Bipartisanship is not a magic word
Jeb Bush caused a stir this week when he said partisanship in Washington had gone too far. If that doesn’t sound like news, what really drew attention was the former Florida governor’s apparent belief his father and Ronald Reagan would find it difficult to become the GOP nominee these days.
I say “apparent” because Bush’s statement, in an interview with Bloomberg, included one enormous qualifier. Reagan and George H.W. Bush would have trouble with today’s GOP, the younger Bush said, “if you define the Republican Party — and I don’t — as having an orthodoxy that doesn’t allow for disagreement.”
Well, that settles that!
The notion that Reagan, at least, would be spurned by the contemporary GOP is odd. In 1980 he was considered far more conservative than the elder Bush, who succeeded him as the Republican standard bearer. Nothing about nominees Bob Dole (1996) or John McCain (2008) places them to Reagan’s right. Even George W. Bush was less aggressive than Reagan on taxes, and his spending, given that unlike Reagan he had a fully GOP-led Congress to work with, is less forgivable.
Yet, Bush didn’t mean Reagan was too conservative for the 2012 GOP.
Until cloning technology allows us to re-create Reagan in the flesh, however, this is just a parlor game. The more pertinent matter is whether Bush was correct to point the finger at partisanship.
Or, even better, whether bipartisanship is the cure for what ails us.
Bipartisanship gave us the No Child Left Behind Act, which both sides now criticize (for different reasons). There was significant support from each party in Congress to authorize the Iraq war, which the left eventually disowned and of which the right grew weary.
The same goes for McCain-Feingold — formally, the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act — which sought to get “soft money” out of elections but instead led to super PACs.
That’s just in the past 11 years. Back in the Reagan era, when the president struck those bipartisan deals of which Jeb Bush approves so much, “working together” brought us tax cuts but only unfulfilled pledges of reduced spending, and amnesty for illegal immigrants without the promised border enforcement to prevent future illicit border crossings.
I could go on, just as Bush or others could point to good laws that passed with bipartisan support: the Civil Rights Act of 1964, for instance.
The point is that being “bipartisan” doesn’t necessarily make a bill good.
Obamacare wouldn’t have magically become good law if a few Republicans had voted for it. The handful of GOP votes for the Dodd-Frank financial reform didn’t prevent it from enshrining “too big to fail” into the law or squeezing credit markets.
A common argument today is that the problem has more to do with obstructionism, that too often one side stands in the other’s way to forestall legislative progress.
The left trotted out this argument back in the health-care debates of 2009-10. In fact, very liberal Democrats spent several months trying to bully moderate Democrats into supporting very liberal policies before Scott Brown’s election to the Senate gave Republicans enough votes even to be obstructionist.
Lately, the GOP-led House and majority-Democrat Senate have disagreed about long- and even short-term plans for taxes and spending. The bipartisan solution being urged is for Republicans to accept higher taxes in order to get lower spending. That happens to be the exact kind of arrangement, economists now warn, that would lead our economy off a “fiscal cliff” in 2013. But at least we’d be holding hands as we took the plunge!
When “bipartisan” means taking the best ideas from both sides, it’s not such a bad thing. If this happens less frequently these days, I chalk it up to two things.
First, while there’s an apparent cry for compromise, there’s very little consensus about what’s an acceptable compromise. We want other people’s taxes raised, or spending that affects other people cut. Politicians don’t advocate splitting things down the middle, because there’s no sign of a constituency for shared pain.
Second, even when combining ideas is practical, the results tend to be smaller than the kind of Grand Compromise we think we need for our toughest problems. But in some cases — health care comes to mind — it’d be better to take several nibbles at problems than to go whole-hog.
Making both sides mad, or happy, too often is just an excuse for not making sure to make good law.
– By Kyle Wingfield
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
268 comments Add your comment
Farsider
June 14th, 2012
5:37 am
A lot of the talk that Reagan couldn’t cut it today in the Birther Party primary is simply a counter-factual analysis of what he actually did. He cut taxes. A lot. But then he pivoted and raised them the next year. One of the biggest peacetime tax increases ever. He negotiated with terrorists when he said he wouldn’t. But Presidential candidates don’t run on their future record, so in that sense it isn’t fair to Reagan to apply what he DID to his so-called political leanings when he actually ran for the office.
Joel Edge
June 14th, 2012
5:52 am
We’ve “compromised” ourselves into this hole. This bipartisan plea is getting old. Fool me once, etc.
Good article.
Common Sense isn't very Common
June 14th, 2012
7:06 am
So what’s the answer Kyle?
More partisan politics or less?
On what bills?
Why can’t the bills stand on their own merits and be voted on(and debated) one at a time instead of having all the riders in them?
I thought that was the plan in Congress since the 2010 elections, but the stuff I see appended to all the important bills has absolutely nothing to do with the original and for the most part is a partisan rider.
jconservative
June 14th, 2012
7:14 am
I would agree that Reagan was one of the more effective “compromisers” of my generation. I would also agree that nothing is magic about the word compromise. It all depends on who’s ox is being gored.
Here is a little chart on who was in charge during the Reagan presidency.
Year……Congress..President…Senate…….House
1987……..100th………R…………..D – 55…….D – 258
1985……….99th………R…………..R – 53…….D – 253
1983……….98th………R…………..R – 54…….D – 269
1981……….97th………R…………..R – 53…….D – 242
For 6 of his 8 years Reagan had the Senate covering his back. Yet that was the period of some of his more far reaching compromises. That was the period he became a “moderate” Republican.
When a president triples the national debt he losses the right to be called conservative.
I disagree with Jeb Bush. Reagan would be the presidential nominee in 2012. He was just as moderate as the current nominee, Mitt Romney.
If one wants a conservative Republican president one must look back to Herbert Hoover. All since have been “moderate” at best.
@@
June 14th, 2012
7:15 am
The bipartisan solution being urged is for Republicans to accept higher taxes in order to get lower spending.
Didn’t work for Reagan. He negotiated with dems in good faith and they took us to the cleaners.
Politicians don’t advocate splitting things down the middle, because there’s no sign of a constituency for shared pain.
Shared pain for everyone is TRULY fair. Dems would argue otherwise.
…it’d be better to take several nibbles at problems than to go whole-hog.
Which is what Republicans were advocating during the debate process. “Slow down” is what I heard. Dems refused to listen. Impatient children, they…
Illegal Alien
June 14th, 2012
7:23 am
Nazis or Communists didn’t believe in bipartisanship either.
It works both ways. This should be a team effort.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
June 14th, 2012
7:25 am
Since obozo extended the Bush tax cuts, I guess that means the tax and spend dummycrats should immediately disavow him, right?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
7:27 am
Which Democrat is going to compromise when more than half the country is getting a government check? Welcome to Handout Nation, and Democrats are the party of handouts.
Ayn Rant
June 14th, 2012
7:30 am
The Republican Party is a bunch of greedy, disagreeable old white men, backed by a bunch of foolish, senile billionaires. Could that possibly be what Jeb Bush alluded to?
Compromise with that lot is the worst thing a president, senator, or congressman could do for his country. The Republican “program” is: keep waging the Cold War by squandering trillions on sophisticated, usually unreliable, weapons for which there is no enemy; refrain from burdening the ultra-rich with taxes that support the institutions and infrastructure from which they derived their wealth; deregulate the predatory, monopolistic business practices that restrict free enterprise; and convince gullible voters that the ultra-rich, if showered with even more wealth, will invest their capital in job-creating American enterprise even if there is no consumer demand for new products and services.
There is no middle ground between sense and nonsense. Forget compromise and bipartisanship! The future of our country depends on the destruction and reinstitution of the Republican Party.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
7:36 am
Ayn Rant: The Republican Party is a bunch of greedy, disagreeable old white men, backed by a bunch of foolish, senile billionaires…who WORKED for a living and built this country.
——————-
Fixed.
Good luck with Handout Nation.
@@
June 14th, 2012
7:38 am
Why can’t the bills stand on their own merits and be voted on(and debated) one at a time instead of having all the riders in them?
Because it’s not the intent of government to let voters in on their dirty little secrets.
Common Sense isn't very Common
June 14th, 2012
7:42 am
@@
I agree with you on that, too much BS in DC is masking the lack of progress
Bob Loblaw
June 14th, 2012
7:43 am
I don’t know, folks. When a state like Indiana tosses a leader respected around the world like Richard Lugar aside for a “real conservative,” then I begin to think Jeb is right.
@@
June 14th, 2012
7:45 am
Bob Loblaw:
And who was it that tossed the blue dogs from the dem party?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
7:56 am
Bills that never made it to a vote on the Senate floor:
The Lugar Balanced Budget Act
The Lugar Tax Cut Act
The Lugar Spending Sanity Act
The Lugar Smaller Government Act
@@
June 14th, 2012
8:01 am
My take on Lugar is his constituency thought he spent too much time of international affairs and not enough on local affairs. With all the praise lavished on him, he forgot about the folks who put him in office.
In short…he got the big head.
Ol; Timer
June 14th, 2012
8:04 am
Bipartisan is not a magic word, but neither is intransigent, bullheaded, stubbord, uncompromising, obstructionist, meanspirited, etc.
the red herring
June 14th, 2012
8:04 am
if there is to be compromise on spending cuts and tax increases i say the spending cuts should come 1 year before the tax increase and that the tax increase would rely upon having $3 worth of cuts for every $1 worth of tax increase. the tax increase should not be implemented if the cuts haven’t been made and in force for a year. if you do it the other way around the cuts will never happen—-been there done that.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
8:07 am
Ol’ Timer, don’t talk about Harry Reid that way!
carlosgvv
June 14th, 2012
8:08 am
The Republican electorate has been taken over by fundamentalist “born again” Christians. This kind of mindset is rigid and narrow and will not tolerate any deviation from the accepted dogma. Republican politicians know this and act accordingly. They know if bipartisanship becomes accepted in their Party, the hardcore faithful will pull up and go elsewhere.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
8:09 am
the red herring wins “Post of the Day”.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
8:10 am
carlosgvv, your mental health is rapidly deteriorating.
MrLiberty
June 14th, 2012
8:10 am
Most accurate bumper sticker ever:
Bipartisan = Double Penetration
Freedom and liberty suffer the most when the two criminal parties come together on legislation.
Dumb and Dumber
June 14th, 2012
8:11 am
Why compromise with a socialist, jihadist, America-hating, liberal-Nazi-fascist Kenyan?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
8:13 am
We should have compromised with Hitler. Only 3 million Jews would have been murdered.
JohnnyReb
June 14th, 2012
8:16 am
Compromise, hell !
One should compromise only when the agreement will work. When on the very rare occasion the Left puts forth something good, compromise is not necessary and most from the Right vote for it.
The Left rolls out the “compromise” cry when their plan sucks and the Right won’t go for it.
If we take the Senate and White House, we should set about not writing new laws but fixing the mess that “compromise” has produced.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 14th, 2012
8:18 am
“When a state like Indiana tosses a leader respected around the world like Richard Lugar aside for a “real conservative,” then I begin to think Jeb is right.”
Strange, Bob Loblaw, but I’m not even a Republican, yet I had little respect for Richard Lugar.
When he couldn’t name his own Indiana address where he allegedly resided, I knew it was time for him to go.
jconservative
June 14th, 2012
8:19 am
“Which Democrat is going to compromise when more than half the country is getting a government check? Welcome to Handout Nation, and Democrats are the party of handouts.”
I agree that the USA is a socialist nation. I disagree that the Democrats alone are to blame. Half the socialist legislation now on the books was signed into law by Republican presidents.
As I noted earlier the last conservative Republican president was Herbert Hoover and I was not even born when he left office. And the next Republican president will not be a conservative.
Eighty years ago the American people demanded a socialist nation. In the last 80 years they have built a socialist nation. That is what we have today. I see nothing on the horizon that indicates that will change.
Thomas Heyward Jr.
