How a Clark candidacy would help the GOP.
With no viable opposition, the worst elements of the party are off the leash. In the long run, that's bad for everyone except the beneficiaries of far-right largesse and our detractors abroad.
Tuesday, September 30, 2003
before you say Bush is Hitler again...
read:
"Don't Casually Call Someone a Nazi
A true appreciation of the scale and scope of the horrors perpetrated by the Nazis should give pause to those who label Bush 'Hitler' and call Ashcroft a Nazi. I believe that it is insulting to the memories of the victims of the Nazi regime to use those labels with so little thought. If Bush were like Hitler, post 9/11 events would have unfolded quite a bit differently. Muslims would have been beaten in the streets of the US, some to death. Mosques would have burned. Muslim shops would have been looted. Legislation would have been passed stripping Muslims of all rights and within months camps would have been built. Muslim men, women, and children would begin to disappear into them never to be seen again. The Democratic party would have been outlawed along with all other political parties and most of its leaders killed or sent to camps. The media would be taken over and run by the state and any attempts at dissent ruthlessly crushed. Michael Moore would not be writing books. He would have been strangled with piano wire and left hanging from a meat hook (a heavy duty, reinforced meat hook to be sure). A vicious war would have been waged against all Muslim nations. Kabul, Tehran, Baghdad, Damascus, and Riyadh (for starters) would have been turned to sand. All oil fields in the Middle East would have been occupied. Citizens in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan would be bombed, brutalized, driven from their homes, and eventually killed to make room for the repopulation of those regions by Texans (Bush's volk). I could go on and on with this but you get my the point. "
www.fraterslibertas.com/2003_09_01_archive.html#106459922174801054
read:
"Don't Casually Call Someone a Nazi
A true appreciation of the scale and scope of the horrors perpetrated by the Nazis should give pause to those who label Bush 'Hitler' and call Ashcroft a Nazi. I believe that it is insulting to the memories of the victims of the Nazi regime to use those labels with so little thought. If Bush were like Hitler, post 9/11 events would have unfolded quite a bit differently. Muslims would have been beaten in the streets of the US, some to death. Mosques would have burned. Muslim shops would have been looted. Legislation would have been passed stripping Muslims of all rights and within months camps would have been built. Muslim men, women, and children would begin to disappear into them never to be seen again. The Democratic party would have been outlawed along with all other political parties and most of its leaders killed or sent to camps. The media would be taken over and run by the state and any attempts at dissent ruthlessly crushed. Michael Moore would not be writing books. He would have been strangled with piano wire and left hanging from a meat hook (a heavy duty, reinforced meat hook to be sure). A vicious war would have been waged against all Muslim nations. Kabul, Tehran, Baghdad, Damascus, and Riyadh (for starters) would have been turned to sand. All oil fields in the Middle East would have been occupied. Citizens in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan would be bombed, brutalized, driven from their homes, and eventually killed to make room for the repopulation of those regions by Texans (Bush's volk). I could go on and on with this but you get my the point. "
www.fraterslibertas.com/2003_09_01_archive.html#106459922174801054
Words like terrorist and freedom fighter are often confused in news reports, and people often get them confused in their heads.
" Dean defends Middle East remarks.
Asked if he would oppose the Israeli policy of selectively killing leaders of Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups, Dean said, "I think no one likes to see violence of any kind."
But he also said that "there is a war going on in the Middle East, and members of Hamas are soldiers in that war, and, therefore, it seems to me that they are going to be casualties if they are going to make war."
Just remember that even if you call a tail a leg, the dog still has 4 legs.
" Dean defends Middle East remarks.
Asked if he would oppose the Israeli policy of selectively killing leaders of Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups, Dean said, "I think no one likes to see violence of any kind."
But he also said that "there is a war going on in the Middle East, and members of Hamas are soldiers in that war, and, therefore, it seems to me that they are going to be casualties if they are going to make war."
Just remember that even if you call a tail a leg, the dog still has 4 legs.
Sunday, September 28, 2003
Blair's Address to a Joint Session of Congress
Tony Blair , like Churchill ...
They both had their ups and downs. They both understood the relationship.
'That's what we're fighting for, and it's a battle worth fighting. And I know it's hard on America. And in some small corner of this vast country, out in Nevada or Idaho or these places I've never been to but always wanted to go--I know out there, there's a guy getting on with his life, perfectly happily, minding his own business, saying to you, the political leaders of this country, 'Why me, and why us, and why America?' And the only answer is because destiny put you in this place in history, in this moment in time, and the task is yours to do.
