Good news/bad news. Bad news is, I have a bowling league this evening so I will not be on hand to live blog the George Bush Misstatement of the Union. Good news is, Kathleen is going to step up and live blog it right here on this site, starting at or around 9 PM.
PAD
Kathleen here. I put my POV on this behind the cut.
9:01
Kathleen here. I am going to comment here. I am watching it on NBC currently but I may flip around a bit as this goes on.
9:03
This just in....Bush is not nostalgic that this is his last SOU address. Nor I think is just about anyone else except possible Rove.
9:05
Let's get this show started! Here he comes. Of course with a blue tie.
OK any bets how long it is going to be before he starts talking? Apparently he has been practicing all weekend
Aaaand the winner is....who had 9:10?
Vigorous Debate? In what alternative universe?
We believe in the power of the individual? He does? Really?
He trusts us with our own money as long as he can dictate how we spend that money. Oooo a warning to do it his way or the high way.
He is pushing for those absurd tax cuts again.
9:14
And the Republicans stand and the Democrats sit.
But the stimulus package is is cheered on.
Oh now he is slapping them on the hands for things that have been done since time began.
We could use the word VETO as a drinking game tonight,
The collapse of the housing market in firmly because of Bush's policies and the "look the other way" as money is being pushed around to make everyone's bottom line look better.
His health insurance promise is a scam from word go. Anyone remember his idea for Social Security.
Ask a teacher No child left behind is a big ass joke. States are being forced to teach to the test. There is no money for the school to do what the feds insist that they do by law.
Still trying to get school voucher in there.
Free trade with the countries that supply the most drugs to the US. That's a great idea. Let's get in bed with some more dictators since we saw how well that worked in Iraq and Iran.
Oh NOW he wants clean energy. Coal power is dead unless someone could come up with a new way to do it. OK we are talking about Nuclear Power again. That makes more sense.
Slow and stop Greenhouse gases....Like the Kyoto Treaty that we have STILL NOT PASSED?
Moral boundaries ? Oh Stem Cells and that mess. Buying Selling or patenting human being? Sorry the barn door is already open and the tissue is out.
Moral Judges? Oh PLEASE. I am going to lose my lunch.
He is still trying to get federal funding for religious organizations again.
Here is his run on Social Security again. My plan didn't work so you do it.
Guest Worker program again. Didn't get it last time and won't get it this time. He just don't get it does he? The congress doesn't want to do it his way.
Are we going to talk about Iran? Not yet? Maybe later.
Justice to our enemies. *snort*
Is that what we are doing? Spreading the hope of freedom? I thought we were spreading the threat of terrorism.
Ah so rather than staying the course we changed it and sent more Americans into countries that don't want us there. He is trying to prove that he did what he said he was going to do in the last year even though the Iraq government has not hit the minimum for continued funding. But he still wants more money and more bodies to throw at the problem.
Wait a minute...weren't they on the run last year and the year before and the year before that?
Return on Success? What? That just is too vague for me to even comprehend.
So now if you don't get what you need it is Congress's fault not the Presidents? I call Shenanigans!
Oh good ONE group of people came home. Do you know how many are over there? Are about to have to go over there again? 20,000 is a drop in the bucket.
Shi'a, Sunni and Kurds are rebuilding together? Yeah each within their own tribe trying to keep the others from gaining anything.
There are problems there that will never be solved unless the Prophet himself comes back and sorts it out himself. (that quote given to me by a friend who's family still lives in Bagdad.)
Here is the poke at Iran (with a side poke at North Korea)
Ah the Freedom Act! Let it DIE!!!!!!
Oooo look at the divide on that one. And the Democrats have the majority.
Sudan is mentioned as are some other troubled spots that are being ignored or given token respect by the world. Bad President no biscuit for you.
Here is the HIV part of the speech. The problem is that the virus is mutating and the numbers in new groups are increasing.
Vets do need more for what they did. And hey here is a wacky idea, stop pushing people out of the system for stupid reasons like creating the situation of dishonorable discharge to people who now have serious mental health issues. I hate how the veterans have been treated by our government.
Oooo Someone gave him a history lesson.
G-d help America and each one of us.
10:04 pm And we are done. Thanks for joining me during this viewing.
Posted by Peter David at January 28, 2008 06:54 PM | TrackBack | Other blogs commentingI just can't sit thru another one of these. What can this man possibly tell me that I haven't already heard, and grown of, in the last 7 years.
I'll just let myself imagine the possibilty of next year's State of The Union being delivered by one Barack Obama...
9:26pm. Now he's talking about supporting the physical sciences with more funding? This from the guy who constantly tried to suppress scientific material from his own administration when it conflicted with the right-wing agenda?
gene hall: I just can't sit thru another one of these.
