Comments


  • Mike.

    Sorry if I am late, but No Labels is the mushy middle. I am of the militant middle. I actually believe in Sync-politics. The mushy middle are corporatists and slaves to wall street and neo-conservatism.

    December 28, 2010 at 6:48 a.m.

  • LOL... You might be right but it was supposed to be republicans, democrats, and independents coming together to solve the nation's problems without an ideological bent...

    I heard a participant of the new " No Labels" group, on one of the talk shows yesterday, but his views were highly partisan.

    If you ever listen to Michael Bloomberg; he'll condemn the democrats and republicans but he was a member of both, when it met his needs.

    I think that ship has sailed; its way out in the middle of the ocean and we don't have enough rope to bring it back.

    December 14, 2010 at 3:53 p.m.

  • "No Labels" Party. That's a oxymoron if I ever heard one. There can be no political party without labels.

    December 14, 2010 at 3:33 p.m.

  • RE: Writein

    The "No Labels" party may be a dumb idea but I thought it was similar to the "Unity '08″ that you said some nice things about..... I may be entirely wrong....... I was just on a fishing expedition because many posters have indicated that they were tired of the partisan,excessive polarization in our politics... I didn't get any feedback, except for yours...Thanks.

    I certainly don't agree that the liberal wing of the democratic party needs shut up because you can only find your weaknesses if those who love and respect you, point them out. The president needs to know that no matter how much he tries to compromise; the GOP will have none of it.... As John Boehner told Leslie Stahl of CBS's 60 Minutes; he will never compromise but he will look for common ground. The Tea Party will vilify any member of the Republican Party that tries to compromise; hence they vote as a group.

    But we can once again, agree to disagree.

    December 14, 2010 at 2:33 p.m.

  • Mike.

    "First of all, Thank you for speaking the turth when you said this....... Why do local conservatives have to brag about their mediocre accomplishments in order to try to marginalize the less fortunate? It's not like you're the only one; I've heard local conservatives pat themselves on the back and demonize others for not trying; when they don't know all the facts... It's a common tactic of" holier than thou.".... A person's character comes from what others say about them not from a self proclaimed one."

    That is so true.

    As far as "No Labels" it is a dumb idea. Micheal Bloomberg is nothing more than a controlling nazi who just had bought himself a third term in office.

    December 14, 2010 at 2:02 p.m.

  • I know right wing pundits tried to use that against John Kerry but in this case John Kerry was right.

    Ann Scott Tyson
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Friday, November 4, 2005

    As sustained combat in Iraq makes it harder than ever to fill the ranks of the all-volunteer force, newly released Pentagon demographic data show that the military is leaning heavily for recruits on economically depressed, rural areas where youths' need for jobs may outweigh the risks of going to war.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/...

    We're hogging the online forum, so let's just leave it at as being 180° apart on any subject under the sun.

    December 14, 2010 at 11:22 a.m.

  • Mike - "Those on the right never complain when military contractors cheat the government because they have a fixation on the poor."

    And the left?

    You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.
    John Kerry

    "The only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is that the Democrats allow the poor to be corrupt, too."

    -- Oscar Levant (1906 - 1972)

    December 14, 2010 at 11:06 a.m.

  • RE:Hictoria

    To me, my time in the military was a mediocre accomplishment and certainly not a pedestal to demonize others that didn't get the opportunity to serve or chose not to. The military can only take in a fraction of the 14 million that are unemployed and when the defense budget gets cut; it will be even less than that. It is not a viable option to curb unemployment.

    You seem to think that it's only the lazy who are making sure that their children are fed by having to go on public assistance after unemployment. I wouldn't begin to know how awful and sometimes degrading it is for some; that public assistance is the final and only choice. I know my churches food cupboards need constant refilling because of the needy and our local Salvation Army cupboards are empty. I'm not ready to be like a Rush Limbaugh and paint every person on public assistance with a broad brush of laziness.

    I'll be willing to bet that you don't know how this administration rate against other administrations as far as welfare distributions. Some on the right call unemployment insurance; welfare; and they are also tagged with the "lazy" label.

    Those on the right never complain when military contractors cheat the government because they have a fixation on the poor.

    December 14, 2010 at 10:39 a.m.

  • Mike - "Why do local conservatives have to brag about their mediocre accomplishments in order to try to marginalize the less fortunate?"