And our job? My nation, that watched you grow, that you fought alongside and now fights alongside you, that takes enormous pride in our alliance and great affection in our common bond--Our job is to be there with you. You're not going to be alone. We will be with you in this fight for liberty.
We will be with you in this fight for liberty, and if our spirit is right, and our courage firm, the world will be with us. Thank you. ' "
http://david.shackelford.org/blair.htm
Tony Blair , like Churchill ...
They both had their ups and downs. They both understood the relationship.
'That's what we're fighting for, and it's a battle worth fighting. And I know it's hard on America. And in some small corner of this vast country, out in Nevada or Idaho or these places I've never been to but always wanted to go--I know out there, there's a guy getting on with his life, perfectly happily, minding his own business, saying to you, the political leaders of this country, 'Why me, and why us, and why America?' And the only answer is because destiny put you in this place in history, in this moment in time, and the task is yours to do.
And our job? My nation, that watched you grow, that you fought alongside and now fights alongside you, that takes enormous pride in our alliance and great affection in our common bond--Our job is to be there with you. You're not going to be alone. We will be with you in this fight for liberty.
We will be with you in this fight for liberty, and if our spirit is right, and our courage firm, the world will be with us. Thank you. ' "
http://david.shackelford.org/blair.htm
Tunisian Intellectual Al-Afif Al-Akhdar On the Arab Identity Crisis and Education in the Arab World
MEMRI: Latest News
..........."Why do expressions of tolerance, moderation, rationalism, compromise, and negotiation horrify us, but [when we hear] fervent cries for vengeance, we all dance the war dance? Why have the people of the world managed to mourn their pasts and move on, while we have established, hard and fast, our gloomy bereavement over a past that does not pass? Why do other people love life, while we love death and violence, slaughter and suicide, and [even] call it heroism and martyrdom…?"
...........The Fundamentalist Answer to the Identity Crisis: A Return to Allah, Riding on a Belt of Explosives............... In religious narcissism [this has meant] that Islam, the 'one true religion,' must triumph over the other religions that are 'false'..............Since the Arabs were transformed from a conquering nation into a conquered nation, Islamic religious law has closed in on itself, and has become Jihad law prohibiting resembling or imitating 'the infidels,' or interacting with them…......
MEMRI: Latest News
..........."Why do expressions of tolerance, moderation, rationalism, compromise, and negotiation horrify us, but [when we hear] fervent cries for vengeance, we all dance the war dance? Why have the people of the world managed to mourn their pasts and move on, while we have established, hard and fast, our gloomy bereavement over a past that does not pass? Why do other people love life, while we love death and violence, slaughter and suicide, and [even] call it heroism and martyrdom…?"
...........The Fundamentalist Answer to the Identity Crisis: A Return to Allah, Riding on a Belt of Explosives............... In religious narcissism [this has meant] that Islam, the 'one true religion,' must triumph over the other religions that are 'false'..............Since the Arabs were transformed from a conquering nation into a conquered nation, Islamic religious law has closed in on itself, and has become Jihad law prohibiting resembling or imitating 'the infidels,' or interacting with them…......
Friday, September 26, 2003
NYT straddles on Iraq
The world changed on Sept. 11, 2001. Terrorist groups like Al Qaeda are dedicated to inflicting maximum harm on this country. Since such groups rely on suicide bombers and are therefore immune to threats of retaliation, the United States is right to attack a terrorist group first in some circumstances. It was certainly justified in its war in Afghanistan, which had become little more than a government-sponsored training camp for Al Qaeda. It is quite another thing, however, to launch a pre-emptive military campaign against a nation that the United States suspects poses a threat.
Americans and others in the world are glad that Mr. Hussein has been removed from power. If Iraq can be turned into a freer and happier country in coming years, it could become a focal point for the evolution of a more peaceful and democratic Middle East. But it was the fear of weapons of mass destruction placed in the hands of enemy terrorists that made doing something about Iraq seem urgent. If it had seemed unlikely that Mr. Hussein had them, we doubt that Congress or the American people would have endorsed the war.