Luigi Novi: What about the last one of these? :-)
9:36pm. Did he just pronounce "tyranny" as "tierney"? Was he make a reference to dictators, or that chick from ER?
I feel a great disturbance in the Force....as if a halfwit was preaching to the useless......
9:43pm. The surge troops are on their way home? When did this happen?
Kathleen David: Slow and stop Greenhouse gases....Like the Kyoto Treaty that we have STILL NOT PASSED?
Luigi Novi: Doing that would probably bankrupt us, and have no positive effect on global warming.
9:43pm. The surge troops are on their way home? When did this happen?
The longest deployment Bush could get the Pentagon to approve was fifteen months (extended from the one-year "extended tours" he'd stuck them on already). So, of course, as each unit hits the 15-month mark and gets rotated back to its home base, our Nitwit-In-Chief claims them as "surge troops" being "withdrawn", because obviously the surge must have worked, or they wouldn't be "withdrawn", right? [rolleyes]
Do it by Friday and do it my way... Or you all die!!!!!!!!! Bwa-ha-ha-ha!!!!!!
"There are problems there that will never be solved unless the Prophet himself comes back and sorts it out himself. (that quote given to me by a friend who's family still lives in Bagdad.)"
I doubt that would work. Remember the South Park episode where Jesus came back and the head of the Evangelical Christians locked him up? Same thing.
Oh, yeah, almost forgot - he's also trying to get the Pentagon to reduce time home between deployments from twelve months to six.
On the so-called Patriot Act - I seem to recall that part of the basis on which it was sold to us was that it was just temporary, and would expire by '06. Then by '08. After all, we were assured, no one would want to permanently limit American freedoms...
I just laugh about him being the first leader in the history of the world to cut taxes while trying to fund a war....
"Absurd tax cuts". Do you, or anybody else, want to pay more taxes? I have little regard for Bush, but giving more money to Congress doesn't seem like a good idea. I enjoyed the rest of the free-form reaction to the speech, even though my reaction may have included venting at different times. Thanks for the entertainment.
Posted by: Jonathan (the other one)
On the so-called Patriot Act - I seem to recall that part of the basis on which it was sold to us was that it was just temporary, and would expire by '06. Then by '08. After all, we were assured, no one would want to permanently limit American freedoms...
I'm still anticipating internal passports by 20109 if another Republican Administration manages to steal the election ... err ... get elected.
Posted by: Dennis Donohoe
"Absurd tax cuts". Do you, or anybody else, want to pay more taxes? I have little regard for Bush, but giving more money to Congress doesn't seem like a good idea.
No, but intentionally cutting your income at the same time as you're spending manymany billions on a useless war is an even worse idea.
This sort of logic is why, historically, the really big deficits have occured under Republican Administrations
I hope the next president goes back just doing this in writing. Its always so boring to say nothing of the clapping bs that they love to focus on. Its really lazy reporting at its finest. And the Democratic responds always makes Bush charming by comparison.
"Do you, or anybody else, want to pay more taxes?"
If tax rates were based on how much people wanted to pay, we'd have no roads, schools, or anything else.
Dennis - "'Absurd tax cuts'. Do you, or anybody else, want to pay more taxes?"
Republicans/right-wing types tend to have this "cut taxes" mantra. Unfortunately the truth is, running a country costs money. And skimping on necessary expenditures will come back to cost you more in the long run. For example: in 2005 the American Society of Civil Engineers put out a report card on the nation's infrastructure stating there would need to be $1.5 TRILLION spent over the next five years just to have things at a minimum acceptable safety level.
Shrub's 'solution'? Try to cut taxes of course.
Reality's response? That bridge collapse in Minnesota. And expect more of the same as long as various levels of governments don't get it.
Posted by The StarWolf at January 29, 2008 08:13 AM
Reality's response? That bridge collapse in Minnesota. And expect more of the same as long as various levels of governments don't get it.
The bridge collapse was due to a design flaw in the gusset plates. It had absolutely nothing to do with tax cuts. So not a good example.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/16/washington/16bridge.html
The Dems in Minnesota were screaming this before the bodies were even out of the water.
Isn't this thing usually given on a Tuesday or a Wednesday? Did they change it to a Monday so it would slip under the radar?
It's Monday because Dubya's trying to strike a blow against those killer robots from the future on NBC Monday nights.
Given that Federal funding for the physical sciences was cut in half this year in large part due to the President's newfound love of the Veto, insisting Congress double it is like raising prices quietly and then loudly claiming to have a big sale (when you're only dropping prices to where they started).