    I copy and paste mainly quotes. Like the one from you here. I had no idea serving in the Marine Corps was a "mediocre" accomplishment. I am not patting myself on the back. I am saying it is possible to better yourself rather than relying on the government handouts this administration runs on. How freaking lazy can a person be to rely on this?

    December 14, 2010 at 10:11 a.m.

  • RE:Hictoria

    Instead of making this about a tit- for- tat and John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi flip flops,I can remember when John Boehner said " In response to a question from TPMDC, House Minority Leader John Boehner backed Tom Donohue, President of the Chamber of Commerce, in saying taxpayers should help pick up the tab.”I think the people responsible in the oil spill–BP and the federal government–should take full responsibility for what’s happening there.”...Later, Boehner back tracked

    Any politician; unless they are extreme ideologue will make noticeable flip/flops.... Some even say that it's the great attribute when a politician changes their mind when all the facts are laid out.

    December 14, 2010 at 10:05 a.m.

  • RE:Hictoria
    If there wasn't for cut and paste; you would not have much to say.

    You will only have two more weeks to kick around Nancy Pelosi then the shoe goes on the other foot;when the party of NO, has to become at least " Well maybe."

    December 14, 2010 at 9:56 a.m.

  • RE:Hictoria

    Why do local conservatives have to brag about their mediocre accomplishments in order to try to marginalize the less fortunate? It's not like you're the only one; I've heard local conservatives pat themselves on the back and demonize others for not trying; when they don't know all the facts... It's a common tactic of" holier than thou.".... A person's character comes from what others say about them not from a self proclaimed one.

    A lot of poor people have served in a military but today it's only about 1/2 of 1% doing so.

    BTW All John Boehner really cares about are the lobbyist. During the finance reform battles; he went over to Wall Street to tell them not to listen to Congress. He is well known for giving out tobacco checks just prior to a vote against the tobacco industry. I wouldn't put him up on on a pedestal.

    December 14, 2010 at 9:49 a.m.

  • Here are a few more form her:

    "Every week we don't pass a Stimulus package, 500 million Americans lose their jobs.''

    "I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels. It's cheap, abundant and clean compared to fossil fuels."

    "We have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market profits taxes could go a long ways to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as "Americans.""

    "First Bush cut taxes for the rich and the economy has rebounded with new record low unemployment rates, which only means wealthy employers are getting even wealthier at the expense of the underpaid working class."

    UHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH OK

    December 14, 2010 at 9:41 a.m.

  • Mike - "First we have to dispense with the “the American Dream" rhetoric because John Boehner might break out into tears, again"

    I would rather have someone who actually cares about this country in that position rather than a Pelosi...and the people agree. Say one thing and totally do a 180 one more issues than one. Here is one.

    Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.
    Nancy Pelosi

    The president led us into the Iraq war on the basis of unproven assertions without evidence; he embraced a radical doctrine of pre-emptive war unprecedented in our history; and he failed to build a true international coalition.
    Nancy Pelosi

    "The greatest thing to come after the Great Depression was the G.I. bill, which allowed people to go to college."

    Then there you have it. SERVE go to school and get a job. Is it really that hard? I did it.

    December 14, 2010 at 9:35 a.m.

  • RE:Hictoria

    First we have to dispense with the “the American Dream" rhetoric because John Boehner might break out into tears, again

    Second, all you're doing is using the same old talking points to demonize the poor and glamorize the rich. That's the same ol' class warfare tactics that prevent us from reforming the tax code, finding ways to improve our trade deficit or a move to the 21st century jobs…..Today; it's about five people looking for the same job, so it's not that easy to find one or that cheap to go to college.... The greatest thing to come after the Great Depression was the G.I. bill, which allowed people to go to college. If there was an easy solution; we would be using it. Housing foreclosure is at an all time high, so that takes away the construction jobs, which has a domino effect- downstream.

    As I've said many times, the poor, rich, liberals, conservatives, democrats, and republicans feed off the government trough... Some do it in a form of noncompetitive government contracts, cost overruns and special interest. The same ol' battles have been going on for quite some time; like the ones between the Shia and the Shiite.

    I'm willing to sacrifice (Social Security and Medicare cuts) but many Americans are not... As a pundit said the other day; asking American voter if they want a tax hike to reduce the deficit, and I will give you the predicted answer. Ask them if they want tax cuts, and they will all say YES.