June 14th, 2012
8:21 am
Balderdash……………………….
.
There is plenty of Bipartenship on the truly evil things.
.
Kill Lists, Patriot Act, NDAA, torture, etc………..
.
Just because state-sponsored mouthpieces are ordered to ignore them, doesn’t mean that those that value liberty and the rule of law………….do.
JohnnyReb
June 14th, 2012
8:24 am
Jeb Bush is a Republican Party elite. The group who decided it was Romney’s turn. They are more interested in maintaining “control” than they are responding to the base.
The base does not want compromise with the Left. The only thing preventing the Tea Party from becoming a third party is, at this time doing so would put Obama in for four more years.
If Romney does not clean up the mess, we may just see the Tea Party emerge more strong than the RNC.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
8:24 am
jconservative: Eighty years ago the American people demanded a socialist nation.
————————
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
8:25 am
Democrats decided they wanted to be the dictators.
JDW
June 14th, 2012
8:28 am
@kyle… “working together” brought us tax cuts but only unfulfilled pledges of reduced spending”
Let’s put this bit of HORSE HOOEY to rest. Reagan submitted 8 budget requests and over 8 years spending equals those requests. The man got EXACTLY shay he asked for. Any “unfulfilled pledges” you might imagine rest on his shoulders.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CDOC-107sdoc18/pdf/GPO-CDOC-107sdoc18-1-12-4.pdf
carlosgvv
June 14th, 2012
8:29 am
Barry – 8:10
You think it will be good if Romney wins but, for you, it will be a disaster. You see, if he wins it does not mean your personal problems will go away. Instead, you’ll realize Obama is not responsible for all your troubles and be forced to man up and look in the mirror. In other words, you won’t have Obama to kick around anymore and will be forced to take some personal responsibility for your troubles. So,don’t lecture me about MY mental health.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 14th, 2012
8:32 am
Let’s put a bit of HORSE HOOEY to rest, shall we?
JDW is NOT to be confused with a Presidential historian.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 14th, 2012
8:34 am
“You see, if he wins it does not mean your personal problems will go away.”
No, just the entire United States of America’s problems will go away.
I can live with that, carlos.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
8:34 am
I don’t have any of your imagined “personal problems”, carlosgvv, so that’s not what I’m worried about.
I’m worried about an America-hating Marxist bent on destroying the free market capitalist economy.
jd
June 14th, 2012
8:41 am
The founding fathers warned us about the destructive nature of factions and parties — unwillingness to compromise, period, is a death sentence to a dynamic republic.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
8:42 am
Speaking of compromise, how many Republicans were consulted, before Oblamer decided to purchase those helicopters from Russia.
America’s everywhere are trying to buy “made in America” merchandise and Oblamer is buying Russian helicopters. With 8.2% unemployment I wonder what the workers at Bell and Secorski are thinking.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
8:47 am
Democrat idea of “bi-partisan” is to try and pick off Snowe, Collins, or Browne to vote with them for some big spending deficit enhancing entitlement bill.
Republicans idea of “bi-partisan” is W letting Teddy Kennedy write the No Child Left Behind Bill.
Both versions stink.
Jefferson
June 14th, 2012
8:47 am
You work together or you fail. Why keep sending back politicians that fail ? The point should be results or someone else, no matter who is to blame. If you must vote party lines, stop the BS of nobody running against the incumbent just because of party.
Its pass or fail, A or F.
Jimmy62
June 14th, 2012
8:47 am
Bipartisanship is a two way street, yet to the left it means the right must do what the left wants, and the left can continue to ignore the right (or call them stupid hicks).
Kyle Wingfield
June 14th, 2012
8:48 am
carlosgvv @ 8:08: “The Republican electorate has been taken over by fundamentalist ‘born again’ Christians.”
Right. Which is why they nominated Mitt Romney over Rick Santorum (and John McCain over Mike Huckabee in 2008).
Jefferson
June 14th, 2012
8:51 am
Kyle Santorum is crazy and you know he would lose, so ya’ll snuggle up to Romney who is not even an good alturnative. Same with Huck, he’s a sell out.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
8:52 am
I thought Leonard Pitts’ column today was just as ignorant, biased, and hateful as usual, but I see that it applies quite well to carlosgvv’s ranting today.
Illegal Alien
June 14th, 2012
8:56 am
I suspect the Defense Department decided to buy helicopters from Russia, primarily because that’s what was already in service and they’re easier to maintain.
Unless you’re using all “Made in America” goods (Cars, electronics, etc.) and you don’t shop in stores like Wal-Mart, you aren’t part of the solution.
the cat
June 14th, 2012
8:56 am
Enter your comments here
ragnar danneskjold
June 14th, 2012
8:58 am
Here, here, well-done. Until the leftists abandon leftism, there is no rational reason to compromise with them. Beat them with our good ideas, which are “anything other than leftism.”
the cat
June 14th, 2012
8:58 am
next door, Bookman has over 600 hits on his page and Kyle you have 40 on your page. The reason is you will not do any moderation on this board.
litlle barry is happy about all the jews killed in the holocaust? Seriously Kyle-you have no trouble with this?
Lil’ Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward–Again)
June 14th, 2012
8:13 am
We should have compromised with Hitler. Only 3 million Jews would have been murdered.
Link
You should be ashamed.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
9:01 am
the cat
June 14th, 2012
8:58 am
———————
Get a grip, hater.
You should be ashamed of your lack of reading comprehension.
Jeffrey
June 14th, 2012
9:06 am
The affordable care act was bipartisan, because it was originally conceived by conservatives I even heard of governor who called himself a republican passed a similar law in some northeast state. But I agree the affordable care act would have been better if it was a single payer totally partisan bill. That would’ve at least explained why no republican voted for it.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
9:08 am
Obozo couldn’t get single payer past his own Democrats. That’s the only reason it didn’t happen.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
9:11 am
Jobless claims on the increase
CNNMoney June 14, 2012: 8:42 AM ET
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — The number of Americans filing for first-time unemployment benefits climbed last week, indicating continued trouble for the labor market.
The Labor Department reported Thursday that 386,000 people filed new jobless claims in the week ended June 9, up 6,000 from the previous week’s revised figure.
————————-
Obozo: Do-nothing failure.
Road Scholar
June 14th, 2012
9:16 am
“The notion that Reagan, at least, would be spurned by the contemporary GOP is odd.”
Are you kidding me? For a party who cannot remember history (Reagan grew the Fed Government and taxes), and who shun science, diversity, math, etc. and which is loaded with very angry members (if they only understood what they are angry about), you are surprised????
Illegal Alien
June 14th, 2012
9:18 am
The 3 million Jews that WEREN’T murdered probably would not have complained too much.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
9:20 am
Obozo’s been in office three and a half years. He’s spent more than anyone since FDR. Last week, 390,000 folks had to apply for unemployment benefits, just like the week before that, and the week before that…
What are Obozo’s ideas for fixing this?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
June 14th, 2012
9:22 am
That’s right, Illegal Alien…and many thousands of American military wouldn’t have been killed, either.
Why wouldn’t FDR compromise?
@@
June 14th, 2012
9:23 am
600 comments pertaining to what?
The reason is you will not do any moderation on this board.
Does another AJC Blog columnist need to moderate a bunch of folks who talk about the books they’re reading or what they had for dinner last night?
By the by, cat….do you call your evening meal dinner or supper? Your midday meal…dinner or lunch?
schnirt
Kyle Wingfield
June 14th, 2012
9:28 am
JDW @ 8:28: That’s a cute document you’ve got there, but a) federal budgets are done in fiscal years, not calendar years, and b) the appropriations listed for each year in your document are a couple of hundred billion dollars less than actual federal outlays during that time. So, even if we ignore the fiscal/calendar issue, either your document is incomplete, or it demonstrates that actual spending was in fact far higher than what presidents requested.
How much higher? If we assume your document is right about presidential requests, then the requests in the calendar years Reagan was in office — 1981-88 — totaled $4,587.4 billion. Actual outlays in FY81-88 totaled $7,089.2 billion. That’s a difference of $2,501.8 billion or 55%. The gap is even wider if we assume Reagan had more to do with the FY82-89 budgets.
So, what were you saying about HORSE HOOEY?
GT
June 14th, 2012
9:29 am
When you began a argument with a list of how the Democrats have failed in bipartisan solution you undermined the sincerity of your statements. And when you say economists now warn, you obviously have found an economist in a cave in north Georgia trading economic information for food or a promise not to blow anything up.
carlosgvv @ 8:08: “The Republican electorate has been taken over by fundamentalist ‘born again’ Christians.” is a correct statement.
Do you think your party really backs Romney or is he a compromise? You ran so many clergy with Rolex watches in this primary, you blocked out the real personality, to the relief of many Washington Republicans, of your party. Your way or the highway would have ran a Rick Santorum as your candidate but who knows maybe that is why the saloon and casino owner from Las Vegas was writing those big checks to keep Newt in the race to water down Santorun.
Reagan was a leader. His own son says he wouldn’t be a Republican today. You have no leaders in your party, more less a Reagan. Jeb Bush may have shown the first light of day you nomads, Dixiecrats jumping the fence to the Republican Party, have seen in years. You make statements that repeated enough times turn to your truth. Most Americans had no idea how bad the health care in this country was until it arrived in the Supreme Court. Now your side has to say we will fix it but not this way. Before you said nothing, because you have no leadership, just a Bible misread for an explanation of why you hate, similar to how you misread the constitution to favor your chosen few.
saywhat?
June 14th, 2012
9:31 am
Don’t worry cat, lil boring , @@ and lil tibby are still just all butthurt because Jay sent them to the kids table. They represent the mindset of the typical republican congressman, and like Ron White likes to say, “You can’t fix stupid”, and apparently, you can’t compromise with it either.
Illegal Alien
June 14th, 2012
9:35 am
Unconditional surrender is what the Allies demanded. The German military wanted to remove Hitler, but unconditional terms weakened their hand and not only did those countless numbers die, we enabled Stalin to occupy and dominate eastern Europe for decades.
Kyle Wingfield
June 14th, 2012
9:36 am
the cat @ 8:58: You complain I do too little moderation, other people complain I put too many people in moderation. All I know is that I try to address the most problematic people. (I also know, and have said many times, that “comments” do not equal “hits,” or readers. In my experience on my blog, the two have no correlation whatsoever.)
I don’t think Lil’ Barry is “happy about all the Jews killed in the Holocaust.” I do think the point would have been better made that Britain and France tried to compromise with Hitler, and it bought him enough time to kill 6 million Jews.
A Realist
June 14th, 2012
9:36 am
Compromise doesn’t guarantee better results, but dogmatic, autocratic approaches to solving complex problems significantly increase the chances of failure.
Successful businesses (especially in the creative fields) have for years worked with teams that consisted of folks with differing opinions. Those folks are put into an environment that encourages development of unique approaches to complex and difficult problems. All sides have to give and take. Modern technology has thrived on that model. Most of the gadgets that the public uses were created using such an approach.
The ‘my way or the highway’ approach being used by both political parties (and apparently more so by the GOP) almost guarantees failure. After all, both sides have valid opinions and approaches to contribute, and must listen and understand the other side. They must not listen with their mouths as they do now.
But that’s reality…. Congress is living in some sort of dream world of the past where the king ruled, and all the serfs had do bow down in homage. And if you keep the serfs stupid, and loudly feed them falsehoods again and again, they will soon begin to believe the falsehoods are true (that’s called brainwashing.)
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
9:36 am
I do wish our dead presidents were left to rest in peace. They did their best and that’s that. Jeb Bush ought to mind his own business. He did not want to run. Then he should stop preaching.
Bipartisanship is just another word for getting something done. If our current congressmen don’t have common sense and good character (which is what it takes), they should come home and stay. Likewise for the president.