What fractures me is his call to support Veterans. Lessee...those would be the same vets who, if they were unable to complete their Iraqi tour because they were injured in the line of duty, had the army trying to screw them out of their enlistment bonuses. The same vets who, if they were found to have mental problems, dishonorably discharged and deprived of veterans benefits. Are those the veterans that Bush demands we support?
PAD
The dirty little secret of Washington is that for all the grandstanding over the budget, they are arguing over 1/10th of one percent of the budget. The rest (entitlements, defense, foreign aid) are all preset to begin with.
We are spending ourselves into oblivion - both personally and as a nation. Our personal savings rate is negative - we spend more than we earn each year. Congress isn't helping with a "stimulus" that is a joke. The economists keep saying we need to pump money into the economy, and that the worst thing to do with this money is to pay down our debt.
What a joke. The BEST thing we could do is pay down debt. The average household has over $5000 in credit card debt alone, not to mention the house and car payments.
However, the media will help push the spend, spend, spend message to avoid a recession. At some point, though, this all has to be paid back.
Regarding the State of the Union. The one thing I really liked is the Executive Order to not spend earmarks. Presidents pre-Nixon had this power over the entire budget - it was essentially a back-door line-item veto. Unfortunately, Congress didn't like this and explicitly removed this power from the Executive. It's no coincidence that the debt starting really spiraling upwards in the Ford era and later. (http://www.marktaw.com/culture_and_media/TheNationalDebt.html)
I don't know how much impact the Executive Order will have, but every little bit helps.
Someone please refresh my memory here... The last time that Georgie sent us the $600, didn't we end up having to pay taxes on it?
If that is indeed the case, I think this "refund" is not a play to improve the economy, but a ploy to nudge those on the verge of a new tax bracket over the edge. That way the government makes more money.
To borrow a phrase from Dennis Miller, "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong."
I don't know how much impact the Executive Order will have, but every little bit helps.
But I'll wager that while Democratic pork will get halted and railed against, GOP pork will be ushered through the back door with nary a raised voice.
Posted by: Mark L at January 29, 2008 10:32 AM
We are spending ourselves into oblivion - both personally and as a nation. Our personal savings rate is negative - we spend more than we earn each year. Congress isn't helping with a "stimulus" that is a joke. The economists keep saying we need to pump money into the economy, and that the worst thing to do with this money is to pay down our debt.
Who is going to pay for this "stimulus" package?
My understanding is $75,000 is the cut off for single. so anybody making more than that is in a round about way going to pay for the "stimulus"
Im not in favor of a redistribution of wealth when the Dems push it and certainly not in favor of it now.
But I'll wager that while Democratic pork will get halted and railed against, GOP pork will be ushered through the back door with nary a raised voice.
Only because the Dems don't object to pork. Look at the self-proclaimed "Pork King" Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia. He never met pork that he didn't like.
I like the Republicans when they stand for cutting spending, but they never do it. I like the Democrats when they pay-as-they-go, but they never object to a single program, either. It just reinforces how much we need a third party.
"If that is indeed the case, I think this "refund" is not a play to improve the economy, but a ploy to nudge those on the verge of a new tax bracket over the edge. That way the government makes more money."
Gaining $600 is not going to cost you an extra $601 dollars in taxes. The tax brackets don't have jumps that big. You don't see people going to their bosses and saying, "Please don't give me a raise, I can't afford it!"
Gaining $600 is not going to cost you an extra $601 dollars in taxes. The tax brackets don't have jumps that big. You don't see people going to their bosses and saying, "Please don't give me a raise, I can't afford it!"
Actually, I quit a part-time, online job a few years back because it did push me over just enough not to be worth it.
Posted by: Jason M. Bryant at January 29, 2008 11:07 AM
Gaining $600 is not going to cost you an extra $601 dollars in taxes. The tax brackets don't have jumps that big. You don't see people going to their bosses and saying, "Please don't give me a raise, I can't afford it!"
but it will cost someone else (higher tax bracket)
$601 or am I missing your point? Remember thats $600 per person + $300 per child if I understand it right.
Posted by: Christine at January 29, 2008 11:14 AM
Actually, I quit a part-time, online job a few years back because it did push me over just enough not to be worth it.
I work with some nurses who will only work 4 double shifts in a pay period because anything more puts them in a bigger tax bracket.
> You don't see people going to their bosses and saying, "Please don't give me a raise, I can't afford it!"
Sure you do. A now-retired co-worker stopped doing overtime because he realized he'd wind up with LESS take-home as a result of being nudged into the next bracket.
> "The bridge collapse was due to a design flaw in the gusset plates."