The world changed on Sept. 11, 2001. Terrorist groups like Al Qaeda are dedicated to inflicting maximum harm on this country. Since such groups rely on suicide bombers and are therefore immune to threats of retaliation, the United States is right to attack a terrorist group first in some circumstances. It was certainly justified in its war in Afghanistan, which had become little more than a government-sponsored training camp for Al Qaeda. It is quite another thing, however, to launch a pre-emptive military campaign against a nation that the United States suspects poses a threat.
Americans and others in the world are glad that Mr. Hussein has been removed from power. If Iraq can be turned into a freer and happier country in coming years, it could become a focal point for the evolution of a more peaceful and democratic Middle East. But it was the fear of weapons of mass destruction placed in the hands of enemy terrorists that made doing something about Iraq seem urgent. If it had seemed unlikely that Mr. Hussein had them, we doubt that Congress or the American people would have endorsed the war.
A pretty good description of how CA got into this predicament:
California voters think the electricity crisis contributed to the state budget deficit. If only things were that simple. In reality, not a cent of the deficit was caused by electricity prices: the cost of the crisis will show up solely in future electricity bills.
The basic economic lesson is this: a deregulated wholesale market and a regulated retail market is a recipe for disaster. If you tell a supplier, "I'll buy the same amount no matter what you charge," don't be surprised if you are charged a high price.
So if the electricity crisis didn't cause the deficit, what did?
Fundamentally, the deficit is a hangover from the days of irrational exuberance. California was the epicenter of the dot-com boom of the late 1990's, and tax receipts flowed to Sacramento. Tax revenue from stock-option grants and capital gains alone rose from $7.5 billion in 1998-9 to $12.7 billion in 1999-2000 to $17.6 billion in 2000-1.
When money flows in, governments find it hard not to spend it. This is particularly true in California, thanks to mandated spending constraints. For example, Proposition 98, passed in 1988, requires the state to spend 40 percent of general funds on education from kindergarten through high school. As a result, spending, both automatic and discretionary, rose in parallel with tax revenue.
Then the house of cards came tumbling down. Revenue from options and capital gains fell to $8.6 billion in 2001-2, and $5.2 billion in 2002-3.
Reversing those spending decisions was not as easy as putting them in place: much of the increased revenue went for education, tax cuts and other long-term commitments.
This brings us to the second lesson in economics: don't spend transitory income on permanent commitments.
State tax revenues in California come basically from three sources: the sales tax, the property tax and the personal income tax. Stephen Levy of the Institute of Regional and Urban Studies in Palo Alto has looked at the historical volatility of these series. (His summary is available at http://www.ccsce.com/irus_cbe.htm.)
Surprisingly, he found that the sales tax base had the most volatility, in part because the sales tax excludes the rapidly growing services sector. Personal income, excluding capital gains, has grown relatively smoothly by comparison.
Mr. Levy argues that revenues from volatile sources, like capital gains, should have special treatment in budgeting: one-time revenue increases should be tied to one-time expenditures or automatically put into a rainy day fund. This is an eminently sensible suggestion.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/25/business/25SCEN.html?pagewanted=2
California voters think the electricity crisis contributed to the state budget deficit. If only things were that simple. In reality, not a cent of the deficit was caused by electricity prices: the cost of the crisis will show up solely in future electricity bills.
The basic economic lesson is this: a deregulated wholesale market and a regulated retail market is a recipe for disaster. If you tell a supplier, "I'll buy the same amount no matter what you charge," don't be surprised if you are charged a high price.
So if the electricity crisis didn't cause the deficit, what did?
Fundamentally, the deficit is a hangover from the days of irrational exuberance. California was the epicenter of the dot-com boom of the late 1990's, and tax receipts flowed to Sacramento. Tax revenue from stock-option grants and capital gains alone rose from $7.5 billion in 1998-9 to $12.7 billion in 1999-2000 to $17.6 billion in 2000-1.
When money flows in, governments find it hard not to spend it. This is particularly true in California, thanks to mandated spending constraints. For example, Proposition 98, passed in 1988, requires the state to spend 40 percent of general funds on education from kindergarten through high school. As a result, spending, both automatic and discretionary, rose in parallel with tax revenue.
Then the house of cards came tumbling down. Revenue from options and capital gains fell to $8.6 billion in 2001-2, and $5.2 billion in 2002-3.
Reversing those spending decisions was not as easy as putting them in place: much of the increased revenue went for education, tax cuts and other long-term commitments.