Both sides should be asking “What’s best for the country?” Move the capitol to the middle of the country for some fresh air. Washington DC is without oxygen these days. Nothing good happens with dead wood. Something HAS to change!! I, like many, are sick of the shenanigans in Washington.
the cat
June 14th, 2012
9:43 am
Kyle-your blog your rules. I believe you would have more intelligent blogging with a wider range of people and comments if the usual suspects were moderated.
Kyle Wingfield
June 14th, 2012
9:46 am
Further to my 9:28, Firefox keeps crashing on me when I try to do more than one year, but I have managed to look at FY83:
1. Reagan’s budget request for fiscal 1983 was $757.6B (your doc had $543B for calendar 1983)
2. Actual outlays for FY83 were $808.4B (your doc had $551.6B for C83)
So, the numbers in your doc are nowhere near the real picture — in terms of totals or the difference between presidential requests and actual spending.
Kyle Wingfield
June 14th, 2012
9:48 am
Btw, I started with FY83 because the request for FY82 was submitted by Carter.
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
9:48 am
Say what..@9:31.
What is your problem? We are here for political discussion. REMEMBER?
If you want to discuss Bookman, he has a BLOG! Go where you can find happiness! Best wishes and tootle loo…..
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 14th, 2012
9:51 am
“Do you think your party really backs Romney or is he a compromise?”
So now your saying that the party that doesn’t compromise just compromised on it’s own nominee? Which is it, GT?
“Reagan was a leader. His own son says he wouldn’t be a Republican today.”
That would be his flaming leftist son who basically disowned him while his father was alive, GT? Why don’t you ask his conservative son if Reagan would be welcome in today’s Republican party? You know, the one who actually knew the man AND knows the party?
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 14th, 2012
9:52 am
the cat, the reason Bookman has so many posts is because his liberal readers don’t have jobs and sit around all day taking in government handouts.
Kyle’s bloggers actually work for a living.
Don't Tread
June 14th, 2012
9:55 am
As far as the left is concerned, conservatives should “compromise” on their principles because liberals are “correct” in their thinking. I believe the correct word there is “appeasement”, and that never works (because then they want more).
As the old saying goes, give them an inch and they’ll take you a mile. A perfect example is the aforementioned “you agree to raise taxes and we’ll agree to cut spending” promises made by the Democrats.
No more appeasement.
Kyle Wingfield
June 14th, 2012
9:58 am
Look, the discussion about bloggers here vs. bloggers on Jay’s site has really gotten old. He and I do things a little differently, and our ways work just fine for each of us.
A Realist
June 14th, 2012
9:59 am
So ‘Appeasement’ is the word of the day?
Since when did we elect representatives in Washington to autocratically run the country? It sure would be easier to just get a dictator and send the rest of them home!
JohnnyReb
June 14th, 2012
10:10 am
Off Subject Slightly – I often post America’s biggest enemies are the rabbid environmentalists. Here’s an example.
http://www.accessatlanta.com/celebrities-tv/actress-lucy-lawless-pleads-1457576.html?cxntlid=thbz_hm
This obviously spoiled little girl has no grasp of reality. She probably thinks the world would be fine without oil. She does not think she will do jail time. I hope they surprise her. She needs a hard jolt of reality and considerable time in the gerneral population at a woman’s prision would do her good.
carlosgvv
June 14th, 2012
10:12 am
Kyle – 8:48
They nominated him because they feel he in the one with the best chance to beat Obama. It’s clear they are holding their collective noses in doing this.
carlosgvv
June 14th, 2012
10:15 am
Barry – “an American hating Marxist bent on destroying”
If you really believe that then one or more of the followig is true:
1. Your are a student in a Christian Academy.
2. You are a graduate of a Christian Academy.
3. You are a simple tool who is easily brainwashed.
4. You are delusional.
ragnar danneskjold
June 14th, 2012
10:18 am
For benefit of our conservative friends, a portrait of the leftist opposition:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnZX5TeUGWI
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 14th, 2012
10:18 am
Unfortunately, the time for compromise on this spending problem has long since expired.
Greece, Spain and now Italy are finding out what it’s like to spend without reason. France is likely next. But when these lesser countries go down, they won’t have the impact of what will happen when our country tanks under the weight of massive, un-payable debt.
We’ll take the whole world down with us when we go belly-up.
The folks on the left who don’t understand a tinkers damn about the economy will keep telling us we aren’t Spain or Greece, and they’re partially right:
We’re both of those countries writ large.
And we can’t print our way or float our way out of this mess. We HAVE to get deficit spending under control.
There is no hope in a Democrat “leadership” that will make this happen. They don’t know how to actually CUT spending; they only know how to raise taxes (and not necessarily raise revenues when that happens because they don’t understand the concept of “cause and effect”).
Republicans are by no means perfect, but I believe they actually get the dire future we are looking at right now, and are the only alternative that will even attempt this needed course of action. Yes, they screwed up their chance in 2000-2006 when they had both houses of Congress, but unlike Democrats, they appear to have learned their lesson. It is the only hope for the future of this world if they have, because to continue with any Democrat-controlled part of our government would mean the end of civilization for untold billions of people.
It is THAT serious, people.
GT
June 14th, 2012
10:26 am
The history of this group running the Republican Party now days has been a take no prisoners since they were trying to garner favor as Democrats back in the 60s. Many a plane carrying a Democratic candidate was not met at the airport by a state official of that party in the day, because the local guy didn’t want to be seen in photos with the national candidate.
These yahoos impressed the nation with storming out of Democratic Conventions looking like a band of greasy gypsies, leaving all to believe we were the descendants of a troll under a bridge somewhere.
In the meanwhile Reagan captured the hearts of the nation, taking over a moderate Republican Party with charm and compromise. One of his greatest speeches was made at a Republican convention where he had just lost the nomination to Ford. He talked about a great American future, a dream he had riding the highway of California, almost a Martin Luther King moment. Republicans were winners before Reagan joined their ranks, Jimmy Carter was the only interruption in a long line of victories. But these were not the Republicans of the troll descendants we see today. The ones who saw a soft spot in the south where the Republican Party was almost non existent, because they were the party of Abe Lincoln and harbored no ill will to minorities. A party they could dominant with their no compromise hatred and stupidity. That came after Reagan, after the last gentleman, Reagan, turned the lights out of a real GOP.
Replacing Reagan are the sting pullers for their own gains, the Murdocks and the Rushs, who saw opportunity in this NASCAR crowd. The Dixiecrat jumping the fence like Mormons looking for a land to practice their polygamy, only in their case it was bigotry. Now the party is lead by profiteers, no longer the dream of Regan on that stage that night many years ago.
DannyX
June 14th, 2012
10:29 am
Ronald Reagan would get kicked out of today’s Republican party. No doubt.
Reagan expanded the now hated socialist Earned Income Credit calling it “”the best anti-poverty, the best pro-family, the best job creation measure to come out of Congress.”
Reagan gave amnesty to 22 million “what do you not understand about illegal” illegal immigrants. Mexican-Americans call him “Ronaldo Reagan, Los Padre de Estados Unidos!”
Reagan tripled the deficit, expanded socialist Medicare, raised gasoline taxes, raised debt ceiling 18 times, increased the federal workforce, increased federal spending, raised SS and Medicare taxes. He created the big government Dept of Veterans Affairs.
As governor of California he liberalized abortion rights.
Ronald Reagan is a Rhino, Republican Hero In Name Only!
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
10:30 am
BIPARTISANSHIP is the big word today. I’m all for it.
But have you noticed alll the many INVESTIGATIONS that are going on in various places? Kyle mentioned yesterday the lawsuit involving the state ethics group. DeKalb County has investigations going on into something (?). Vernon Jones says he will report to the investigators if they don’t try to “investigate ” him. And the Atlanta School system is just one big ongoing investigation . Gov Deal is said to have walked away from his investigation and came home. I guess he got tired of Democratic dosey-does.
So what is an investigation any more? Just another way to point fingers and make claims? Is anyone tarred & feathered, put in jail, stay after school, fingers slapped or what? And most surely they are costly to the taxpayer. You betcha!
JohnnyReb
June 14th, 2012
10:39 am
For all the Moonbats who try to use Reagan against Conservatives, are you that dumb?
Reagan would not like today’s Repbulican Party. Not because he would not fit in. Not because he does not believe in today’s Conservative causes. No, it would be because he would be utterly PO’d that in the short time since his death the Right has allowed things to get so out of control toward the Left.
Reagan spoke often of the folly of healthcare law similar to Obamacare. He believed in limited federal government. He believed in the same social issues as does the Right today.
There is only one thing dumber than the Left using Reagan; that would be anyone on the Right that buys into it.
1961_Xer
June 14th, 2012
10:40 am
Bipartisan politics has led to an incessant ratcheting to the left. Every “compromise” moves government to the left of status quo.
Example: first there was no income tax. Then there was 1 or 2 percent….. and up from there.
First there was not SS. Then there was. Then there was SS disability. Then there was Medicare. Then Medicaid. Then a medicare drug program. Then Obamacare.
I could go on and on, program after program that gets more expensive and more intrusive… to the point that the Government now controls the entire Healthcare system and owns a car company. Welcome to the Fascist States of America. The march is always to the left. If a lawmaker dares try to halt the march, then there are the cries of “Jim Crow” or wanting “dirty air, food and water”.
The days of the bipartisan march to the left is over. Democrats decry this as the “extreme” factions of the Republican party taking over. I submit that the extreme factions of the Democratic party have always been in control, and the Republicans have only just now taken their cue from the Democrats in order to stop this move towards the European socialist model (that , itself, is just about to fall off a cliff).
detritusUSA
June 14th, 2012
10:41 am
A previous poster identified the problem when he used the word “moderate”. For too many conservatives and republicans, moderate has become an epithet and both sides have become extreme. Cooperation cannot exist in an extremist environment. In America we have plenty of conservatives and liberals, republicans and democrats, but too few patriots willing to sacrifice for the good of the country.
td
June 14th, 2012
10:41 am
You people that think Reagan would not be the nominee of todays Republican party are just nutty. The Tea Party would love him, the neo cons would put him on a pedestal and the social conservatives would embrace his message.
The moderate dems and Independents would embrace him and he would win in a landslide this Nov over Obama.
md
June 14th, 2012
10:45 am
Let’s not forget Reagan’s compromise that led to amnesty #1……..which led to a huge influx of more illegals who realized one could break our laws with no consequence…….which seems to be leading to amnesty #2………which will certainly lead to numerous amnesties down the road as folks realize our laws aren’t worth the paper they are written on………
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
10:46 am
Well, it looks like all the liberals here want to talk about is REAGAN! It’s REAGAN this and REAGAN that and REAGAN aint what he used to be
You would think that the antics and policies of our current out of touch president OBAMA would interest them. Looks like they’d want to talk about OBAMA this and OBAMA that and OBAMA just aint what he was supposed to be.
I admit keeping up with President OBAMA on the campaign trail is hard to do; here , there and yonder. But I think we should be more aware of our CURRENT PRESIDENT than the illustrious, but deceased President Reagan.
Where R U, President OBAMA? Stop by, will ya? Liberals have almost forgotten you.
yuzeyurbrane
June 14th, 2012
10:50 am
Kyle, you presume that both sides are being equally recalcitrant about taking the best ideas of both sides. Empirically not accurate. Also, “fair and balanced” does not mean that one must take an equal number of ideas from each side (or all sides if more than 2) if an idea is just plain bad.
As to your continued contortions with Jeb Bush’s pretty clear statement, just read it again. Jeb did say that both his dad and Reagan would have trouble getting the Republican nomination if they were coming along today. The only thing he backtracked on was his statement that he did not agree with those who say the Republican Party has an “orthodoxy that doesn’t allow for disagreement.” Being a wordsmith, you should agree that this is quite different from your interpretation.
ragnar danneskjold
June 14th, 2012
10:51 am
International papers reporting on the typical Reagan compromise, quoted in today’s WSJ:
From a June 12 New York Sun editorial remembering Ronald Reagan’s 1987 speech at the Berlin Wall:
[The New York Times] greeted Reagan’s speech in Berlin with an editorial paean not to Reagan but to Gorbachev and to Lenin. “The world watches Mikhail Gorbachev’s reforms with hope and wonder,” it began.