Design flaws can often be fixed. But first they have to be spotted. Both take money.
Posted by The StarWolf at January 29, 2008 11:50 AM
"The bridge collapse was due to a design flaw in the gusset plates."
Design flaws can often be fixed. But first they have to be spotted. Both take money.
Did you actually read the article?
All right, it can happen sometimes.
But for the government to actually make money on this, they'd need it to happen so often that *on average* everyone pays at least $601 of taxes. So for every person who isn't nudged into the next tax bracket, someone else needs to get $600 but pay an extra $1201. And that only adds up to a grand profit of 50 cents per person for the government.
Seems like a pretty unlikely money making scheme.
Oh, Jesus, there he goes---gettin' all political again.
Whatsamatta, not enough WORK ta keep ya busy?
Jesus, its just a 4-8 year JOB folks!!!! He/she's not a friggin' KING!
Y'all act as though we're electing Dr. DOOM or something...
I don't give a rats ass who thinks they're gonna run this country. They're all the same. Nothing's EVER gonna change.
Once they get into office, they go into their own little world and don't give a SHIT about us.
Why not find something better to do with your time? You do realize that the more you pay attention to these politicians, the more they're gonna tell you what you wanna hear.
Jesus, talk about the Red Hulk or something--get off this crap
Hey---now THERE'S an idea for a comic--a society where, if the leaders don't really--and I mean REALLY--do the will of the people, they get a bullet thru the head.
They won't know where or when.
We could call it "The Oswald Mandate" or something.
Are there two words used more often that have come to MEAN LESS? Freedom and Patriot. Buzzwords for "patriots give up their freedom". Gawd.
Sure you do. A now-retired co-worker stopped doing overtime because he realized he'd wind up with LESS take-home as a result of being nudged into the next bracket.
Ok, now I'm confused--I was under the impression that, say, the first $20,000 would be taxed under one rate, then the next $50,000 under a higher rate, etc etc. So while a raise might be taxed higher than the money you were making before, there's no way you could possibly end up with less take home pay.
Am I wrong about this?
Bill Mulligan---
Yes, you are right. But what happens in reality is that a person's take home pay can be affected. What most reasonable people don't take into consideration is that they gat more back in the spring on their refunds.
Bill Mulligan---
Yes, you are right. But what happens in reality is that a person's take home pay can be affected. What most reasonable people don't take into consideration is that they get more back in the spring on their refunds.
Anybody else notice that the unreasonable nutjobs have returned to this comment thread?
What, you've got nothing better to do in life than come around here trying to flame the place?
Get a life, losers!
Anonymous wrote:
"I don't give a rats ass who thinks they're gonna run this country. They're all the same. Nothing's EVER gonna change."
=====
You are so right. In fact, in the end, we are all gonna die. Doesn't matter who we are. Nothing's EVER gonna change that. Why bother to even try to go on living. In fact, I am gonna go kill myself right now so that it doesn't happen in the future.
{{sarcasm off}}
A classic mike tpoy:
"... I'm still anticipating internal passports by 20109 ..."
Obviously that ought to be "2109" ... errr ... "2010"
Posted by: Pat Nolan
Posted by The StarWolf at January 29, 2008 08:13 AMReality's response? That bridge collapse in Minnesota. And expect more of the same as long as various levels of governments don't get it.The bridge collapse was due to a design flaw in the gusset plates. It had absolutely nothing to do with tax cuts. So not a good example.
Well, not exactly - it *was* a design flaw, but (i may have this wrong, but it's consistent with engineering realities with which i am familiar) it was a design flaw that allowed gradual weakening of the structure that could have been caught by a proper program of inspections.
Posted by: ALB
Isn't this thing usually given on a Tuesday or a Wednesday? Did they change it to a Monday so it would slip under the radar?
Perhaps because the networks pointed out that the big news thing tonight and tomorrow night would the Florioda primary?
Posted by: Mark L
The dirty little secret of Washington is that for all the grandstanding over the budget, they are arguing over 1/10th of one percent of the budget. The rest (entitlements, defense, foreign aid) are all preset to begin with.
Another few hundred billion every few months for Georgie's War - in addition to the military funding in the budget - doesn't help any
Posted by: Pat Nolan
Who is going to pay for this "stimulus" package?
Glenn Danziger cartoon the day after it was announced the package was in the works:
US Government borrows money from China at high interest.USG gives money to citizens.Citizens spend money at WalMart.WalMart gives money to China.Posted by: Jason M. Bryant
Gaining $600 is not going to cost you an extra $601 dollars in taxes. The tax brackets don't have jumps that big. You don't see people going to their bosses and saying, "Please don't give me a raise, I can't afford it!"
