldn’t pay the same tax rate as someone who makes $10 million.
Bud Wiser
March 26th, 2009
1:08 pm
Well G, it has been proven that one cannot get thoughtful answers from:
a. a stone
b. a person with a stone for a brain
c. you
Choosing the insult route seems to be the only level of discourse you can maintain, so I choose not to respond to you about anything in the future.
You are incapable of responding to anything, therefore you are now irrelevant.
Moving ahead, AP today drew from Obama’s internet photo op: “ The president said even as the economy bounces back, Detroit can’t focus on building more SUVs and counting on low gas prices.
Apparently drilling for our own oil as a stopgap measure against continually funding unfriendlies and outright terrorists is part of O’s plan, if he has one. It would alleviate our dependence on the goons in the Middle East until future energy sources could be developed. It could help the poor and near-poor to continue to fuel their vehicles as they either drive to work, or look for work, or go the stores and spend money to help the economy, but that’s not important to O. Making people dependent on the government is important to him and the Democrats.
Fine.
I recommend buying stock in Schwinn.
williebkind
March 26th, 2009
1:09 pm
Mrs. G and G
If you want more government, please require your lawmakers to read the bills that come in front of them before they vote. Not a bad idea since that is their job.
AmVet
March 26th, 2009
1:10 pm
Copyleft at 1:00.
Funny. One of many great lines from that wonderful movie.
But be careful! Lest our own John Marshall expose you as some sort of unworthy legal layman!
Corporal
March 26th, 2009
1:13 pm
Mrs. Godzilla:
1) You lost me on the husband thing. Sorry.
2) Yes change …….. and change can be good or bad. In this case it is bad.
3) HEADLINE: Obama’s Q&A has a twist
“The president holds a new kind of news conference — with questions from regular folks.”
Yes, questions from regular folks picked by the staff = milktoast question. Can you imagine if Mr. “T T T” had a nationally televised press conference (without Mr. Teleprompter) and HAD to answer 10 questions each from liberal and conservative “regualr folks” ??
To Dave R:
Good posts …. but remember most liberal (and some conservative) Supreme Court justices make the Constitution say what they “want” it to say. When they do, either side is WRONG !
“The courts exist to exercise not the will of men, but the judgement of law”. James Madison
“The Constitution does not constitute us as ‘Platonic Guardians’ nor does it vest in this Court the authority to strike down laws because they do not meet our standards of desirable social policy, wisdom or common sense … We trespass on the assigned function of the political branches under our structure of limited and separated powers when we assume a policymaking role.” Chief Justice Warren Burger
“The Court, in addition to the proper use of its judicial functions, has improperly set itself up as a third house of Congress – a super legislature – reading into the Constitution words and implications which are not there, and which were never intended to be there. We have therefore reached the point as a nation where we must take action to save the Consitution from the Court and the Court from itself. We must find a way to take an appeal from the Supreme Court to the Constitution itself. We want a Supreme Court which will do justice under the Constitution and not over it. In our courts we want a government of laws and not of men.” President Franklin D. Roosevelt
“If in the opinion of the People, the distribution or modification of the Constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.” George Washington
DebbieDoRight
March 26th, 2009
1:13 pm
Everyone talks about “the people that got us into this mess” but they are always talking about the wrong people. The real mess makers are those who couldn’t or wouldn’t pay their mortgages and those that enabled them by forcing lenders to lower their standards. Period.
Ok, so much misinformation and nonsense. How can anyone STILL blame only the mortgages for this mess and NOT the speculators and stock brokers?
I think the greater point of Jay’s article, the idea that capitalism needs government to save it, is true. Unfettered capitalism will lead to even greater income and wealth inequality. The stratification of society will continue unabated and people will lose any hope of upward social mobility. And when the people are worked to the bone in the hopes that they maybe, just maybe, can afford a loaf of bread for dinner for their family of four, **that’s** when those pesky communist revolutions take place. Cause you know what? People couldn’t care less about how much our GDP increases when their income is stagnant, prices for everything are increasing, and there are fewer government services to help them.
Great comment!!