The Times rattled on at some length before ending with a paragraph kvelling about how those who say the Soviet system “is too rigid for reform” should “ponder Lenin’s” new economic program “in which the system accommodated real change without losing its character.” But it can be said for the Times that it was by no means the battiest of the big papers. The London Observer greeted Reagan’s speech at Berlin, and his participation in the Venice Summit shortly before Berlin, with a story headlined “Lame-duck Reagan enters the twilight zone.” It described Reagan as “slowly, laboriously and without any of his usual verve, reading his challenge to Mikhail Gorbachev to pull down the Berlin Wall.”
We mention this only to mark the virtue of humility. Few are immune from having been made fools of by history. But there are very few who have been more abjectly mistaken than those who underestimated Reagan.
DannyX
June 14th, 2012
10:53 am
“The Tea Party would love him, the neo cons would put him on a pedestal and the social conservatives would embrace his message.”
Funny stuff. What part of Reagan’s record would the Tea Party love?
Social conservatives were used by Reagan, he gave them nothing. As California governor like I said, Reagan expanded abortion rights and also refused to purge the public education system of gay and lesbian teachers.
The Reagan myth, alive and kicking.
Hillbilly D
June 14th, 2012
10:54 am
When he couldn’t name his own Indiana address where he allegedly resided, I knew it was time for him to go.
Well, sometimes I forget my phone number, probably because I never call it……..Oh, wait….
md
June 14th, 2012
10:57 am
“Do you think your party really backs Romney or is he a compromise?”
Do you think the Hillary voters really meant to vote for Obama?
What a silly question………
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
10:58 am
There is nothing wrong with partisanship, as long as it means a support of an idea, rather than a blind support of a party. If the idea is wrong, then it is the wrongness of the idea that is the problem.
When the issue is legislation, however, it should be kept in mind that many “ideas” are just that, ideas, not facts, and that the legislators represent people with different ideas about how to solve a problem. Insistence on not allowing a legislation to pass in order to deny the other party a victory is obstructionism, and we have seen plenty of that from the Republicans from the start of Obama’s term. It has not been the exclusive tool of that party, but the current members have brought it to new heights.
Jefferson
June 14th, 2012
10:58 am
President Reagan, one of the 1st big spending neo cons was popular but Jeb was probably right.
Jefferson
June 14th, 2012
11:00 am
md: “and I don’t have an answer” because ?
md
June 14th, 2012
11:00 am
“Republicans are by no means perfect, but I believe they actually get the dire future we are looking at right now, and are the only alternative that will even attempt this needed course of action”
In discussing this issue with a few of our friends over at the other place, they contended that we were nowhere near in trouble as individuals still had trillion of dollars in the bank…….that pretty much summed up the ideologies for me. As long as “others have it”, it is there for the good of all.
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
11:03 am
Dusty @10:46 am
“Well, it looks like all the liberals here want to talk about is REAGAN! It’s REAGAN this and REAGAN that and REAGAN aint what he used to be”
Dusty,
Have you not noticed that it is one of the major themes of Kyle’s article today?
GT
June 14th, 2012
11:03 am
Reagan left the Democrat Party in the 60s when these right extremist were in that party, instead of drowning the Republican Party as they do today. If he didn’t feel an affiliation with them then why would he now as they have only gone backwards from what was considered then an illiterate position even in that time.
Just saying..
June 14th, 2012
11:04 am
To me, Kyle, the issue is the seemingly increasing number of people voting Republican who believe bipartisanship is a dirty word.
md
June 14th, 2012
11:06 am
“Insistence on not allowing a legislation to pass in order to deny the other party a victory is obstructionism, and we have seen plenty of that from the Republicans from the start of Obama’s term. It has not been the exclusive tool of that party, but the current members have brought it to new heights”
All a matter of perspective…..the House has passed how many laws that the Senate refuses to look at since 2010??
ragnar danneskjold
June 14th, 2012
11:06 am
This blog proves that leftists today misunderstand Reagan as much as they did in the 1980s. But then, when have leftists ever understood anything rational?
md
June 14th, 2012
11:08 am
“md: “and I don’t have an answer” because ?”
In reference to what?? I’ll gladly give you an answer……..
Don't Forget
June 14th, 2012
11:11 am
Kyle, you need look no further than Grover Norquist’s pledge and the effect that has had on today’s conservatives. None of the GOP presidential candidates would agree to a 10 to 1 ratio of cuts to taxes. Jeb Bush was absolutely correct.
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
11:13 am
DannyX 10:53
How about the OBAMA MYTH? You forgot to mention that. Let me help you.
About three and half years ago, a little known knight rode into town on his little donkey, penniless but perky. He flashed a big smile and said: “I am here to being you Hope & Change!” The people said “Go for it!”
Then the knight said “First we raise taxes so everyone can have peanut butter and jelly sandwiches every night and….. bandaids for all hangnails!.” So the people cheered and exclaimed “Sir Handout the Knight has come to save us!” And then………(tears & groans)
And then……
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
11:16 am
md @11:06 am
http://crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/republicans-unprecedented-obstructionism-by-numbers
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
11:19 am
Dusty @ 11:13 am
“Then the knight said “First we raise taxes …”
Dusty,
Do you really need to resort to outright lies?
A Realist
June 14th, 2012
11:23 am
Lies, where? Oh, yes…. FoxWatchers. Fair and Balanced if you are on the right hand fringe.
clyde
June 14th, 2012
11:23 am
Just a few days ago I posted on one of these blogs that compromise and team work don’t necessarily make for stunning results and got called for it.I now repeat same.I don’t vote for people to compromise on taxes,etc.I don’t want my representative or President to bi-part with Democrats on spending.I want someone who will bring the hammer down and stop this insanity..
Just saying..
June 14th, 2012
11:24 am
Dusty-
JEB Bush voluntarily brought Reagan’s name up in his Congressional testimony, and this is Kyle’s second column within a week on Jeb’s remarks.
I really don’t think that makes Kyle a liberal.
Which word, to today’s self-proclaimed evangelists, seems to have wholly replaced the word sinner…
Jefferson
June 14th, 2012
11:26 am
md
June 14th, 2012
10:57 am
“Do you think your party really backs Romney or is he a compromise?”
Do you think the Hillary voters really meant to vote for Obama?
What a silly question………
I don’t think it is as much silly as it is true.
On the question to answer a question :I think a lot of McCain supporters should have voted for Clinton if they hated President Obama so much, as McCain, much like Romney is way out of touch.
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
11:26 am
Dear MarkV
ON my Girl Scout oath, I cannot tell a lie. How about you?
OH here’s another line to the OBAMA MYTH. His bags of hidden “gold” were all marked “Made in China”..
Doncha have any imagination ?
DannyX
June 14th, 2012
11:27 am
From today’s Gallup… “More than two-thirds (68%) of Americans say former President George W. Bush deserves a great deal or a moderate amount of blame for the nation’s economic woes — substantially more than the 52% who say the same about President Obama.”
Republicans are in denial. Complete denial. Lol at the “my way or the highway” attitude of today’s Republican.
Hey everyone lets give the car keys to the drunk driver, everything will be wonderful.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 14th, 2012
11:28 am
“None of the GOP presidential candidates would agree to a 10 to 1 ratio of cuts to taxes.’
Since it was brought up in a debate by the moderator, with no specifics as to what the cuts were or the tax increases were, I applaud them for not agreeing to that utterly stupid question.
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
11:30 am
Just saying, 11:24
What was it you said about PRESIDENT OBAMA? I missed it. Is he still in Washington?
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 14th, 2012
11:30 am
DannyX keeps bringing up more useless polling information.
Don
June 14th, 2012
11:31 am
I am not a fan of arguments made by cherry picking facts. This is one of those times, I think.
What of the centerpiece of the Reagan years? The income tax simplification/overhaul. That was most certainly a bipartisan effort.
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
11:33 am
Dusty @11:26 am
Do not try to be cute to hide the lie you have written. Name the taxes Obama has increased. Make sure you do not forget the stimulus rebates, the 18 tax cut for small businesses, and the extensions of the payroll tax cuts.
getalife
June 14th, 2012
11:35 am
Sane Americans know the economy collapsed under w’s watch and our President needs a second term to finish cleaning up their mess.
This is what the 12 cycle is all about.
Going back to another collapse or finish cleaning up the gop mess.
I am confident the American people will choose to finish cleaning up the gop mess.
SBinF
June 14th, 2012
11:37 am
Another post taking time to explain to us what Jeb meant?
Must be a slow week for you, Kyle.
But yes, bipartisanship, if only the darned Democrats would sign on. I’m reminded of the words of the great senator, Mitch McConnell:
“The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”
If only the Democrats were this willing to work with the Republicans. Shame on them!
DannyX
June 14th, 2012
11:38 am
REPUBLICAN VOTER: Mr Republican are you sure you can drive? Can you recite the alphabet?
MR REPUBLICAN: Yep, I cun dwive. a c d b j x k a g t x z
REPUBLICAN VOTER: Good job Mr Republican, you sound very fit to drive, here are the keys!
Don't Forget
June 14th, 2012
11:38 am
Reagan tripled the deficit. He had to in order to get the economy going. Under Obama the deficit has increased by 50%. You get what you pay for.
getalife
June 14th, 2012
11:38 am
jeb is being honest now but if he runs in 16 he will have to get stupid with the pee party.
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
11:39 am
DannyX @11:27
What was it you said about PRESIDENT OBAMA? How many TRILLIONS has he added to the national debt at the present time? (Yes, you can count on your fingers.)
Jefferson
June 14th, 2012
11:39 am
What about the super committee, what did they accomplish ? If you go around signing pledges you can only keep at the expense of the USA, what good are you ?
getalife
June 14th, 2012
11:44 am
Write another spin lie on what jeb meant kyle.
Three times is the charm.
No intellectual honesty .
@@
June 14th, 2012
11:44 am
There is nothing wrong with holding an opinion and holding it passionately. But at those times when you’re absolutely sure that you’re right, talk with someone who disagrees. And if you constantly find yourself in the company of those who say “Amen” to everything that you say, find other company.Condoleeza Rice @ SMU
Interesting when considering what many call “the extremes”.
Just saying..
June 14th, 2012
11:47 am
Tiberius – Banned from Bookman’s and proud of it!
June 14th, 2012
11:28 am: “Since it was brought up in a debate by the moderator, with no specifics as to what the cuts were or the tax increases were, I applaud them for not agreeing to that utterly stupid question.”
Tib-
Any of the Presidents-in waiting qualify their responses? Also point out, as you just did, that is was a stupid question?
Or just play to their Etch-a-Sketch bases?
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
11:48 am
Dear Mark V, 11:33
I am sure you already have the figures you requested. No need to repeat. But I have a request for you.
How many TRILLIONS have been added to the national debt since OBAMA took office? Now, no “cute fudging”. Just straight figures.
@@
June 14th, 2012
11:50 am
Write another spin lie on what jeb meant kyle.
jeb is being honest now but if he runs in 16 he will have to get stupid with the pee party.
GETALIFE’S CHARM DIED TODAY!!!
boohoohoohoooooooooo
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
11:52 am
Danny X aka poll watcher
What do you say about the new poll last night that showed independents supporting Oblamer at 35% down significantly in the last month. Not that polls mean anything to anyone else at this point.
Your other question, what would Tea Party like about Reagan.
1. Government is not the solution to any problem, government is the problem. Contrast that with Barry Oblamer.
2. He fired the PATCO strikers.
3. He reformed our outrageous tax rates.
4. He stood up to the Soviet Union after 40 years of the Dems trying to appease them with nuclear freeze nonsense.
5. He got the hostages freed from Iran
6. He rebuilt the Armed Forces after Carter allowed them to waste away.
I’m tired of this stupid argument, I could go on for awhile. Reagan was the antithesis of Barry Oblamer and his “Reset” mentality.