Ummm, if you make $60,000 and your taxes go up one percent (and tax bracket jumps are more than 1%), that's $600...
Posted by: Alan Coil
You are so right. In fact, in the end, we are all gonna die. Doesn't matter who we are. Nothing's EVER gonna change that. Why bother to even try to go on living. In fact, I am gonna go kill myself right now so that it doesn't happen in the future.
Shel Silverstein wrote a song entitled "Still Gonna Die", performed with great gusto on the "Old Dogs" album by Waylon, Mel Tillis, Jerry Reed and Bobby Bare:
all the nikes
and adidas
and the reeboks you buy -
you can jog up to heaven
'cos you're still gonna die!...
you can get an AIDS test
enroll in est
move out west
where it's healthy and dry
and you live to be a hundred...
but you're still gonna die.so you better have some fun
before you say "bye-bye" -
'cos you're still gonna
still gonna
you're still gonna die!(of course, Waylon has stepped on a rainbow since then, having demonstrated both points the song makes...)
Anybody else notice that the unreasonable nutjobs have returned to this comment thread?
What, you've got nothing better to do in life than come around here trying to flame the place?
Get a life, losers!
-------------------------------------
If you give a shit enough to care about flamers and can't stick to the conversation, then maybe you're the one that needs to get a life.
"You are so right. In fact, in the end, we are all gonna die. Doesn't matter who we are. Nothing's EVER gonna change that. Why bother to even try to go on living. In fact, I am gonna go kill myself right now so that it doesn't happen in the future"
---------------------
So die already, coward.
OK Knock it Off.
Please ignore that Anonymous individual.
New Rule: If someone shows up it is OBVIOUS that they are there to troll, they are to be ignored.
Got it?
"So die already, coward."
Okay, so maybe I was a bit fatalistic. I tend to be a social realist, and since I live in Washington DC, Political talk is so commonplace here I'm surprised we don't all wipe our asses with the Washington Post.
But hell.....I've lived here for years now, its always the same thing. Doesn't matter if the President is Democrat or Republican.
I'm really beginning to think that the only way there is going to be real change, is if there's another revolution--maybe one with a real democracy where the people actually DO have a say in things.
I mean Jesus, Politics these days has sunk so low that its beginning to look like just another reality TV show.
I'm just sick of it. Nothing ever gets done.
So, leave some bullets in that gun, Alan, I may need it.
"Ummm, if you make $60,000 and your taxes go up one percent (and tax bracket jumps are more than 1%), that's $600..."
As someone already pointed out, your rebate will be bigger, too. By even if there are a few people that the math works out bad for, the vast mojority will come out ahead. Thus making "giving away money" a pretty bad money making scheme for the goverment.
Posted by mike weber
Well, not exactly - it *was* a design flaw, but (i may have this wrong, but it's consistent with engineering realities with which i am familiar) it was a design flaw that allowed gradual weakening of the structure that could have been caught by a proper program of inspections.
Could we split hairs any thinner?
1http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/washington/15bridge.html?ref=us
Thus making "giving away money" a pretty bad money making scheme for the goverment.
No argument, though you have to admit, our government has not been very good with money-making in the first place. My comment was more tongue-in-cheek than serious.
I just find it incredibly annoying that they give out these "refunds" then want to charge tax on the "refund." If they need the money (or part of it) so badly, then why play this absurd game.
Besides, I know many people use it to pay down debt or help with property taxes, not stimulate the economy.
As a guest on the Daily Show pointed out, we have a 13 trillion dollar economy. $600 per person (who qualifies) isn't going to add up to enough to do much no matter what they spend it on. It's not like $600 is gonna do anything long term for someone who can't afford his house payments every month.
I think the only real chance it has of affecting the economy is a psychological one. If people pay off a debt, maybe they'll relax and stop panicking just as much as if they'd spent it buying something new.
Curioius. Apparently, the best way to stimulate the economy is the one method that is almost certainly not going to be in the package: Food stamps and unemployment benefits. (http://money.cnn.com/2008/01/29/news/economy/stimulus_analysis/index.htm?postversion=2008012913)
The most amusing suggestion I've heard is give every college student in America $25 as they are virtually guaranteed to spend it immediately on domestic goods (pizza, wings, beer).
Ha! I like the low number. Give a college student too much and he'll buy clothes, shoes, and other stuff that might be foreign goods. Give him $25 a week for 6 months and it'll all go to pizza and beer. Interesting thought.
Bill, Alan - You're assuming they would qualify for a rebate. Not necessarily so.
>Nothing ever gets done.