This brings us to the second lesson in economics: don't spend transitory income on permanent commitments.
State tax revenues in California come basically from three sources: the sales tax, the property tax and the personal income tax. Stephen Levy of the Institute of Regional and Urban Studies in Palo Alto has looked at the historical volatility of these series. (His summary is available at http://www.ccsce.com/irus_cbe.htm.)
Surprisingly, he found that the sales tax base had the most volatility, in part because the sales tax excludes the rapidly growing services sector. Personal income, excluding capital gains, has grown relatively smoothly by comparison.
Mr. Levy argues that revenues from volatile sources, like capital gains, should have special treatment in budgeting: one-time revenue increases should be tied to one-time expenditures or automatically put into a rainy day fund. This is an eminently sensible suggestion.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/25/business/25SCEN.html?pagewanted=2
I rather trust Hackworth -- if he thinks Clark is the real deal, he's probably right.
Hackworth admits he was wrong about Clark < Emmanuel_Goldstein > 09/26 07:32:57
For the record, I never served with Clark. But after spending three hours interviewing the man for Maxim’s November issue, I’m impressed. He is insightful, he has his act together, he understands what makes national security tick – and he thinks on his feet somewhere around Mach 3. No big surprise, since he graduated first in his class from West Point, which puts him in the super-smart set with Robert E. Lee, Douglas MacArthur and Maxwell Taylor.
...
No doubt he’s made his share of enemies. He doesn’t suffer fools easily and wouldn’t have allowed the dilettantes who convinced Dubya to do Iraq to even cut the White House lawn. So he should prepare for a fair amount of dart-throwing from detractors he’s ripped into during the past three decades.
Hey, I am one of those: I took a swing at Clark during the Kosovo campaign when I thought he screwed up the operation, and I called him a “Perfumed Prince.” Only years later did I discover from his book and other research that I was wrong – the blame should have been worn by British timidity and William Cohen, U.S. SecDef at the time.
www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=Hacks%20Target%20Homepage.db&command=viewone&op=t&id=32&rnd=435.9873491074057
http://forums.craigslist.org/?ID=9111015
Hackworth admits he was wrong about Clark < Emmanuel_Goldstein > 09/26 07:32:57
For the record, I never served with Clark. But after spending three hours interviewing the man for Maxim’s November issue, I’m impressed. He is insightful, he has his act together, he understands what makes national security tick – and he thinks on his feet somewhere around Mach 3. No big surprise, since he graduated first in his class from West Point, which puts him in the super-smart set with Robert E. Lee, Douglas MacArthur and Maxwell Taylor.
...
No doubt he’s made his share of enemies. He doesn’t suffer fools easily and wouldn’t have allowed the dilettantes who convinced Dubya to do Iraq to even cut the White House lawn. So he should prepare for a fair amount of dart-throwing from detractors he’s ripped into during the past three decades.
Hey, I am one of those: I took a swing at Clark during the Kosovo campaign when I thought he screwed up the operation, and I called him a “Perfumed Prince.” Only years later did I discover from his book and other research that I was wrong – the blame should have been worn by British timidity and William Cohen, U.S. SecDef at the time.
www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=Hacks%20Target%20Homepage.db&command=viewone&op=t&id=32&rnd=435.9873491074057
http://forums.craigslist.org/?ID=9111015
Saturday, September 20, 2003
Does a capitalist free trader's heart good :
The G-8 meeting in Cancun failed to reach any agreements.
Things the rich socialists won't give up include their farm subsidies (thereby screwing the vast majority of their own population that don't farm and the majority of 3rd world that do at the same time).
The G-8 meeting in Cancun failed to reach any agreements.
Things the rich socialists won't give up include their farm subsidies (thereby screwing the vast majority of their own population that don't farm and the majority of 3rd world that do at the same time).
Friday, September 19, 2003
"bin Laden and al Qaeda forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in Sudan and with representatives of the Government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezballah with the goal of working together against their common enemies in the West, particularly the United States.
'In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the Government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq,'"
---State Department press release from November 4, 1998, on the indictments of Osama bin Laden and Muhammad Atef for the bombings of the US Embassies in Africa.
'In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the Government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq,'"
---State Department press release from November 4, 1998, on the indictments of Osama bin Laden and Muhammad Atef for the bombings of the US Embassies in Africa.
