What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[mercury14]

You think the Democrats just stumbled on the idea that last day before the vote right?

Lol no the filibuster rates by either party during the 60s is nothing like today. Nobody thinks that.

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

Read history, don't try and instruct me with your bullshit.

Sigh...

Today we go off threats of filibuster. They used to actually carry them out because they were so rare. So yes, lol, the number of carried-out filibusters is probably comparable or even fewer today.

The effect is the same. Stop being selectively literal...

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

Who was the first to use the nuclear option?

Nobody did.

Then some people went and changed the meaning of the term. Reid changed the rules to prevent a procedure the minority party was using to force votes even when the majority didn't want them.

OMG NUCLEAR OPTION!!!




You bring up a good point though. Senate Republicans threatened to use the nuclear option to overcome Democratic filibusters... Which were far smaller in number than the Republicans subsequently turned around and engaged in themselves just a couple years later.

Hypocrites.

 

[mercury14]

On a side note, it's amazing how fast the cockroaches scurried back into the wall when their lies about Fisker were exposed. Doesn't matter though. These two will still go back to the sources that lied to them for more "facts".

 

[eyer]

Meanwhile, back in the USSA...

...the country formerely known as the greatest nation the earth has ever known:

Which Countries Love Start-ups?

The World Bank's annual Doing Business report ranks the ease of doing business within 183 countries based on business-friendly regulations. The formula takes into account the ease of starting a business, factoring minimum cost, time, and available capital. Which economies are fostering start-ups? Get this, entrepreneurs: While the United States ranks fourth in the over-all ease of doing business in 2011, it didn't crack the top 10 for start-ups. Here's the count-down, starting at No. 9.

http://www.inc.com/ss/9-best-countries-start-business-right-now#0

9. Belarus
8. Rwanda
7. Georgia
6. Macedonia
5. Hong Kong
4. Singapore
3. Canada
2. Australia
1. New Zealand

 

[Sean Renaud]

Except maybe Canada none of those places has anything. It's easy to start up a Burger Joint when McDonald's doesn't already have one on every corner.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

It's part of the green energy program, meant to incentivize certain types of businesses. Nobody is saying it's without risk.

Meanwhile you support Cain's tax plan which is very much government picking winners and losers, isn't it? Would you like to discuss the political winners Republicans would like to see picked?

Do I? Link or lie...

And if I did, then a plan that treats every citizen with a blindfold is only picking winners and losers to a person who sees individuals not as such, but as part of a group. Give me anonymity and give me liberty.

Let's get back to this meme of "Republican Obstruction."

In 2006, the Republicans were swept out of Congress and in 2008 they were given bullet-proof majorities and the Democrats went about doing (what I predicted, just go to the Firespin files) what they had been promising for decades to do.

For some time they had the "That's nice, but we won" attitude about governance.

They did some things that Republicans did not approve of. Good for them. They had the majority, the American people spoke and they cleansed Washington DC of Bush and the Republicans, we might say the people obstructed the Bush administration. Then they pissed down the backs of the silent majority and praised the rain.

So, America, beginning with Brown and the Kennedy seat began to obstruct the Obama administration (as they did with Clinton, but he triangulated to the mob, he did not run to the Left and praise wacko protestors) by electing Republicans.

So to me, it's not a matter of REPUBLICAN obstruction, but the People's obstruction, otherwise, why the hell would they elect Republicans?

It's not like they tried to pretend to be someone they were not. Like Obama, they told us what they were going to do once elected. If we wanted Obama to pass these bills without impediment, then we would have retained Democrat control of Congress, but unfortunately for you, we, THE PEOPLE, decided that we had had enough "pragmatic centrism..."

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Lol no the filibuster rates by either party during the 60s is nothing like today. Nobody thinks that.

No. In the 60's we took to the streets and railed against LBJ and his illegal war.

As Uncle Herman would say, apples to oranges...