It goes against political life. Just finished an ITIL (best IT service practices) course and one example they gave was an engineer who'd worked out that spending more money on upkeep and maintenance could actually save the government money as they'd be able to avoid building new bridges as existing ones could have their life extended to 50 years hence. The Senator he mentioned this to had but one response: "I won't be in office in 50 years."
Well, there's the personal aggrandizement part for sure, but there's also the problem that voters don't take the long term view and won't vote for people who take the long term view. Would voters support a politician that would RAISE spending on maintenance? Nine times out of ten, that'd get portrayed as featherbedding to keep useless employees on payroll and thus more government waste to be cut out.
Hey, here's a nice analysis for anyone interested.
http://www.factcheck.org/bush/facts_of_the_union_2008.html
Oh, time to put Hannity and Rush on suicide watch again. McCain, the man who would "destroy the republican party" if he got the nod, just took Florida an hour ago and looks strong in several other key states as well. And the latest word is that Rudy will drop out and endorse McCain tomorrow as well. Sick as I am right now, it'd almost be worth it to suffer listening to those windbags tomorrow just to hear them spin all of this.
For all those who say/think it doesn't matter who gets elected because nothing will change, I believe if a Democrat were elected in 2000 we wouldn't be in Iraq now. We'd have had a president who relatiated -- correctly -- against Afghanistan after 9/11 and not then fabricated facts to fit the next country on our hit list. We might actually still have dialogues with other countries (instead of a "you're either with us or against us" mantra), we probably wouldn't be performing warrantless wiretaps on U.S. citizens, and we wouldn't declare people "enemy combatants" and then deprive them of their rights as Americans or under the Geneva Convention. There might have been funding for stem-cell research, and we might not have had a surplus turned into a massive debt.
Otherwise, yeah, things might be a little similar.
>Nine times out of ten, that'd get portrayed as featherbedding to keep useless employees on payroll and thus more government waste to be cut out.
"OK, it's like this. We pay $100 million on maintenance over the next couple of years, or pay $500 million to build a new one a few years later. Your call."
I know the avewrage voter isn't very bright, but how hard would it be to explain this to them?
Posted by: The StarWolf
"OK, it's like this. We pay $100 million on maintenance over the next couple of years, or pay $500 million to build a new one a few years later. Your call."
I know the avewrage voter isn't very bright, but how hard would it be to explain this to them?
Considering that a huge percentage of people can't be persuaded to save for retirement, or that it's a Good Thing to make sacrifices now to prevent global warming from affecting the next generation...? Pretty hard.
Here's a link to a really good Public Service Ad about that...
More likely, you'll have people disputing any study as padding the government budget and saying that we could "get away" with spending less.
Locally, the voters HAVE KNOWN that we have to replace one viaduct and one major commuting bridge. Known if for the past decade. Tune of billions of dollars. Yet, they've repeatedly voted down gas tax bills specifically earmarked to pay for those replacements. They passed the last one---that only promised to pay for PART of them. Not gonna be likely to pass another one.
Mr. David - was wondering whether you had an opinion on the fact that Joe Quesada crossed a Guild picket line to appear on the Colbert report the other day?
Ugh, I don't know how you guys could sit through even five minutes of him talking, much less the whole thing. For the past couple years, as soon as Bush comes on screen/air I flip the station.
So die already, coward.
Spoken like a true, anonymous internet nut-job.
If people pay off a debt, maybe they'll relax and stop panicking just as much as if they'd spent it buying something new.
If the credit card companies were told to stop handing out new cards to anybody who asks for them, then the problem might eventually be solved.
The same goes for our government.
Until then, it will just keep getting worse.
We pay $100 million on maintenance over the next couple of years, or pay $500 million to build a new one a few years later.
It reminds me of the FastTracks plan here in the Denver Metro. We voted a couple of years back for a massive plan to build a dozen new light rail lines, including to DIA.
Well, the expected budget keeps going up year by year, because the cost of materials keeps going up.
Another part of the battle is the need to buy up land for the rail lines and the struggle involved there. Meanwhile, people are calling for not-as-needed lines to be cut (such as the one to DIA)... only, by the time the project is finished in 10-15 years, we WILL need such lines, so you build them NOW while you still can. If you don't, they'll never get built.
Damn near everybody would rather think short term.
Mr. David - was wondering whether you had an opinion on the fact that Joe Quesada crossed a Guild picket line to appear on the Colbert report the other day?
Since Marvel studios has carved out a separate agreement with the WGA, I'd have to think it falls into the clear conscience category.