SBinF
June 14th, 2012
11:52 am
The irony of course is that Kyle posts a topic on Obama saying the private sector is doing fine, taking him at his word, when the president says he meant in relation to the public sector (which is still bleeding jobs). Yet, he’s taken TWO topics to explain to us that what Jeb said is not really what he meant. I follow a lot of politics btw, and Kyle is the ONLY person out there I’ve seen making this argument about Jeb’s words.
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
11:53 am
getalife @11:38
You mentioned the pee party. If you have a problem with your urinary tract, please do not mention it here. Thank you.
Just saying..
June 14th, 2012
11:53 am
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
11:30 am: “Just saying, 11:24
What was it you said about PRESIDENT OBAMA? I missed it. Is he still in Washington?”
Actually Dusty, Hussein Obama is your President, wherever he is.
DannyX
June 14th, 2012
11:54 am
“Your other question, what would Tea Party like about Reagan.”
You know the Tea Party motto Rafe, “Deficits don’t matter.”
Just saying..
June 14th, 2012
12:00 pm
SBinF
June 14th, 2012
11:52 am: “I follow a lot of politics btw, and Kyle is the ONLY person out there I’ve seen making this argument about Jeb’s words.”
Your point, on this blog, will be understood in inverse relation to its accuracy…
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
12:00 pm
Just saying, 11:53
I am glad you know that President OBAMA is still president. I was beginning to think that all liberals had forgotten about him. President OBAMA is seldom mentioned by liberals. Wonder why?
Is he still in Washington or you don’t know either?
@@
June 14th, 2012
12:01 pm
If you have a problem with your urinary tract, please do not mention it here.
Clap, although not polite kinda…
No Clapping Matter: Antibiotic-Resistant Gonorrhea is on the Way and We Are Not Prepared
md
June 14th, 2012
12:05 pm
“I don’t think it is as much silly as it is true. ”
No, it is silly as compromise is the standard when it comes to party nominees…….Romney certainly isn’t a compromise for those that voted for him in the primaries as their first choice…..the same with every candidate from the beginning of time……
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
12:06 pm
DannyX, 11:54
You need target practice. “DEFICITS DON’T MATTER” has got to be PRESIDENT OBAMA’ S MOTTO.
Jefferson
June 14th, 2012
12:08 pm
md, you hear that kind of double talk at class reunions…
AU Liberal in ATL
June 14th, 2012
12:10 pm
You know it, I know it, Jeb Bush knows it, we all know it. Reagan and G.H.W. Bush would be drummed out of T-bag Republican party faster than the speed of light. The same holds true for Romney if he ever chooses to reveal his true self…if he even remembers who his true self is.
md
June 14th, 2012
12:12 pm
“when the president says he meant in relation to the public sector (which is still bleeding jobs)”
As the size of the public sector has a direct relation to how well the private sector can do…..
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
June 14th, 2012
12:12 pm
Sane Americans know the economy collapsed under w’s watch and our President needs a second term to finish cleaning up their mess.
———-
Obozo said he could turn it around in three years. Unemployment is worse now than when he took office. The deficit is still $1.3 trillion a year. We still have record numbers on the dole.
Obozo: Fail.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
12:14 pm
From Newsmax
Obama campaign claims that hundreds of thousands of teachers have lost their jobs in the last couple of years are hyped “beyond reality,” The Washington Post concluded in a fact check.
The Post was examining remarks made by Obama campaign senior advisor David Axelrod, who made the remark in defense of President Barack Obama’s claim that the “private sector is doing fine.”
“We have had 4.3 million private sector jobs created over the last 27 months, but we lost almost half a million public sector jobs, and most of them are teachers….We have lost 250,000 teachers in the last couple of years,” he said in an appearance on ABC’s “This Week.”
Axelrod’s figures were drawn from Bureau of Labor Statistics, but BLS told the Post the numbers are not all teachers but include all jobs in education including administrators, cafeteria workers and janitors.
“For instance, about 10 percent of the total education jobs are in administration or clerical support, 5 percent are food preparation workers, 4 percent are janitors, and 3 percent are bus drivers. All told, only about 67 percent of the jobs could be broadly defined as being held by ‘teachers’ — including teaching assistants (11 percent of the posts). If only full-time teachers are counted, it works out to about 50 percent.
Read more on Newsmax.com: WaPo: Obama Campaign Exaggerated Teacher Job Losses
Oblamer exaggerating, I just don’t believe he would do that, would he?
That Black guy
June 14th, 2012
12:18 pm
Jefferson
June 14th, 2012
11:26 am
On the question to answer a question :I think – considering what you wrote after saying this, you DIDN’T think at ALL.
a lot of McCain supporters should have voted for Clinton if they hated President Obama so much, – First, Obama WASN’T the President. Second, why would you vote for someone you feel is WORSE than your candidate? Third, that was just illogical.
as McCain, much like Romney is way out of touch. – I guess that means that you won’t be voting for Obama since he is out of touch. “The private sector is doing fine” – Obama
md
June 14th, 2012
12:20 pm
Folks should also remember that teachers are hired locally……which boils down to local choices……so talk to your neighbors about why they prefer other services over teachers…….
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
12:21 pm
Danny
I don’t ever remember a Tea Party member say that deficits don’t matter. The Tea Party began as a protest against Oblamercare and the stimulus and the record deficits both of those caused.
The out of context quote you mentioned was not uttered by a Tea Party spokesperson.
That Black guy
June 14th, 2012
12:24 pm
DannyX
June 14th, 2012
11:38 am
Democrat VOTER: Mr Obama are you sure you can drive? Can you recite the alphabet?
MR Obama: Ummmmm… Who unplugged my teleprompter?
Democrat VOTER: I bet he’ll give a really good answer when they get that thing plugged in.
See DannyX, we can ALL say stupid ish.
md
June 14th, 2012
12:26 pm
And speaking of firing teachers…….folks best hope the SC strikes down obamacare because if they don’t, the States will have to implement it and the many millions in administration costs to the States are not covered by the aca…….teaching jobs will once again be on the chopping block as states have to balance their budgets.
Choices do have consequences……..
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
12:33 pm
Dusty @11:48 am
I understand that you want to run from what you have written. That is what the Republicans like to call “taking personal responsibility.”
What has that got to do with the national debt?
“How many TRILLIONS have been added to the national debt since OBAMA took office? Now, no “cute fudging”. Just straight figures.”
National debt:
5.7 trillion 12/31/2000
10.7 trillion 12/31/2008
15.1 trillion 12/31/2011
Any questions?
md
June 14th, 2012
12:37 pm
Yep, 15.1 trillion the private sector must come up with on top of what it takes to do business and care for the public sector………sounds like a winning formula for growth.
DannyX
June 14th, 2012
12:38 pm
“The Tea Party began as a protest against Oblamercare and the stimulus and the record deficits both of those caused.”
Rafe, what is the Tea Party plan to pay for the 2 unfunded wars, the unfunded socialist Medicare Part D, the unfunded Dept of Homeland Security, that were handed out with massive tax cuts?
Where were they? Still under their “deficits don’t matter’ spell?
Republicans of any sort, Tea Party, Reagan fans, neo-cons, conservatives, suddenly showing concern for the deficit is very amusing.
What’s the plan? Surely there is a plan to clean up your mess, if not sober up.
That Black guy
June 14th, 2012
12:38 pm
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer’s ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
12:21 pm
Danny
I don’t ever remember a Tea Party member say that deficits don’t matter. The Tea Party began as a protest against Oblamercare and the stimulus and the record deficits both of those caused.
The out of context quote you mentioned was not uttered by a Tea Party spokesperson.
___________________________________________________
He knew that, but a chance to lie is…
a chance to lie.
Kinda hard to resist for some people.
DannyX
June 14th, 2012
12:44 pm
The Tea Party motto is “Republican deficits don’t matter.”
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
June 14th, 2012
12:53 pm
Bush didn’t veto the spending proposed in the 2007 Nasty Pelosi budget because of the mandate the dummycrats won in the 2006 elections. The true spirit of bipartisanship. He could have vetoed those spending bills and locked down the government. He didn’t.
And now they blame him for their spending.
You think we learned our lesson?
md
June 14th, 2012
12:54 pm
“what is the Tea Party plan to pay for the 2 unfunded wars, the unfunded socialist Medicare Part D, the unfunded Dept of Homeland Security, that were handed out with massive tax cuts?”
The dems controlled the whole shebang for 2 whole years and had the choice…..key word again……to end any and all of those programs/wars/departments………last I checked, they didn’t and instead added another huge program to those that folks are saying we couldn’t afford……yep, that makes sense.
SBinF
June 14th, 2012
12:58 pm
Hey Kyle, maybe you need to call up Scott Walker and explain to him what Jeb meant. It seems he’s confused:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/14/scott-walker-jeb-bush_n_1596326.html
WASHINGTON — Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) told reporters Thursday morning that he disagreed with former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s assessment of the state of the modern Republican Party and the need for the GOP to support economic policies that go beyond tax cuts.
Bush said Monday that both his father, President George H.W. Bush, and President Ronald Reagan would have trouble meshing with the current Republican Party.
Jefferson
June 14th, 2012
1:01 pm
Black guy you can only blame yourself for President Obama, it was him or Clinton, McCain’s chances were simular to Cain’s –zero.
The private sector is fine, much better than in 2008.
md
June 14th, 2012
1:05 pm
“The private sector is fine, much better than in 2008.”
Better than very bad does not equate to “fine”……..
That Black guy
June 14th, 2012
1:10 pm
Jefferson
June 14th, 2012
1:01 pm
Black guy you can only blame yourself for President Obama, it was him or Clinton, McCain’s chances were simular to Cain’s –zero.
The private sector is fine, much better than in 2008.
_________________________________________________
True, since I voted for him in 2008.
“The private sector is fine, much better than in 2008″ – “Aimee Copeland reached another major milestone this week. Doctors Hospital in Augusta, where she is being treated, upgraded her condition to serious from critical.”
I guess that means Aimee is doing “fine”.
Jefferson
June 14th, 2012
1:10 pm
Then its fine with me.
Jefferson
June 14th, 2012
1:11 pm
I was not talking about Aimee, BTW.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
1:12 pm
Danny
Tea Party Plan for deficit……………………………stop the spending, get the economy (i.e. private sector) growing so tax revenue improves, reform entitlements, extend Oblamers Tax cuts, repeal Oblamercare, implement rules to tie future spending to a percentage of GDP (in case we ever make the mistake of electing another Oblamer), develop private sector solutions for health care, and other things you have obviously heard about, but do not acknowledge.
Jefferson
June 14th, 2012
1:14 pm
The tea reps plan won’t work, should be shelved. If you don’t admit the revenue problem, you can’t solve the revenue problem. Same can be said of spending. Both have to give.
DannyX
June 14th, 2012
1:14 pm
“Better than very bad does not equate to “fine”…”
You are in denial. The economy is doing a hell of a lot better than it was 3 years ago. Just how fast was Obama supposed to immediately get us out of the Great Bush Recession ? 68% still blame W a great deal for the problems we still have with the economy, how fast was Obama supposed to clean up W’s mess?
Our labor force was hit with massive layoffs caused by corporate mergers, loss of real estate jobs, outsourcing, manufacturing jobs lost to China, technology gains that allowed businesses to employ fewer people, and Bush and his Republican friends were building bridges to nowhere.
How do you fix that in 3 years?
DannyX
June 14th, 2012
1:26 pm
“Tea Party Plan for deficit”
You mean the Tea Party would not raise payroll and gasoline taxes like Reagan? The Tea Party would not favor Reagan’s tripling of the deficit, (”deficits don’t matter?”) The Tea Party would not be in favor of the Earned Income Credit that Reagan expanded? The Tea Party would not be in favor of 22 million more illegals being given amnesty thus giving them access to tax payer dollars? The Tea Party would not favor Reagan’s expansion of Medicare?