In the 60s, Republicans would have had but a few opportunities to filibuster, they were happy just to get in a round with Tip...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

In the 60's though, the Party of Lincoln was useful in certain civil rights matters...



Oh those evil fucking Republicans. What would Sheets say?

Shit Happens!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Except maybe Canada none of those places has anything. It's easy to start up a Burger Joint when McDonald's doesn't already have one on every corner.

You've never been to Hong Kong or Singapore?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

On a side note, it's amazing how fast the cockroaches scurried back into the wall when their lies about Fisker were exposed. Doesn't matter though. These two will still go back to the sources that lied to them for more "facts".

Jesus H. Christ, I used it to beat you about the head and shoulders with and I caught you in a lie about it.

You gonna demand I quote you again?

Been there.

Done that.

Shit Happens!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Mark Steyn, over at NRO has some words about the bill the "Republicans" in the Senate are "obstructing" (and never you mind about the Republicans who won control of the house, today, we're slandering the Senate and proposing to rewrite its rules in order to get it to rubber-stamp Democrat policies...) :

In one of those inspired innovations designed to keep American classrooms on the cutting edge of educational excellence, the administration has been sending Joe Biden out to talk to schoolchildren. Last week, it was the fourth grade at Alexander B. Goode Elementary School in York, Pa., that found itself on the receiving end of the vice president’s wisdom:

Here in this school, your school, you’ve had a lot of teachers who used to work here, but because there’s no money for them in the city, they’re not working. And so what happens is, when that occurs, each of the teachers that stays have more kids to teach. And they don’t get to spend as much time with you as they did when your classes were smaller. We think the federal government in Washington, D.C., should say to the cities and states, look, we’re going to give you some money so that you can hire back all those people. And the way we’re going to do it, we’re going to ask people who have a lot of money to pay just a little bit more in taxes.

Who knew it was that easy?

So let’s see if I follow the vice president’s thinking:

The school laid off these teachers because “there’s no money for them in the city.” That’s true. York City School District is broke. It has a $14 million budget deficit.

So instead Washington, D.C., is going to “give you some money” to hire these teachers back.

So, unlike York, Pa., presumably Washington, D.C., has “money for them”?

No, not technically. Washington, D.C., is also broke — way broker than York City School District. In fact, the government of the United States is broker than any entity has ever been in the history of the planet. Officially, Washington has to return 15,000,000,000,000 dollars just to get back to having nothing at all. And that 15,000,000,000,000 dollars is a very lowball figure that conveniently ignores another $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities that the government, unlike private businesses, is able to keep off the books.

So how come the Brokest Jurisdiction in History is able to “give you some money” to hire back those teachers that had to be laid off?

No problem, says the vice president. We’re going to “ask” people who have “a lot of money” to “pay just a little bit more” in taxes.

Where are these people? Evidently, not in York, Pa. But they’re out there somewhere. Who has “a lot of money”? According to President Obama, if your combined household income is over $250,000 a year you have “a lot of money.” Back in March, my National Review colleague Kevin Williamson pointed out that, in order to balance the budget of the United States, you would have to increase the taxes of people earning more than $250,000 a year by $500,000 a year.

Okay, okay, maybe that 250K definition of “bloated plutocrat” is a bit off. After all, the quarter-mil-a-year category includes not only bankers and other mustache-twirling robber barons, but also at least 50 school superintendents in the State of New York and many other mustache-twirling selfless public servants.

So how about people earning a million dollars a year? That’s “a lot of money” by anybody’s definition. As Kevin Williamson also pointed out, to balance the budget of the United States on the backs of millionaires you would have to increase the taxes of those earning more than 1 million a year by 6 million a year.

Not only is there “no money in the city” of York, Pa., and no money in Washington, D.C., there’s no money anywhere else in America — not for spending on the Obama/Biden scale. Come to that, there’s no money anywhere on the planet: Last year, John Kitchen of the U.S. Treasury and Menzie Chinn of the University of Wisconsin published a study called “Financing U.S. Debt: Is There Enough Money in the World — and At What Cost?”