    I heard some great solutions this morning, like reducing the tax rates for everyone but also means test the deductions even further, to make those people making millions pay a higher effective tax rate. I'm not against the wealthy per say; just the greedy wealthy, who want to starve the beast for their own bottom line… More and more wealthy people are becoming philanthropers.

    December 14, 2010 at 9:09 a.m.

  • Weather we like it or not, the rich will always be rich and continue to make money. That is what they do. They pass on vacations and focus on what this country is all about. The American dream. The poor will always be poor looking for a government handout. Mike you always ask for solutions. Here is one for you. How about the poor get a job and maybe attend college to try and better themselves instead of whining that the government does not do enough to help. It is possible for anyone who wants a better life to get one. You just have to be willing to sacrifice.

    December 14, 2010 at 8:24 a.m.

  • Ok Mike,
    I will bite on your comment; your topic “No Labels Party”, in the first paragraph you endorsed the organization. My question again, is this group involved in the same type of movement as the “Tea Party”???????

    You call the tax package a short term stimulus; I call it “supply-side economics” because of the tax cuts or “Bush tax cuts” which will continue if passed… You have stated in the past you would like to write something on supply-side economics.

    As far as negative, what was funny is you support this group, but mock the Tea Party movement. I don’t know maybe there is a metaphor in there or something like calling the kettle black, what ever♠♠♠

    Reading comprehension LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    December 13, 2010 at 6:54 p.m.

  • The 1929 stock market crash should have caused just a recession. There are many that say the impending vote on Smoot Hawley was what caused the crash because it would have (and did) collapse world trade.

    The Depression was caused by the Fed contracting the supply of money by 33%. I suppose Ron Paul believes this (like I care) I don't know, but one person who does believe it is none other than Ben Bernanke - you know the Fed chairman, perhaps you have heard of him. This is borne out by the GDP numbers I published previously.

    And also I get a good chuckle out of reading your comments about what I think and why - my sinister motives and etc. And I guess I'm really confused, you write these blogs with all kinds of speculation and innuendo and then you get angry and upset if anyone disagrees with you - WTH is that?

    December 13, 2010 at 5:48 p.m.

  • That doesn't make your point any less ideological; it just reinforces your viewpoints of no government intervention. You subscribe to Ron Paul’s theory that markets operate properly only when they are unfettered by government regulation and intervention. It holds that the government should not have a central bank or dictate economic or monetary policy. Once the government begins any economic planning, such thinking goes, it ends up making all the economic decisions for its citizens, essentially enslaving them.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/13/us/... _r=1&src=ISMR_HP_LO_MST_FB

    I really don't know why you continue to bother me with your gloom and doom prognostications and red-baiting rhetoric. It's not like I will ever believe them because I think it's silly to compare a $14 trillion economy to a household..... Your equation will never consider the lack of demand because Laissez-faire and those who believe in a supply-side only theories; restrict that component. Until consumers start buying whether it's green technology, cornbread, housing, or automobiles; unemployment will stay high. It's about the middle class not the multi-millionaires.

    Don't we both have more productive things to do than regurgitate the same old things over and over?

    Since I started reading this book about the 1929 Depression, I've come to the conclusion that the ideological arguments will never change. I was shocked that President Hoover used the same words that doomed John McCain’s presidential campaign. A few days before Black Tuesday (1929 Market Crash) president Hoover said" the fundamental business of the country" being” on a sound and prosperous basis. The wealth was concentrated at the very top like it is today. The same GOP compassion was used when president Hoover endorsed a $45 million appropriation to feed the livestock of Arkansas farmers during a 1930 drought but ejected a grant of $25 million for food for farmers and their families.

    Ideology is what it is.

    December 13, 2010 at 3:20 p.m.

  • I did not mention anything about the cause of the Depression. Dupont's comment was referring to the slow recovery and the recession that occurred during the Depression.

    I think what we have now is an economy almost completely controlled by politicians. We proceed from one political knee jerk to the next - case in point is ethanol. We have subsidized this industry to the point where we have millions probably billions invested in infrastructure nationwide. Producing ethanol from corn is not the right technology, it is a gross misallocation of capital and a waste of corn.

    We are currently on track to make additional investments in green energy and other junk that will also be a complete waste. The country has stopped making investments in sustainable jobs. Each year our labor force increases by about 1.5 million people. They will just add to our unemployment because, investment in real jobs is not being made. After three or four years of this we are probably 4 to 6 million jobs behind.