You Republicans are all over the place. The Tea Party would have little in common with Reagan, no matter how hard you try to change the record.
HDB
June 14th, 2012
1:35 pm
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer’s ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
8:42 am
“Speaking of compromise, how many Republicans were consulted, before Oblamer decided to purchase those helicopters from Russia.
America’s everywhere are trying to buy “made in America” merchandise and Oblamer is buying Russian helicopters. With 8.2% unemployment I wonder what the workers at Bell and Secorski are thinking.”
Have you thought about the ILLEGALITY of exporting military secrets to a foreign nation?? Even when we sell military aircraft to Israel, it’s not the American version due to additional technology that can’t be exported!!
JDW
June 14th, 2012
1:56 pm
@ Kyle…”That’s a cute document you’ve got there, but a) federal budgets are done in fiscal years, not calendar years, and b) the appropriations listed for each year in your document are a couple of hundred billion dollars less than actual federal outlays during that time. So, even if we ignore the fiscal/calendar issue, either your document is incomplete, or it demonstrates that actual spending was in fact far higher than what presidents requested.”
You can thank the Library of Congress for the document (note the verification seal in the lower left). My guess is that the difference you see is the difference between budgeted vs. off budget expenses (mainly Social Security) and the fact that it is in constant dollars apparently around 1980 or so. Fiscal vs. calendar year is really irrelevant over an 8 year timeframe.
“”How much higher? If we assume your document is right about presidential requests, then the requests in the calendar years Reagan was in office — 1981-88 — totaled $4,587.4 billion. Actual outlays in FY81-88 totaled $7,089.2 billion. That’s a difference of $2,501.8 billion or 55%. The gap is even wider if we assume Reagan had more to do with the FY82-89 budgets.”"
Apparently the raw dollar numbers were in aggregate $7,357.6 requested and $7,554.9 spent but when the spent total is adjusted for budget items that are estimated in the original submission (unemployment, interest etc…). If you adjust for those numbers as the House Appropriations Committee did when they conducted a study that compared Reagan’s concrete proposals to what Congress actually passed you find that Reagan asked for $29.4 billion more than Congress passed.
So as I was saying…this myth that Reagan was mislead on spending or that Congress was responsible is HORSE HOOEY…the man got $29.4 Billion or 4% LESS than he requested.
You can read more analysis than I have time to give you here.
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/56More.htm
JDW
June 14th, 2012
1:57 pm
@Kyle…and while I am on the subject of HORSE HOOEY…lets go for that bit that Reagan’s policies raised tax collections…
Average Real Annual Growth of Tax Collections by President4
Average
President Annual Growth
Roosevelt 121.3%
Truman 3.7%
Eisenhower 2.4%
Kennedy 4.8%
Johnson 6.9%
Nixon 0.3%
Ford 6.4%
Carter 3.0%
Reagan 2.4%
Bush -0.0%
NOPE
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/5Debt.htm
Kyle Wingfield
June 14th, 2012
2:08 pm
JDW: So average annual growth of 2.4%, after adjusting for inflation, doesn’t count? Only in the minds of those who want Washington to have loads more money to spend.
Kyle Wingfield
June 14th, 2012
2:14 pm
Somewhere along the way, I fear, JDW and I got to having one conversation on two threads.
JDW
June 14th, 2012
2:18 pm
@Kyle…my bad on the two threads…I back posted by mistake.
As for the 2.4%, sure it counts but it was tied with Eisenhower for the third to the bottom. Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Ford and Carter all did better. That tells me that what Reagan did worked worse than that which came before him.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
2:19 pm
Danny
How do you fix that in 3 years?
To put it in the man’s own words, something to the effect, if I don’t get it turned around we are looking at a one term proposition. Well, now is the time to admit defeat and step aside, I’d say.
Kyle Wingfield
June 14th, 2012
2:25 pm
JDW: It’s only “better” if you want more money to spend. If you want to restrain government, 2.4% real growth is rather generous. If you can accomplish that while cutting marginal tax rates, I’d call that “better” than the rest.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
2:28 pm
HDB
I share your concern about military secrets, having worked for the DOD for 20 years, however, I don’t think Barry Oblamer cares that much based on all the leaks from the WH. Leaks intended to cause others to heap praise on the anointed one.
If he cared as much about military secrets as he did his college records there would be no leaks.
BTW, we sell aircraft all over the world. The Saudis fly F-15’s, as do the Israelis. We have helicopter manufacturers here, I can think of two Skorsky and Bell, both I’m sure could make a helicopter acceptable for sale to the Afghan government.
He bought the helicopters from Russia as part of his “Reset” era (error) of good feelings, he thinks he can create with Putin.
Putin has to be laughing uncontrollably that he is selling the American’s helicopters. They will probably all have built in flaws that will render them useless in less than 2 years. Putin is putting one over on Barry, so what is new there. We never get anything in return when Barry makes a deal with the Russians.
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
2:29 pm
Oh my, did someone say that the national debt in 2011 was 15.1 TRILLION???
The USA OWES 15.1 TRILLION $$$$$$$$ Really? 15.1 TRILLION? Now it is MORE in 2012?
And President OBAMA wants to add $$$$$$ with another “stimulus”?
EEiiiyyyyyiii That is hard to believe but it is true. Would someone tell the Democrats that there is a PROBLEM!!! Seems they haven’t noticed.
.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
2:39 pm
Bush and his Republican friends were building bridges to nowhere.
I don’t think it ever actually got built, but assuming you are correct, then I would say well at least we got a nice bridge out of the expenditure, surely it has some purpose, as a home for wildlife, structure for the fishes and it provided some construction jobs. Oblamer would call that Stimulus.
But, with Oblamers green energy programs all we got was a few very temporary jobs and a lot of missing government money. It was not just Solyndra, there is a whole list someone posted the other day, all failures, all very expensive failures.
As for a Reagan, we can disagree on how he fits today, but that is wasted effort, as Dusty says let dead Presidents be. Different times, different problems, different solutions, so, all you can look at is there overall ideology and try to guess how that would work today.
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
2:42 pm
Rafe, 2:28
Maybe the president forgot and decided to stimulate the Russian economy instead of ours. He was whispering something to the Russian president at the White House when he thought the microphone was off.
The Russians should send a bit of caviar along with the helicopters. And some vodka! We should get something out of this “deal”.
JDW
June 14th, 2012
2:42 pm
@Kyle…”It’s only “better” if you want more money to spend. If you want to restrain government, 2.4% real growth is rather generous. If you can accomplish that while cutting marginal tax rates, I’d call that “better” than the rest.”
And therein lies the crux of the Republican fallacy…Reagan did not restrain spending and when you slow revenue growth and not spending growth you get deficits. Duhbya is the poster child for this. Killed revenue exploded spending.
Kyle Wingfield
June 14th, 2012
2:44 pm
JDW @ 2:42: “Reagan did not restrain spending”
Which brings us back full-circle to the original argument.
Former Reagan Republican
June 14th, 2012
2:45 pm
In Washington and Atlanta the definition of Bipartisanship is…..the other party does exactly what we want them to do. No compromising with Demopublicans
HDB
June 14th, 2012
2:49 pm
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer’s ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
2:28 pm
There’s another possibility here that many may not see; remember that the Afghans primarily had Russian equipment when the mujahaddin fought the Russians in the ’80s….and they came to the US when the weapons weer ineffective!! I’d rather them buy Russian weapons systems that are ineffective and can’t be fully used against American systems! Also remember that the Afghans don’t have the infrastructure to maintain American equipment! Note how the Iranian Air Force went down after they couldn’t get parts for the F-14s they had from us!! We all know the airworthiness of Russian equipment…only those in Aeroflot can enter US airspace! Could be a strategic move in play here……
JDW
June 14th, 2012
2:50 pm
@Kyle…”Which brings us back full-circle to the original argument.”
What was spent was what Reagan asked for…he did not restrain spending. It’s just a fact. Republicans try to spin that by laying the blame on Congress but Reagan actually seems to have gotten 4% less than he asked for.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 14th, 2012
2:51 pm
all about that right wing brainwashing machine:
http://www.salon.com/2012/06/14/weve_been_brainwashed/
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 14th, 2012
2:53 pm
at least we got a nice bridge out of the expenditure, surely it has some purpose, as a home for wildlife
several million dollars for a very small wildlife refuge?
tree hugger!
@@
June 14th, 2012
2:54 pm
To put it in the man’s own words, something to the effect, if I don’t get it turned around we are looking at a one term proposition. Well, now is the time to admit defeat and step aside, I’d say.
There’s a black contributor on “Your World With Neil Cavuto, who said the very same thing. I figured he must be a racist.
schnirt
Perhaps an Uncle Tom?
Anyhoo, LUV that guy. I’m gonna make a point of catching his name one day.
A little further from home:
Egypt court rules entire parliament illegally elected, orders body to dissolve after unconstitutional vote
eeeeeYOW!
Kyle Wingfield
June 14th, 2012
2:59 pm
JDW: The numbers from 2-3 decades ago haven’t changed in the past 50 minutes. They still show what they show, which is not what you want them to show, but still.
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
3:06 pm
Wow, is it possible to get a sunstroke while sitting inside? I can’t help but wonder about some here.
HDB @2:46
HDB thinks USA buying helicopters from Russians may be a STRATEGIC move.
Yes, indeed, but only for Russians.
JDW @ 2:50
Reagan spent money!!!! ( Psttt….he’s dead!)
Finn @ 2:51
Finn refers to a brainwashing machine. Yes! Musta been right after he fell into his washing machine.
———-
See what I mean?
@@
June 14th, 2012
3:08 pm
To my way of thinking, there are only two people capable of dealing with Putin…Dick Cheney and/or John Bolton.
I used to fantasize about Dick Cheney and Vladimir Putin in a confrontation. Was there ever such a moment?
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
3:08 pm
HDB
Any strategy that would enhance the Russian economy while disenfranchising ours, would only be considered by some out of touch, naive, unprepared, and outwitted person like Barry.
If we are paying the freight for the helicopters, then we make the rules, not the Afghans. Those people have not demonstrated that they could adequately operate a sun dial, so why we are buying them helicopters is something that I can’t figure out anyway. I thought Oblamer was getting us out of Afghanistan, not starting another deficit adding entitlement program.
@@
June 14th, 2012
3:09 pm
Sorry, Kyle.
My mind wanders.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
3:13 pm
Finn
several million dollars for a very small wildlife refuge?
Yeah, you are right, too much for a wildlife refuge. I have an idea, lets take some of those solar panels that Solyndra stuck the bankruptcy court with and place them on the bridge. Now, it is a power plant. There were solar panels, weren’t there?
JDW
June 14th, 2012
3:14 pm
“The numbers from 2-3 decades ago haven’t changed in the past 50 minutes. They still show what they show, which is not what you want them to show, but still.”
They show that Reagan’s policy of reduced tax revenue coupled with spending increases led to deficits…about $2.4 trillion in 2005 dollars. But more importantly his policies have culminated in the situation we face today…save the Clinton years the gap between tax collections and spending have continued to widen and are now the largest in history.
So should we do more of the same or should we try something different?
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
3:15 pm
@@
You have to be bare chested and armed to deal with Putin.
JDW
June 14th, 2012
3:15 pm
@Dusty…”Reagan spent money!!!! ( Psttt….he’s dead!)”
Problem is the Republicans of today are still following that old disproven handbook.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
3:17 pm
JDW
So should we do more of the same or should we try something different?
You convinced me, lets get rid of Oblamer, the gap seems to be getting worse. Maybe a new person can improve the gap.
Hillbilly D
June 14th, 2012
3:17 pm
I used to fantasize about Dick Cheney and Vladimir Putin in a confrontation. Was there ever such a moment?