Don’t worry, it’s a book with a happy ending! U.S.-government spending is sustainable as long as by 2020 the rest of the planet is willing to sink 19 percent of its GDP into U.S. Treasury debt. And why wouldn’t they? After all, if you’re a Chinese politburo member or a Saudi prince or a Russian kleptocrat or a Somali pirate and you switched on CNN International and chanced to catch Joe Biden’s Fourth Grade Economics class, why wouldn’t you cheerily dump a fifth of your GDP into a business model with such a bright future?

Since 1970, public-school employment has increased ten times faster than public-school enrollment. In 2008, the United States spent more per student on K–12 education than any other developed nation except Switzerland — and at least the Swiss have something to show for it. In 2008, York City School District spent $12,691 per pupil — or about a third more than the Swiss. Slovakia’s total per-student cost is less than York City’s current per-student deficit — and the Slovak kids beat the United States at mathematics, which may explain why their budget arithmetic still has a passing acquaintanceship with reality. As in so many other areas of American life, the problem is not the lack of money but the fact that so much of the money is utterly wasted.

But that’s no reason not to waste even more! So the president spent last week touring around in his weaponized Canadian bus telling Americans that Republicans were blocking plans to “put teachers back in the classroom.” Well, where are they now? Not every schoolmarm is down at the Occupy Wall Street drum circle, is she? No, indeed. And in that respect York City is a most instructive example: Five years ago (the most recent breakdown I have), the district had 440 teachers but 295 administrative and support staff. If you’re thinking that sounds a little out of whack, that just shows what a dummy you are: For every three teachers we “put back in the classroom,” we need to hire two bureaucrats to put back in the bureaucracy to fill in the paperwork to access the federal funds to put teachers back in the classroom. One day it will be three educrats for every two teachers, and the system will operate even more effectively.

It’s just about possible to foresee, say, Iceland or Ireland getting its spending under control. But, when a nation of 300 million people presumes to determine grade-school hiring and almost everything else through an ever more centralized bureaucracy, you’re setting yourself up for waste on a scale unknown to history. For example, under the Obama “stimulus,” U.S. taxpayers gave a $529 million loan guarantee to the company Fisker to build their Karma electric car. At a factory in Finland.

If you’re wondering how giving half a billion dollars to a Finnish factory stimulates the U.S. economy, well, what’s a lousy half-bil in a multi-trillion-dollar sinkhole? Besides, in the 2009 global rankings, Finnish schoolkids placed sixth in math, third in reading, and second in science, while suffering under the burden of a per-student budget half that of York City. By comparison, America placed 17th in reading, 23rd in science, and 31st in math. So the good news is that, by using U.S.-government money to fund a factory in Finland, Fisker may be able to hire workers smart enough to figure out how to build an unwanted electric car that doesn’t lose its entire U.S.-taxpayer investment.

In a sane world, Joe Biden’s remarks would be greeted by derisive laughter, even by fourth graders. Certainly by Finnish fourth graders.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Mark Steyn, over at NRO has some words about the bill the "Republicans" in the Senate are "obstructing" (and never you mind about the Republicans who won control of the house, today, we're slandering the Senate and proposing to rewrite its rules in order to get it to rubber-stamp Democrat policies...) :

Despite the assertions of Mr. Steyn, nobody is attempting to rewrite anything. The obstructionism of the GOP in the Senate is merely being pointed out for what it is. That IS what you call forcing a 60 majority in order to head off a filibuster no matter how you or Mr. Steyn wish to redefine it. Oddly enough this is exactly the sort of thing that Republicans whined and cried about when it was done to them (although not NEARLY as often, Bush was able to get many of his initiatives passed, much to the detriment of our economy), when THEY tried to rewrite the rules.

Why is it that the Senate GOP doesn't like their behavior being labeled as exactly the sort of hypocitical bullshit we've seen from them for a decade now? It's only "slander" if it's not true. In this case, it's very much the truth that the GOP has made it it's mission to obtruct any legislation that the President has endorsed, even those which they initiate themselves.