    A family household much less a company and certainly not a country can be run like this. The purpose of a government is to provide a sound stable foundation where an economy can grow and prosper. No not everyone will receive the same pay, some will get more than others, that is always the case even under socialism - hopefully it's the more productive members that get paid more. Case in point Cliff Lee of the Rangers will end up getting paid more, much more than most players on the Ranger's roster - is that a bad thing?

    December 13, 2010 at 2:42 p.m.

  • RE:rollingstone

    The Great Depression of 1929 is more than GDP numbers because in the run up to the Wall Street crash; Europe's financial problems, consumer debt, the policies of Calvin Coolidge and wealth concentrated at the very top had much to do with a total collapse in later years...BTW the Wall Street crash was not the principle cause,as some experts report.

    The EPA, tax policies, the hate of unions is just fodder for the same old ideological food fights.

    Economist and Historians are not in agreement about the causes of the Great Depression, so it's not that strange the recovery policies of the last two years will not be fully evaluated until sometime in the future....Sure, you can go to several sites to get negative or positive results but they are not a truth certain...In most cases it is to satisfy one's own beliefs.

    I'm tired of all the negativity; pass the tax cuts in its current state; we can make adjustments sometime early next year.... It's obvious no one has all the answers but everyone is able to speculate. ..It's certainly not about my cut & paste is better than yours.

    December 13, 2010 at 1:52 p.m.

  • Lol....itisi, what's funny as all get out, is your reading comprehension.

    You posted "The “No Label” party, is it any way remotely or similar to the “Tea Party”?

    Where did I compare the" No Labels" party to the Tea Party? I merely stated that they will meet in New York and have a round table discussion over the issues... I didn't say I was going to quit the democratic party,I never endorsed the "No Labels" or condoned them... I didn't compare them to any party.

    I quoted Charles Krauthammer when he wrote "Barack Obama won the great tax-cut showdown of 2010 - and House Democrats don't have a clue that he did. In the deal struck this week, the president negotiated the biggest stimulus in American history, larger than his $814 billion 2009 stimulus package.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/...

    Where did I mention supply-side economics in this blog?

    What interesting twist am I taking out a context?

    I think you just can't get over your compulsion to make a negative comment, every time I write a blog.

    And this time I didn't get a "With all due respect to your column."

    December 13, 2010 at 1:27 p.m.

  • Mike you are right what we are hearing today is strikingly similar to what was being said during the depression:

    "Uncertainty rules the tax situation, the labor situation, the monetary situation, and practically every legal condition under which industry must operate. Are taxes to go higher, lower, or stay where they are ? We don't know. Is labor to be union or non-union?....Are we to have inflation or deflation, more government spending or less?...Are new restrictions to be placed on capital, new limits on profits?...It is impossible even to guess at the answers." Lammont Dupont ca 1936.

    But on the other hand the depression was very different. Below are the GDP's for 1929 the beginning of the depression and the lowest point 1933 in actual dollars and inflation adjusted 2005 dollars and the same for the current "depression" for the years 2007 and 2009 in billions of dollars.

    Year...............GDP..................as 2005 $

    --------------------------------------------------------------------

    1929..............103.6.................977.0

    1933...............56.4................. 716.4

    % Change........46.0...................27.0

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    2007..............14061.8..............13228.9

    2009..............14119.0.............12880.6

    % Change.......-0.4....................2.6

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the low point of the depression unemployment rose to about 25% currently we are at 10%. I'll admit this does not make a lot of sense except the part about the uncertainty and confusion about taxes and regulations. The examples being the confusion about the new taxes associated with healthcare and financial regulation not to mention the Bush tax cuts.

    Then there is the uncertainty with new EPA regulations concerning CO2 as a pollutant and of course the regulations associated with financial reform, oil drilling - you name it.

    And finally what is really puzzling is that we need more stimulus, like five trillion dollars of stimulus over the last three years is not enough? What the ??????

    December 13, 2010 at 12:55 p.m.

  • Mike,

    Sometimes your columns are funny as all get out.

    The “No Label” party, is it any way remotely or similar to the “Tea Party”?

    The tax package “supply-side economics” and Obama wants to call it a stimulus, an interesting twist the way you put into context.

    December 13, 2010 at 12:14 p.m.