Corporal
March 26th, 2009
1:15 pm
To My Conservative Posters:
Let’s try to stick to debate. Name calling or personal attacks is just getting in the gutter with those who don’t want to debate.
@@
March 26th, 2009
1:22 pm
Again with the government “regulations”, jay? Eat more fiber!
I find it absolutely inconceivable that liberals would be supporting government “regulation” when it was their regulating mortgage lending that got us where we are today. Now I know that liberals will say Clinton’s de-regulation was to prevent red-lining but good grief….shouldn’t he have at least, expected homebuyers to meet the same standards applied to all? And yes, I know Bush continued the practice but he, at least, realized that something had gone astray (Fannie & Freddie) and things weren’t looking so good. From red-lining to red flags and nobody listened.
By the bye…..did Barney Frank make advances to Justice Scalia, who, in turn, rejected them? What was with Barney’s “Scalia is a homophobe comment”? Trivial, I know…..but Barney was so ANGRY when he said it.
DebbieDoRight
March 26th, 2009
1:24 pm
DDR @ 12.50, what’s really frightening is knowing in my heart that the housing bubble probably hasn’t finished deflating. That the ATL metro isn’t positioned to take quite as bad a fall as some other areas is fairly cold comfort.
Amen to that!!!
Pokey
March 26th, 2009
1:25 pm
Wow! Thanks! I feel reassured now!
DebbieDoRight
March 26th, 2009
1:26 pm
Ok I’ll stop with trying to do the stupid italics!!
Mrs. Godzilla
March 26th, 2009
1:26 pm
Sorry Coporal….
An earlier post said Mr not Mrs. I just checked to be sure, I’m Mrs.
Mr is in SE Asia…..
Bosch
March 26th, 2009
1:38 pm
RW from earlier,
And I’m sure we WILL see those definitions – at least I hope so. No more, giving money unconditionally, I want conditions and definitions too – I have faith that they’ll do that.
And who is asking for this help? It’s the financial people – but they just want the money and not ask any questions. Um, no. I don’t think so.
I just got back in from lunch, but I’m moving on to the other thread –
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
HI ya Midori!
I was having cat guilt last night. I keep thinking I should have taken him to the vet earlier, but anyway.
Last night I posted something about irony and death, because one of my elder relatives who lives with us was yelling, yelling, yelling about eating cake and I couldn’t help but think about the “let them eat cake” thing. She’s got Alzheimer’s and is teetering on death, but yet, my cat died, and now she’s yelling about cake – it was kind of a surreal moment.
It was like I was in a bad Fellini film.
DB, Gwinnettian
March 26th, 2009
1:39 pm
Debbie, you close the slanties the same way you started them, only with a forward slash before the “i”.
if that’s not making sense, then go here…
Corporal
March 26th, 2009
1:59 pm
Mrs. Godzilla:
10-4. Gee, I hope he didn’t go back to kill some Cong????
RW-(the original)
March 26th, 2009
2:15 pm
DB,
If you look at the source code DDR is closing the italics properly, she just immediately starts them again.
BPJ
March 26th, 2009
3:46 pm
Here’s a link to an excellent article on the vast differences between liberalism and socialism….differences not merely of degree, but of kind. http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e050da85-7d49-46da-80fc-d9168c0faec7
Pokey
March 26th, 2009
5:52 pm
The The New Reublic explaining the differences between liberalism and socialism?? Total lack of self-awareness! That is rich!!
Pokey
March 26th, 2009
5:53 pm
JB is a shill for BHO!
bubba
March 26th, 2009
6:28 pm
Anytime I hear someone call democrats “socialist” I know they don’t have a clue and it is pointless to debate them.
Dave R
March 26th, 2009
10:15 pm
Coylefty, show me the EXACT wording in the U.S. Constitution that allows government to regulate BUSINESSES.
The silence will be deafening.
Copyleft
March 27th, 2009
7:46 am
Mrs. G already showed you, Dave R: “Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.”
You may not like it, but that DOES give government the power to regulate business. (Commerce IS business; they’re the exact same thing, blockhead.)
Now, you may not agree with that interpretation: Tough! The courts do, and they know a HECKUVA lot more about the Constitution than you ever will.