Mr. Steyn seems to be exactly as stupid as the GOP believes the majority of the electorate to be... Or he's hoping that the rubes reading his column are.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Despite the assertions of Mr. Steyn, nobody is attempting to rewrite anything. The obstructionism of the GOP in the Senate is merely being pointed out for what it is. That IS what you call forcing a 60 majority in order to head off a filibuster no matter how you or Mr. Steyn wish to redefine it. Oddly enough this is exactly the sort of thing that Republicans whined and cried about when it was done to them (although not NEARLY as often, Bush was able to get many of his initiatives passed, much to the detriment of our economy), when THEY tried to rewrite the rules.

Why is it that the Senate GOP doesn't like their behavior being labeled as exactly the sort of hypocitical bullshit we've seen from them for a decade now? It's only "slander" if it's not true. In this case, it's very much the truth that the GOP has made it it's mission to obtruct any legislation that the President has endorsed, even those which they initiate themselves.

Mr. Steyn seems to be exactly as stupid as the GOP believes the majority of the electorate to be... Or he's hoping that the rubes reading his column are.

And what will you say if it passes the Senate and dies in the House? Is that too going to be some really unusual and "partisan," most likely racial "hate?"

Again, go back to what I said.

The American People gave them the power to obstruct Obama.

They did not force their way in with guns and take the Senate hostage. They ran on stopping Obama and they won.

They are stopping Obama.

If this is as dastardly as you two are trying to portray it, then of course, We, The People, are going to hand Obama a landslide so he can get back to his really important work of the transformation change of his backswing and keeping track of the TOTUS...

So, when you bash Stein, when you impugn his readers, when you express your contempt for their stupidity, then you're blasting the ignorance of the American people, something we probably agree on, but for differing reason...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

...

Let's get back to this meme of "Republican Obstruction."

In 2006, the Republicans were swept out of Congress and in 2008 they were given bullet-proof majorities and the Democrats went about doing (what I predicted, just go to the Firespin files) what they had been promising for decades to do.

For some time they had the "That's nice, but we won" attitude about governance.

They did some things that Republicans did not approve of. Good for them. They had the majority, the American people spoke and they cleansed Washington DC of Bush and the Republicans, we might say the people obstructed the Bush administration. Then they pissed down the backs of the silent majority and praised the rain.

So, America, beginning with Brown and the Kennedy seat began to obstruct the Obama administration (as they did with Clinton, but he triangulated to the mob, he did not run to the Left and praise wacko protestors) by electing Republicans.

So to me, it's not a matter of REPUBLICAN obstruction, but the People's obstruction, otherwise, why the hell would they elect Republicans?

It's not like they tried to pretend to be someone they were not. Like Obama, they told us what they were going to do once elected. If we wanted Obama to pass these bills without impediment, then we would have retained Democrat control of Congress, but unfortunately for you, we, THE PEOPLE, decided that we had had enough "pragmatic centrism..."

Justin case you missed it. You don't have to ad hominem Steyn.

You can ad hominem me!

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

And what will you say if it passes the Senate and dies in the House? Is that too going to be some really unusual and "partisan," most likely racial "hate?"

Again, go back to what I said.

The American People gave them the power to obstruct Obama.

They did not force their way in with guns and take the Senate hostage. They ran on stopping Obama and they won.

They are stopping Obama.

If this is as dastardly as you two are trying to portray it, then of course, We, The People, are going to hand Obama a landslide so he can get back to his really important work of the transformation change of his backswing and keeping track of the TOTUS...

So, when you bash Stein, when you impugn his readers, when you express your contempt for their stupidity, then you're blasting the ignorance of the American people, something we probably agree on, but for differing reason...

You, like most of the "right" misinterpreted the will of those who voted GOP politicos into office. You, and they, took it as a license to obstruct, to drag their feet, and to repeal everything they could think of, when the actual message was to stop fucking around and get something done.