PAD
>>For all those who say/think it doesn't matter who gets elected because nothing will change, I believe if a Democrat were elected in 2000 we wouldn't be in Iraq now. We'd have had a president who relatiated -- correctly -- against Afghanistan after 9/11 and not then fabricated facts to fit the next country on our hit list. We might actually still have dialogues with other countries (instead of a "you're either with us or against us" mantra), we probably wouldn't be performing warrantless wiretaps on U.S. citizens, and we wouldn't declare people "enemy combatants" and then deprive them of their rights as Americans or under the Geneva Convention. There might have been funding for stem-cell research, and we might not have had a surplus turned into a massive debt.
Otherwise, yeah, things might be a little similar.
At least Bush did something about 9/11...Carter allowed American Citizens to be held hostage by terrorists for over A YEAR.
I seriously doubt a Democrat President would've had the balls to go to war. All Clinton could do was lob SCUD missiles at em' from far away.
The last DEM that had any teeth was FDR.
Posting anonymously leads to being ignored. In some threads, there are two or three people who post as anonymous. Pick a name. Use the same name every time you post. Use your real name, if you wish. Many of us do.
Posted by Alan Coil
Posting anonymously leads to being ignored. In some threads, there are two or three people who post as anonymous. Pick a name. Use the same name every time you post. Use your real name, if you wish. Many of us do.
WHOA! What a concept!
What is reality, and why does it keep following me around?
>Posting anonymously leads to being ignored. In some threads, there are two or three people who post as anonymous. Pick a name. Use the same name every time you post. Use your real name, if you wish. Many of us do.
okay, can I use yours?
Its a nice name....
okay, can I use yours?
Only if you want to look even worse than you already have.
No, it's not a 'nice' name, it is just a name.
But you can obviously see that using Anonymous is something that just anybody can do.
Kathleen, thank you for your expert analysis. May I ask what your political crediatials are and which political papers you write for?
Kathleen here. I put my POV on this behind the cut.
9:01
Kathleen here. I am going to comment here. I am watching it on NBC currently but I may flip around a bit as this goes on.
9:03
This just in....Bush is not nostalgic that this is his last SOU address. Nor I think is just about anyone else except possible Rove.
9:05
Let's get this show started! Here he comes. Of course with a blue tie.
OK any bets how long it is going to be before he starts talking? Apparently he has been practicing all weekend
Aaaand the winner is....who had 9:10?
Vigorous Debate? In what alternative universe?
We believe in the power of the individual? He does? Really?
(My question is - do you libs? You guys seem to want to make everyone a victim.)
He trusts us with our own money as long as he can dictate how we spend that money. Oooo a warning to do it his way or the high way.
(At least he admits it is our money. Just how long have you been paying taxes?)
He is pushing for those absurd tax cuts again.
9:14
And the Republicans stand and the Democrats sit.
But the stimulus package is is cheered on.
(Yeah, what a silly thing. Better to lie and say he is going to raise taxes that only affect the upper class. Kathleen, do you have a better proposal to keep the ecomony strong.
Oh now he is slapping them on the hands for things that have been done since time began.
We could use the word VETO as a drinking game tonight,
(Yeah, from the man that approved every spending measure that crossed his desk in his first term. As for the drinking game, that probably explains your political thinking.)
The collapse of the housing market in firmly because of Bush's policies and the "look the other way" as money is being pushed around to make everyone's bottom line look better.
(It would have been nice to have some evidence in writing rather than simply your all-knowing mind.)
His health insurance promise is a scam from word go. Anyone remember his idea for Social Security.
(His idea was a modified version of the same idea Bill Clinton tried to pass during his term. As for health insurance promises, Hellary Clinton's has a strong whiff of manure coming from it.)
Ask a teacher No child left behind is a big ass joke. States are being forced to teach to the test. There is no money for the school to do what the feds insist that they do by law.
Still trying to get school voucher in there.
Yeah, the all the problems with our school systems are GWB's fault. I basically agree with you about NCLB, but the problems with the public school system existed long before W came to office.
Free trade with the countries that supply the most drugs to the US. That's a great idea. Let's get in bed with some more dictators since we saw how well that worked in Iraq and Iran.
Yeah, and let us not forget how many libs think Castro and Hugo Chavez are such wonderful people.
Oh NOW he wants clean energy. Coal power is dead unless someone could come up with a new way to do it. OK we are talking about Nuclear Power again. That makes more sense.
(Funny, I've heard the same thing coming from the Dems as part of the upcoming election. Not that the Dems have a great record for coming up with realistic solutions...for anything.)
Slow and stop Greenhouse gases....Like the Kyoto Treaty that we have STILL NOT PASSED?
(If you feel that strongly about it, Kathleen, why don't you do something about the countries that don't have our standards, like China and India. Spare me the whole global warming hoax, Chicken Little.)