That’s a little bit too much information. (IWH)
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
3:18 pm
md @12:37 pm
“Yep, 15.1 trillion the private sector must come up with on top of what it takes to do business and care for the public sector…”
Another fallacy from the public-sector basher.
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
3:22 pm
@@ 3:08
Vladimir couldn’t go one round with Cheney Dick’s got a new heart!!
Illegal Alien
June 14th, 2012
3:29 pm
Don’t pay attention to Rafe, he worked for the DOD for 20 years. Just another “hog at the trough”.
@@
June 14th, 2012
3:30 pm
You have to be bare chested and armed to deal with Putin.
Okay! But all I’ve got is a BB gun. The chest will have to compensate for my diminished firepower.
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
3:32 pm
MarkV 3:18
If md has a fallacy, perhaps you should tell us how that 15.1 trillion USA debt is going to be managed. With your clear perspective on everybody’s fallacies, I’m sure you have a solution to all problems.
By the way, installing Obama for another four years is not a good answer. More of the same=worse.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
3:33 pm
@@
I’m sure you would win, either you take him outright or you charm him to death. What scares me is Barry sitting across the table from Rootin Tootin Vladie Putin. Bet the first word Putin would say would be ………….
BOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
3:34 pm
Dusty @ 2:29 pm
“Oh my, did someone say that the national debt in 2011 was 15.1 TRILLION???
The USA OWES 15.1 TRILLION $$$$$$$$ Really? 15.1 TRILLION? Now it is MORE in 2012?”
Is there anything you are going to write today other than childishness?
For you information, which you apparently greatly need, the standard measure of the national debt is in comparison to the strength of the economy, the debt as percentage of the GDP. This has now reached about 100% – a big percentage for sure. However, at the end of WWII the national debt was about 120% of GDP. Did the US go bankrupt? Did the economy collapse under the weight of that debt? I think you know the answer, if you can admit it.
HDB
June 14th, 2012
3:36 pm
“Those people have not demonstrated that they could adequately operate a sun dial”
Right….so why sell them something that could wind up being used against us?? Remember….when Russian weapons didn’t work for the mujahaddin in the 80s, the Afghans came to the US for help….ultimately, those weapons that Reagan allowed to be sold to Afghanistan were used AGAINST us by al Qaeda and the Taliban. Are you willing to do the same mistake?? Give them something that won’t last and won’t be used against us in combat……
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
3:38 pm
Illegal alien
another “hog at the trough”.
Yep, but I took tiny bites. I have learned from the master of blame redistribution. It was not my fault. Anyway it was Reagan’s fault, if they had not rebuilt the Armed Forces after Carter they wouldn’t have needed me.
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
3:40 pm
Dusty @ 3:32 pm
“If md has a fallacy, perhaps you should tell us how that 15.1 trillion USA debt is going to be managed.”
I have just given you an outline of the answer in my preceding post. How do you think the US has managed the debt after WWII?
It certainly will not be managed by the policies of Romney – cutting spending, which would cut growth, and lowering taxes, which would cut revenues.
P.S. md’s fallacy has nothing to do with the national debt, but that goes over your head, I am afraid.
Hillbilly D
June 14th, 2012
3:40 pm
Give them something that won’t last and won’t be used against us in combat……
That’s actually a pretty good idea, in my opinion. You don’t have to buy directly from the source (if they are), you can go third party.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
3:46 pm
other than childishness?
Whoa, Dusty, you have really been disparaged. I like your posts, as well as @@’s. Simple, concise, light hearted, and above all to the point. You two bring a lot of enjoyment to the blog.
Some people just seem to have this dark cloud that hovers over them as they post apparently. What could that dark cloud be…………………
@@
June 14th, 2012
3:46 pm
It’s not just recent comments…sometimes it’s what Bill said two years ago.
(CBS News) Cleveland’s Cuyahoga Community College is the site of a major economic address Thursday that President Obama hopes will frame his fiscal message and distinguish his vision for the future from that of his Republican rival, Mitt Romney. But Mr. Obama is not the first person to deliver an address at the Ohio community college: As Republicans reminded voters on Thursday, former President Bill Clinton was there just two years ago.
“In 2010, President Clinton At Cuyahoga Community College Said If Obama And Democrats Haven’t Worked Out In Two Years, ‘You Can Vote Us All Out Then,’”
Okey dokey, Bill! WORDS MATTER!
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
3:48 pm
MarkV 3:34
I’m sorry that you can ignore scary straight facts. I don’t want to see us raise a a national debt big enough to bankrupt the USA. I don’t care to test our economy to its limits..
I want to stop raising the debt before we get there. Get it? BEFORE WE GET THERE! I don’t want to find out how high we can go in debt before bankruptcy is the only move left.
You may be a gambler but I am not. Face the facts. A 15.1 trillion national debt is a very dangerous position in which to be. R U trying to say it is not dangerous just because it did not happen before? Prevention! Prevention! Prevention!!
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
3:53 pm
Rafe, @ 3:46
Thank you for the kind words. We conservatives understand each other.
Don’t mind MarkV. He has a good heart. Likes bluebirds. Can’t be all bad.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
3:54 pm
were used AGAINST us by al Qaeda and the Taliban.
Yes, HDB, you are correct, but, they were also used to run the Russians out of Afghanistan. Would be better off with the Russians in Afghanistan. I don’t think so.
I have at times thought the best thing to do with the middle east is to arm all sides and get out. Let them entertain themselves. The only thing against that is the Israelis plight, if for some reason they could come together and unite against Israel. They would probably be happy killing one another for awhile, but eventually we would have to go in to protect Israel.
It is a sticky mess over there, but we still under no circumstances should be buying anything from Mr. Putin.
HDB
June 14th, 2012
3:58 pm
.Hillbilly D
June 14th, 2012
3:40 pm
…and another thing: we CONTROL the volume of arms going into Afghanistan so we KNOW what we have to combat if we have to go BACK!! Like you said: a pretty smart move in my book!
HDB
June 14th, 2012
4:03 pm
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer’s ineptocracy
June 14th, 2012
3:54 pm
Understand what you’re saying…but I see a strategic move here!! We control the arms shipments and type going into Afghanistan….AND the quality…so we know what we’re up against and can generate contingencies if we find ourselves having to to back!! Many may not see that as plausible….but I think Sikorsky and Bell/Textron will outperform Ilyushin in combat! We keep the military EDGE!!
Lynn
June 14th, 2012
4:06 pm
If going “whole hog wild” about health care saves American lives, why not just pick away they parts of the law that are most offending to GOPers? If the GOP was willing to flight like hell to save one life, that of Terri Schiavo’s, why does it not have even a larger army standing ready to fight for even more Americans or Georgians, soon to be at great risk? Before ObamaCare was enacted, nearly 50,000 people die each year because they were denied access to health care insurance. As the Supreme Court sits ready to decide between life and death of Georgians, what are you doing Kyle to save lives? How about you, Governor Deal? And you, Georgia State legislators?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
June 14th, 2012
4:09 pm
Obozo made a really long speech today on the economy.
Long on blame, zilch on solutions.
Obozo: Petty, incompetent, do-nothing fail.
@@
June 14th, 2012
4:12 pm
Before ObamaCare was enacted, nearly 50,000 people die each year because they were denied access to health care insurance.
A lot of people WITH access die each year.
LIFE! It’s a terminal disease.
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
4:12 pm
Dusty @ 3:48 pm
“I’m sorry that you can ignore scary straight facts. I don’t want to see us raise a a national debt big enough to bankrupt the USA.”
I do not ignore scary straight facts either, but I also do not suffer panic brought by ignorance. The national debt will not bankrupt the USA. It cannot. We need to reduce it, but not because of fear of bankruptcy.
davetv
June 14th, 2012
4:35 pm
Seems to me that the tea party supported representatives where voted into place to be obstructionists and not to compromise anymore with the craziness that has gotten us to this place. I say, well done. After a few more election cycles, the people may actually have real representation in politics. For those of you place a bunch of labels on the tea party, just remember- they ARE the majority in those districts. You can whine all day about them being extreme but if the majority of the people believe in those values, then I’d say that “extreme” is becoming the main-stream. I’m happy to be on the “extreme” side of a group who demands that our politicians abide by our Constitution.
Hillbilly D
June 14th, 2012
4:37 pm
LIFE! It’s a terminal disease.
Well what a Debbie Downer you are today. (IW&SH)
Them 40 mouths get fed last night?
davetv
June 14th, 2012
4:42 pm
“nearly 50,000 people die each year because they were denied access to health care insurance.”
Really? And here I thought the argument was that health care/insurance $ was so high because hospitals were forced to treat everyone regardless of their ability to pay. Hmmm…
md
June 14th, 2012
4:48 pm
“You are in denial. The economy is doing a hell of a lot better than it was 3 years ago.”
Once again, “better” does not equate to “fine”……..
And how does he fix it in 3.5 years? Certainly not by focusing the first 2 on ramming through another entitlement program……..I thought we couldn’t afford the ones we already have??
@@
June 14th, 2012
4:49 pm
Missed this one:
In a Tuesday post on Time magazine’s Swampland blog, columnist Joe Klein took time away from blogging about his road trip across America to criticize Washington Post columnist and Fox News Channel regular Charles Krauthammer.
Klein went on to praise Bush, with a parting shot at Krauthammer.
“Krauthammer used to be an independent thinker, too,” said Klein. “Tis a pity he’s a hack, and a smug, reflexive one at that.”
The Daily Caller reached out to Krauthammer for a response to Klein’s “one small quibble.”
“Joe who?” Krauthammer replied in an email.
“The Hammer” comes down. Priceless!
MrLiberty
June 14th, 2012
4:50 pm
What compromise are we actually talking about here. To compromise, one must first come from a principled position. Neither the republicans or the democrats have any principled positions to come from. They are both big government, war loving, welfare loving, big spending, liberty hating parties. They only pretend to be different in hopes that we will see one party as better than the other and elect them. In truth, they are both the same.
Bipartisan = Double Penetration.
davetv
June 14th, 2012
4:50 pm
MarkV – at the end of world war II, the American Dream was not to see how long one can live off the handouts from the Government.
md
June 14th, 2012
4:51 pm
Fallacy Mark? Do tell…….I’ve been waiting for days for you to tell us where you think the money comes from and all I get is deflection……..
So Mark…….where do you think the money will come from to pay that 15.1T of debt, and run the public and private sectors??
Again, I’m waiting with open ears but I’m guessing you are delaying your answer in an attempt to not look so bad in front of everybody…………
davetv
June 14th, 2012
4:52 pm
100% increase in food stamps- yep, the private sector is doing fine.
Hillbilly D
June 14th, 2012
4:55 pm
The economy is doing a hell of a lot better than it was 3 years ago.
Where I live, it’s pretty much the same.
@@
June 14th, 2012
4:57 pm
Hillbilly:
I did…with a smidgen left over.
md
June 14th, 2012
4:58 pm
“The national debt will not bankrupt the USA. It cannot.”
Now that’s a pipe dream……maybe you missed the shot across our bow by S&P? Why do you think Greece and Spain are having so much trouble?
It’s called “the ability to borrow at an affordable rate”………even we can fall to debt if we no longer have lenders…….that’s basic common sense.
@@
June 14th, 2012
5:00 pm
Sorry!
They did, Hillbilly.
Hillbilly D
June 14th, 2012
5:01 pm
@@
I knew what you meant. Remember, I’m not big on linguistic formalities. I don’t have time to worry about such. (ISH)
davetv
June 14th, 2012
5:05 pm
md – not to mention what will happen when the dollar is removed as the oil currency. Good night America as we know it.
md
June 14th, 2012
5:08 pm
“not to mention what will happen when the dollar is removed as the oil currency.”
I don’t think enough folks are keeping up with that and they should be. Give China and Russia an opening and they will not hesitate to replace the dollar as the reserve currency……which is one of the main reasons we have the investors/lenders that we do……take away that safe haven and all bets are off.
davetv
June 14th, 2012
5:10 pm
and a huge reason we should be worried about our credit rating.