Instead, the GOP has engaged in more of the same old Party of No, the people are tired of gridlock and zero progress. Congressional job performance polls speak volumes. The majority of respondents look on Republicans in Congress MUCH more negatively than they do their Democratic counterparts. Ever wonder why that is? Look at the paragraph above.

So no, I'm not bashing the ignorance of the "American people", just Mr. Steyn, and those stupid enough to buy his line of "we're victims being persecuted" bullshit.

We shall see in November 2012 who is on the right side of things. People are fed up with nothing being done, of constant obstructionism, of party before people.

As far as President' Obama's re-election chances that little wager is still open. So far I have about a dozen righties where I work on the line. They seem to be more confident in their convictions than you are. A few more and I stand to make enough to buy myself a nice new set of chromed out highway pegs for my motorcycle.

As for your mock indignation over ad hominem, stop playing the victim Cap'n Hypocrite, you're only against a little personal jab when it's directed at you.. You seem to turn a blind eye to your own jabs, and those with whom you agree.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Well, that is your opinion.

If you think that the Republicans were sent there just to do what Obama wanted because we were tired of gridlock, well then, there we have it.

But one wonders why they didn't send Democrats to maintain the status quo if they so loved the policy emanating from the White House, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

Just on a pure logical basis, your line of argument really doesn't play out all that well.

What was the lesson of the November 2010 Vote then in your estimation?

That Republicans were sent to finish the work of the Democrats?

That we were tired of the Democrats unwillingness to compromise, so we sent Republicans to compromise to get something done other than overhaul the health industry, bail out Wall Street and stimulate the public sector with cash in order to revive the private sector?

What are we missing, or not seeing in the election results?

Are you telling us the Tea Party has real influence?

If so, how can it come from anywhere other than the people?

Speaking of polls, why is Obama dropping like a rock too if it's the fault of the Republicans in "getting something done" like President Obama's halving down on his failed stimulus plan...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Why are so many Blue Dog Democrats retiring?

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Speaking of polls, why is Obama dropping like a rock too if it's the fault of the Republicans in "getting something done" like President Obama's halving down on his failed stimulus plan...

Dropping like a rock? In what universe? mid 40's approval since 2009 is dropping like a rock?

Failed stimulus? According to who? merc has schooled you repeatedly on that piece of tripe.

Democrats unwilling to compromise? *laugh* Good Lord man, you're going to make me fall out of my seat.

You really do live in a Hannity/Limbaugh/FauxNews fantasy land don't you?

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Why are so many Blue Dog Democrats retiring?

It's called old age and attrition, something you should be well aware of Cap'n Dinosaur.

 

[koalabear]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/var/plain/storage/images/media/obama_index_graphics/october_2011/obama_approval_index_october_22_2011/604090-1-eng-US/obama_approval_index_october_22_2011.jpg

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Whatever.

Not too many Presidents have been this low looking to be reelected.

That's not the stuff of fantasy.



That's not what they are saying; they're blaming the hostility of their party and their inability to raise funds.

I bitched about Bush for six years, and through all that time the Republicans on this board never trashed me the way the Democrats do now that "their guy" is "in charge."

They were angry when Bush was President, but they seem even more angry now that Obama is President.

Maybe it's just disappointment.

Maybe, it's who they really are and have been all along.
A_J, the Wiser

I still have to think that We, The People, are more concerned with what Obama is doing than what the Republicans are doing. I mean, he got elected on the back of Bush, the big debt guy and then he tripled the debt on his watch. Now you're bitching because those big-spending Republicans won't let him continue to run up the credit cards...

Do you have ANY solid principles? I know you hate mine, but I'm hard-pressed to find any principle other than I'm against whatever the Republicans are for.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/var/plain/storage/images/media/obama_index_graphics/october_2011/obama_approval_index_october_22_2011/604090-1-eng-US/obama_approval_index_october_22_2011.jpg

Maybe I should have said decaying like the arc of a rock skimmed across a pond?