Moral boundaries ? Oh Stem Cells and that mess. Buying Selling or patenting human being? Sorry the barn door is already open and the tissue is out.
(Clarification? Evidence? I know, I know ...too much to ask.)
Moral Judges? Oh PLEASE. I am going to lose my lunch.
(Funny...I'm getting the same feeling from reading your delightful analysis.)
He is still trying to get federal funding for religious organizations again.
(What? No mention about how much funding is going to liberal groups that do not work and have not worked. If the money went to religious groups, maybe it might so some good. Ah, but I forget...there's that all church vs. state thing.)
Here is his run on Social Security again. My plan didn't work so you do it.
(Gee, I remember back in the late 70s, how the Democrats were saying Social Security is going broke and something needed to be done. Guess they were wrong and the president is just trying to scare people now.)
Guest Worker program again. Didn't get it last time and won't get it this time. He just don't get it does he? The congress doesn't want to do it his way.
(Yeah, and he doesn't want to things the way House Speaker Nancy Lugosi and Harry "Murkin Muffley" Reid want it done. So what's your suggestion on how to solve the problem, oh most expert Kathleen?)
Are we going to talk about Iran? Not yet? Maybe later.
(What about Iran? Did they take hostages? Oh, wait...I forgot, that was when Jimmy "I'm doing my on-the-job training as president" Carter.)
Justice to our enemies. *snort*
Is that what we are doing? Spreading the hope of freedom? I thought we were spreading the threat of terrorism.
(A great statement if you are preaching to the choir. A left-wing talking point that is absolutely meaningless to anyone else. Boy, I wish I could have seen one thing to back up your statement. Too much to ask again, I guess.)
Ah so rather than staying the course we changed it and sent more Americans into countries that don't want us there. He is trying to prove that he did what he said he was going to do in the last year even though the Iraq government has not hit the minimum for continued funding. But he still wants more money and more bodies to throw at the problem.
(Hey, Kathleen -- if you want the troops outta there, go talk to the Democratically-controlled Congress! They do have the power to cut the funds. And do you really believe that, if Obama or (God help us) Lady McBeth get elected, that he/she is going to take the troops out of Iraq? Ain't gonna happen.)
Wait a minute...weren't they on the run last year and the year before and the year before that?
Return on Success? What? That just is too vague for me to even comprehend.
(You may have a point here, because it's the only thing that explains the same about your statements.)
So now if you don't get what you need it is Congress's fault not the Presidents? I call Shenanigans!
(Funny, the libs have been blaming the president for EVERYTHING that's gone wrong since he's been in office. Maybe he'd just angry about that little slumber party they had a few months back.)
Oh good ONE group of people came home. Do you know how many are over there? Are about to have to go over there again? 20,000 is a drop in the bucket.
Shi'a, Sunni and Kurds are rebuilding together? Yeah each within their own tribe trying to keep the others from gaining anything.
There are problems there that will never be solved unless the Prophet himself comes back and sorts it out himself. (that quote given to me by a friend who's family still lives in Bagdad.)
Here is the poke at Iran (with a side poke at North Korea)
Ah the Freedom Act! Let it DIE!!!!!!
Oooo look at the divide on that one. And the Democrats have the majority.
Sudan is mentioned as are some other troubled spots that are being ignored or given token respect by the world. Bad President no biscuit for you.
(Ah, yes, and Bill Clinton did sooo much are all those places.)
Here is the HIV part of the speech. The problem is that the virus is mutating and the numbers in new groups are increasing.
(Funny that you didn't mention that the president has spent more money on research on HIV than Clinton did. Guess you can't, though.)
Vets do need more for what they did. And hey here is a wacky idea, stop pushing people out of the system for stupid reasons like creating the situation of dishonorable discharge to people who now have serious mental health issues. I hate how the veterans have been treated by our government.
(And I hate the way the far-left, anti-protesters are treating the soldiers. I still remember how the libs treated the soldiers when they came back from 'Nam. Spare us your indignation.
Oooo Someone gave him a history lesson.
(Don't kid us, Kathleen. It was you, wasn't it. Just for one moment, you enlighted him on history so that he could enlighen us all. Thank you, all-knowing history matron.)
Kathleen, I want to thank you very, very much. Your "analysis" has given me the best laughs since I read that the New York chapter of NAG claimed Ted "Swimmer" Kennedy betrayed them by not backing Ahillary the Hun. Thank Peter, too. Now I have to go; I have to put my Peter David-written issues of the Hulk (along with the rest of the stuff I have that he has written) because every time I've tried to read them lately I fwow up. Thanks again for the laughs...and maybe you should think about getting your own radio show.