Sometimes the other side wins, others you just lose on your own. The GOP is out to lose both WH and both houses following their apparently irresistable predeliction for overreaching.
Case in point: Partial Birth Abortions
A huge majority supports a ban on these in the last trimester, but in their zeal (not unlike a poker player with 4 aces who decides to draw for the royal flush), they're extending their bill. As NYT notes,
"A Deceptive Abortion Ban
It now looks likely that in the coming weeks, President Bush will sign into law a ban on so-called partial birth abortion, thereby culminating a long campaign of deception. The measure, which has been constantly misrepresented as limited to late-term abortions, would in fact ban common abortion procedures used after the first trimester of pregnancy but well before fetal viability.
... anyone who has actually paid attention to the bill's fine print understands it is impossible to support both the bill and Roe v. Wade. The measure's deceptively sweeping wording, would, in effect, overturn Roe by criminalizing many midterm abortions and by omitting any exception to protect the health of the woman.
These are precisely the defects that led to the Supreme Court's rejection of the Nebraska statute. But that does not seem to trouble the measure's backers, starting with President Bush. Their actions show a troubling disrespect not just for the rights of women, but also for truth, and the rule of law."
Case in point: Partial Birth Abortions
A huge majority supports a ban on these in the last trimester, but in their zeal (not unlike a poker player with 4 aces who decides to draw for the royal flush), they're extending their bill. As NYT notes,
"A Deceptive Abortion Ban
It now looks likely that in the coming weeks, President Bush will sign into law a ban on so-called partial birth abortion, thereby culminating a long campaign of deception. The measure, which has been constantly misrepresented as limited to late-term abortions, would in fact ban common abortion procedures used after the first trimester of pregnancy but well before fetal viability.
... anyone who has actually paid attention to the bill's fine print understands it is impossible to support both the bill and Roe v. Wade. The measure's deceptively sweeping wording, would, in effect, overturn Roe by criminalizing many midterm abortions and by omitting any exception to protect the health of the woman.
These are precisely the defects that led to the Supreme Court's rejection of the Nebraska statute. But that does not seem to trouble the measure's backers, starting with President Bush. Their actions show a troubling disrespect not just for the rights of women, but also for truth, and the rule of law."
Wednesday, September 17, 2003
Tuesday, September 16, 2003
Debt is BAD!
2003-09-15 07:20:22
Who moved my party? True Republicans know debt can easily grow into a whirling economic black hole. It's just bad -- was, is, always will be.
Keeping tax rates high during expansion so that we can run a surplus and pay down the trillions of debt on the other hand is not a bad thing.
(Not to say that running up a little debt during a recession is never called for, and certainly a bit of sustainable borrowing for capital investment is acceptable. If you need some home improvement like, say, a security system, you borrow and pay it off over the life of the system. That's different than borrowing to pay your tab at O'Malley's.)
----------------------------------------------------------------
If you want a conspiracy, ask the dead < RoughJustice > 09/12 20:50:37
Enron - Bodies
J. Clifford Baxter
Found dead in his car, shot in the head. Mr. Baxter was vice chairman of Enron Corp. when he resigned in May 2001. Enron has been hot copy lately with the revelation that they were the largest campaign contributors for George W. Bush. Was J. Clifford Baxter a potential witness to Bush foreknowledge of their wrongdoings? His death was ruled a suicide.
Charles Dana Rice
He was the senior vice president and treasurer of El Paso Corp., an energy corporation swept up in the recent energy scandal. Two months after the "suicide" of Enron executive Clifford Baxter, in the midst of questions about the accounting practices of El Paso Corp., Charles Rice was found dead of a gunshot wound to the head. His death was ruled a suicide.
James Daniel Watkins
His body was found on December 1, 2001 in the Pike National Forest in Colorado, a gunshot wound to the head. Mr. Watkins was a consultant for Arthur Andersen, the accounting firm for Enron. He disappeared on November 13 after he left work. He was described as a devoted family man who always called home if he were going to be late. Officials initially said that the death was suspicious, but have changed their tune and have ruled his death a suicide.