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
5:33 pm
md @ 4:51 pm
“Fallacy Mark? Do tell”
Glad to oblige. Your post implied that the private sector produces as opposed to the public sector, which consumes. That is a fallacy.
md
June 14th, 2012
5:33 pm
Good read for some basics…..but one can fast forward to the bottom for the explanation of why China wants to put an end to the dollar as the world reserve……
http://www.lapasserelle.com/billets/greek_crisis.html
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
5:36 pm
md @4:58 pm
“Now that’s a pipe dream……maybe you missed the shot across our bow by S&P?”
Indeed I noticed – how it made no difference in our ability to borrow money.
“:Why do you think Greece and Spain are having so much trouble?”
The US is neither Greece nor Spain. Why do YOU think that is?
md
June 14th, 2012
5:38 pm
“Your post implied that the private sector produces as opposed to the public sector, which consumes. That is a fallacy.”
The public sector does consume Mark……it generates no income…..it relies on the private sector for survival…….for the life of me, I can’t understand where you think the money comes from to sustain both.
It ALL comes from the private sector mark……..
md
June 14th, 2012
5:42 pm
“Indeed I noticed – how it made no difference in our ability to borrow money.”
And the operative word should be “yet”…….one is only fooling themselves if they think it “can’t” happen. Why just a few short years ago Americans were convinced that housing prices could do nothing but go up………..
md
June 14th, 2012
5:45 pm
“The US is neither Greece nor Spain. Why do YOU think that is?”
That was in the above posts that you may want to visit…….if China gets their way (and if they overtake us as the #1 economy anything is possible), as I said all bets are off…….we may very well have trouble borrowing on the open market if we don’t get our spending/debt under control.
davetv
June 14th, 2012
5:46 pm
What pays for the public sector jobs? Private sector taxes- that’s what. The reason the public sector is not “doing as well” is that the private sector is not doing “fine”
md
June 14th, 2012
5:51 pm
“What pays for the public sector jobs? Private sector taxes- that’s what. ”
Evidently not dave……I think Mark may have one of those gov’t money trees growing in his backyard……
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
5:51 pm
md @5:38 pm
“The public sector does consume Mark……it generates no income…..it relies on the private sector for survival…….for the life of me, I can’t understand where you think the money comes from to sustain both.”
md,
It would serve you well to learn some economics; hopefully it would stopped you from making these errors.
I suppose you have at least heard about GDP? The value of all officially recognized final goods and services produced within a country in a given period? Notice the word services. Does the definition make any difference between services of the private sector and public sector? It does not. And it is called Gross Domestic PRODUCT. Understand?
If you need a more close-to-earth explanation by example, remember how you argued that what public sector does can be done by the private sector? Then let’s take an example where it indeed can. Let’s consider a city, which has as public service garbage collection. Then the city decides to privatize it, and a private company hires those same people, and pays them (for simplicity) the same. So they are now part of the private sector, while doing exactly the same as before for the same money.
Now explain how the same service of the same people magically switched from being consumers to being producers. I am waiting.
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
5:53 pm
md @5:45 pm
“if China gets their way (and if they overtake us as the #1 economy anything is possible), as I said all bets are off…….we may very well have trouble borrowing on the open market if we don’t get our spending/debt under control.”
And you have no idea why China would NOT want to do anything like that, even if they could, which they don’t?
md
June 14th, 2012
6:02 pm
You may want to read up on China Mark……you make yourself look silly by not being up to date.
Yes, they absolutely do want to eliminate the dollar as the primary world currency…..they are now focusing on getting a third party to administer a currency through the IMF……
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
6:06 pm
md @6:02 pm
Do not hold your breath. They may make noises, but it will NOT happen.
md
June 14th, 2012
6:10 pm
“Let’s consider a city, which has as public service garbage collection. Then the city decides to privatize it, and a private company hires those same people, and pays them (for simplicity) the same. So they are now part of the private sector, while doing exactly the same as before for the same money.
Now explain how the same service of the same people magically switched from being consumers to being producers. I am waiting.”
Mark…..in both cases, the money to run either must be generated by the private sector. So for the gov’t to do any function, it must “take” the money first from the private sector.
That 1T stimulus plan?? Now solely the burden of the private sector…….hence the problem of gambling on stimulus and it not working…..the bill is still due and must be paid by the very entity that it was supposed to help.
md
June 14th, 2012
6:13 pm
“They may make noises, but it will NOT happen.”
No such thing……everything is possible, and if they get to a point where they hold the upper hand then they may get to make the rules…….how do you think we ever got to the point where we got to make the rules??
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
6:22 pm
Everything is indeed possible. But you have no better crystal ball than I have.
The main point is that the money they have lended us (in a way of speaking) gives us the leverage. Would they want to lose a substantial portion of it? And why are they still buying our securities?
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
6:34 pm
md @ 6:10 pm
“Mark…..in both cases, the money to run either must be generated by the private sector. So for the gov’t to do any function, it must “take” the money first from the private sector.”
You are not making sense, and you do not answer questions.
Lynn
June 14th, 2012
6:49 pm
DaveTV,
Sadly, you know, hospital emergency rooms don’t provide Chemo. therapy to those with cancer. Heck, these days, hospitals usually won’t even set a broken limb. They will stabilize it, rest it on splint, maybe give you a pain shot, probably a script, and a list of ortho. doctors, and a good luck wish, as they send you out the door.
md
June 14th, 2012
6:55 pm
“The main point is that the money they have lended us (in a way of speaking) gives us the leverage. Would they want to lose a substantial portion of it? And why are they still buying our securities?”
Read the link I posted…….they want to create an alternative IMF currency and then unload their dollars in exchange for the new currency……then they don’t take the hit when we print money.
md
June 14th, 2012
6:56 pm
“You are not making sense, and you do not answer questions.”
I don’t answer questions?? I’ve been asking you for 3 days now where you think the gov’t gets it’s money………and still no answer.
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
7:06 pm
md @6:56 pm: “I don’t answer questions??”
Have you answered the question about how the people collecting garbage would have changed from consumers to producers just by doing the same work for a private company instead of the government? Have you answered my writing about GDP?
“ I’ve been asking you for 3 days now where you think the gov’t gets it’s money………and still no answer.”
That is another silly question, made even worse by your assertion that “the money to run either must be generated by the private sector.” Money is “generated by the private sector?” Can you explain how? Does the private sector prints the money, for crying out loud?
md
June 14th, 2012
7:16 pm
“Money is “generated by the private sector?” Can you explain how? Does the private sector prints the money, for crying out loud?”
Wow….just wow……I think we now see who needs that economics class.
Printing money does nothing but add supply……and devalue the currency……something else the private sector must overcome as the dollar drops in value.
Of course the private sector has to generate all the capital…..where do you think it comes from? It comes from consumers buying products and services mark………….and they buy them in the private sector mark……
printing money…..too funny.
MarkV
June 14th, 2012
10:28 pm
md @ 7:16 pm
It is obvious that you do not understand the meaning of the words you use. Generate is one of them.
Generate: To cause to exist; bring into being
Money is currency. How do you cause currency to exist by private enterprise?
And you still have failed to answer those other questions.
“Printing money does nothing but add supply……and devalue the currency…”
Another example of your incomprehension and inability to express thoughts. “Printing money” may under some circumstances devaluate the currency, but only under those specific circumstances. Where do you thing the money came from in the first place? The private sector just “generated” it out of thin air? How can you write these ridiculous sentences?
MrLiberty
June 15th, 2012
9:21 am
md – give it up on MarkV. If he wants to get a real education that doesn’t involve economic smoke and mirrors he will go to http://www.mises.org and avail himself of all the free articles and books that will provide him with a sound Austrian school economics training. If not, he will remain an ignorant Keynesian believing the lies of government and the media that public sector spending is good for the economy.
Education is at the heart of the battle. Keep up the good fight, but realize that sometimes you just have to walk away because some are too emotionally tied to their world-view to have it destroyed by facts and reality. Ultimately the collapse of the US economy will come – just like in Greece, Spain, Italy, and hundreds of failed empires before it. Maybe then MarkV will see the truth of what the massive public sector spending has done to our economy as well.
And here’s a quick one for you MarkV – yes, the private sector absolutely CAN do everything the government sector does. The difference is that if we have a fully free market with open competition among numerous business to provide “needed” services, it would be the market that would be deciding what services were ACTUALLY needed/required and the competitive market would also be determining the value of those services and their price. Picking up garbage is certainly something most everyone would be willing to VOLUNTARILY pay for from a private company, I can imagine hundreds if not thousands of things most folks would NOT be willing to voluntarily pay for that are currently considered “essential” by politicians and other who benefit from the service being taxpayer financed (involuntarily). That is the essential point MarkV. When one looks to Greece and other welfare state countries like the US, that is exactly the root of the problem. Those of us who create wealth through the productive private sector do not begrudge those companies who freely compete to secure our business (and who we can voluntarily REFUSE to purchase services from). What we are upset with are those government services we do not want, do not want to pay for, and have no other option but to pay as that payment is ultimately enforced at the point of a gun.
Hope that provides some clarity.
Check out mises.org. There is a lot you could learn.
MrLiberty
June 15th, 2012
9:27 am
MarkV:
Here are a couple of great books on the origin and nature of money (all free):
http://mises.org/daily/1333
http://mises.org/daily/3993/Menger-Explains-the-Origins-of-Money
And here is Mises’ great book on the subject:
http://library.mises.org//books/Gary%20North/Mises%20on%20Money_Vol_4.pdf
Just saying..
June 15th, 2012
9:28 am
Dusty
June 14th, 2012
12:00 pm: “Just saying, 11:53
I am glad you know that President OBAMA is still president. I was beginning to think that all liberals had forgotten about him. President OBAMA is seldom mentioned by liberals. Wonder why?
Is he still in Washington or you don’t know either?”
My goodness, aren’t you the informed voter!
MarkV
June 15th, 2012
2:03 pm
MrLiberty @9:27 am
Thank you. The issue here, however, is not the origin of money. The issue debated here is the money supply in a modern state. And we know where that comes from, don’t we?
MarkV
June 15th, 2012
2:06 pm
Just saying.. @9:28 am
Why not give Dusty a pass on a little innocent sarcasm? It is better than some of her really uninformed opinions
MrLiberty
June 15th, 2012
5:53 pm
MarkV – no, the issue has nothing to do with the “modern state.” The unbacked paper that governments/central banks create out of thin air is just paper. It has no wealth behind it, does not create wealth, but certainly is a mechanism for the transfer of wealth from the productive sector to the first recipients of the new money. Wealth only comes from the input of labor to transform raw materials into something useful/edible. These articles/books are about money in general and you would do well to read them. You definitely were not exposed to this clarity in school – none of us were.
md
June 15th, 2012
6:58 pm
Mr Liberty……I hear you loud and clear…..but sometimes I just feel like wasting a little time on these here blogs. Maybe there are a few that are not a lost cause……..I was once a card carrying democrat and loved the idea of getting stuff for free…….until I realized nothing is free.
Just saying..
June 16th, 2012
11:41 am
MarkV
June 15th, 2012
2:06 pm: “Just saying.. @9:28 am
Why not give Dusty a pass on a little innocent sarcasm? It is better than some of her really uninformed opinions”
She Is edging into the Linda nebula, isn’t she…?
MarkV
June 16th, 2012
10:41 pm
MrLiberty @5:53 pm
I would be willing to take you seriously, if you knew what you were talking about. Unfortunately, you do not. md was not talking about creating wealth – he wrote about “generating money.” Money is a measure of wealth, but wealth is not money. And please, do not give me advice about reading books, or about my education. You do not know me. But one of the marks of good education is to be able to express oneself accurately, and to recognize, what is the subject of the argument. Which you have failed to do.