Jake Horton
He was the senior vice-president of Gulf Power, a subsidiary of Southern Company, a cohort of Enron in the energy industry, and a major contributer to the Bush agenda. According to reporter Gregory Palast, Horton knew of the company's appalling accounting practices, and "... had no doubt about its illegal campaign contributions to Florida politicans - he'd made the payments himself. In April of 1989 Horton decided to come clean with state officials, and reserved the company jet to go confront company officials. Ten minutes after takeoff the jet exploded.
http://forums.craigslist.org/?ID=8791308
Steve Kangas
His web site, Liberalism Resurgent, was meticulously researched and presented such a problem to the "real boss" of George Bush, Richard Scaife, that he hired a private detective to look into Kangas' past. Steve Kangas was found in a 39th-floor bathroom outside of Scaife's offices at One Oxford Centre, in Pittsburgh, an apparent suicide. Mr. Kangas, a very prolific writer, left no note. He had brought a fully-packed suitcase of clothes with him to Pittsburgh. He bought a burglar alarm shortly before he left for Pittsburgh. Why did he need a burglar alarm if he was going to commit suicide? An avowed advocate of gun control, he nevertheless bought a gun. What was he afraid of? Why did he go to Pittsburgh? After his death, his computer was sold for $150 and its hard drive wiped clean. Everything in his apartment was thrown away.
Danny Casolaro
He was working on a book that tied together the scandals surrounding the presidency of George H. W. Bush. He told his friends he was going to "bring back" the head of the Octopus. Instead, his body was found in a hotel in Martinsburg, West Virginia, on August 10, 1991, an apparent suicide.
Mark Lombardi
He was an accomplished conceptual artist who, while chatting on the phone with a banker friend about the Bush savings and loan scandal, started doodling a diagram and was inspired to create a complex series of drawings and sketches that charted the details of the scandal. According to the New York Times, "He was soon charting the complex matrices of personal and professional relationships, conflict of interest, malfeasance and fraud uncovered by investigations into the major financial and political scandals of the day; to keep facts and sources straight, he created a handwritten database that now includes around 12,000 3-by-5-inch cards."
On the evening of March 22, 2000, Mark Lombardi was found hanging in his loft, an apparent suicide.
James Hatfield
Mr. Hatfield was the author of Fortunate Son, an unauthorized biography of George W. Bush. The book detailed Bush's cocaine use and cover up of a cocaine arrest. He was found Wednesday, July 18, 2002 in a motel room, an apparent suicide.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[sfo] Politics - World (context)
The paleocons are getting restless
2003-09-06 10:30:05
"Had there been any doubts about the direction the Republican Party is headed, they vanished last week when Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie visited New Hampshire.
During a cheerful and pleasant meeting (that’s the kind of guy Gillespie is) at The Union Leader offices, the party’s new chairman, energetic and full of vigor, said in no uncertain terms that the days of Reaganesque Republican railings against the expansion of federal government are over.
No longer does the Republican Party stand for shrinking the federal government, for scaling back its encroachment into the lives of Americans, or for carrying the banner of federalism into the political battles of the day.
No, today the Republican Party stands for giving the American people whatever the latest polls say they want. The people want the federal government to tell states how to run local schools? Then that’s what the Republican Party wants, too. The people want expanded entitlement programs and a federal government that attends to their every desire, no matter how frivolous? Then that’s what the Republican Party wants, too.
The party’s unofficial but clear message to conservatives is: Where else are you going to go? To the Democrats? To the Libertarians? They don’t think so. "
www.thesakeofargument.com/archives/000116.html
......................
"In three years, Bush has managed to wreak so much havoc with the nation's finances it's very hard to see who could do worse. In his first three years, you have an increase in domestic discretionary spending of 20.8 percent, compared to a decrease of 0.7 percent for Bill Clinton. If a Democrat had this record, do you think Republicans would let him off the hook? Here's Tom DeLay in 1995: "By the year 2002, we can have a federal government with a balanced budget or we can continue down the present path towards total fiscal catastrophe." If Clintonomics was a "fiscal catastrophe," what would an intellectually honest DeLay say about Bush? (I know an intellectually honest Tom DeLay is a bit of magical realism, but bear with me.) We don't just have big tax cuts; we have a big leap in discretionary spending, huge hikes in agricultural subsidies, no reform of corporate welfare, a huge new entitlement for prescription drugs, big jumps in the number of people employed indirectly by Uncle Sam, and on and on. Looking ahead, the future looks even worse - and that's even before we try and tackle the entitlement crunch of the boomer retirement. The GOP has to be punished for this. They run the Congress; and they're now officially worse than Democrats at keeping government solvent or small. Clinton was way, way better. Honest conservatives know this. Dishonest partisans look the other way."
www.andrewsullivan.com/index.php
the place is falling apart...
2003-09-06 10:53:47
Who's gonna pay for it?
"America's infrastructure is full of cracks, leaks and holes and is getting worse, according to an analysis by civil engineers that concludes the nation's transportation, water and energy systems have shown little improvement since they were given an overall grade of D-plus in 2001.
A report by the American Society of Civil Engineers released Thursday assessed trends over the last two years in the condition of 12 categories of infrastructure, including roadways, bridges, drinking water and energy.
...
There was no progress for schools, which received the worst grade — D-minus — from the engineers in 2001. The report said three out of four school buildings are inadequate. They estimate it will cost more than $127 billion to build new classrooms and modernize outdated schools.
Energy transmission earned a D-plus two years ago, and the engineers said the trend is getting worse. Investment in transmission fell by $115 million annually, to $2 billion a year in 2000 from $5 billion in 1975. Actual capacity increased by only 7,000 megawatts a year, 30 percent less than needed to keep up with power demand. "
story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030904/ap_on_re_us/aging_infrastructure_3
.......................................................
hey we don't talk much but? < ibRightandLeft > 09/06 11:36:39
can you explina the debt rise with the so called "clinton budget surpluses?
www.treas.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/fed-debt.html
2003-09-15 07:20:22
Who moved my party? True Republicans know debt can easily grow into a whirling economic black hole. It's just bad -- was, is, always will be.
Keeping tax rates high during expansion so that we can run a surplus and pay down the trillions of debt on the other hand is not a bad thing.
(Not to say that running up a little debt during a recession is never called for, and certainly a bit of sustainable borrowing for capital investment is acceptable. If you need some home improvement like, say, a security system, you borrow and pay it off over the life of the system. That's different than borrowing to pay your tab at O'Malley's.)
----------------------------------------------------------------
If you want a conspiracy, ask the dead < RoughJustice > 09/12 20:50:37
Enron - Bodies
J. Clifford Baxter
Found dead in his car, shot in the head. Mr. Baxter was vice chairman of Enron Corp. when he resigned in May 2001. Enron has been hot copy lately with the revelation that they were the largest campaign contributors for George W. Bush. Was J. Clifford Baxter a potential witness to Bush foreknowledge of their wrongdoings? His death was ruled a suicide.
Charles Dana Rice
He was the senior vice president and treasurer of El Paso Corp., an energy corporation swept up in the recent energy scandal. Two months after the "suicide" of Enron executive Clifford Baxter, in the midst of questions about the accounting practices of El Paso Corp., Charles Rice was found dead of a gunshot wound to the head. His death was ruled a suicide.
James Daniel Watkins
His body was found on December 1, 2001 in the Pike National Forest in Colorado, a gunshot wound to the head. Mr. Watkins was a consultant for Arthur Andersen, the accounting firm for Enron. He disappeared on November 13 after he left work. He was described as a devoted family man who always called home if he were going to be late. Officials initially said that the death was suspicious, but have changed their tune and have ruled his death a suicide.
Jake Horton
He was the senior vice-president of Gulf Power, a subsidiary of Southern Company, a cohort of Enron in the energy industry, and a major contributer to the Bush agenda. According to reporter Gregory Palast, Horton knew of the company's appalling accounting practices, and "... had no doubt about its illegal campaign contributions to Florida politicans - he'd made the payments himself. In April of 1989 Horton decided to come clean with state officials, and reserved the company jet to go confront company officials. Ten minutes after takeoff the jet exploded.
http://forums.craigslist.org/?ID=8791308
Steve Kangas
His web site, Liberalism Resurgent, was meticulously researched and presented such a problem to the "real boss" of George Bush, Richard Scaife, that he hired a private detective to look into Kangas' past. Steve Kangas was found in a 39th-floor bathroom outside of Scaife's offices at One Oxford Centre, in Pittsburgh, an apparent suicide. Mr. Kangas, a very prolific writer, left no note. He had brought a fully-packed suitcase of clothes with him to Pittsburgh. He bought a burglar alarm shortly before he left for Pittsburgh. Why did he need a burglar alarm if he was going to commit suicide? An avowed advocate of gun control, he nevertheless bought a gun. What was he afraid of? Why did he go to Pittsburgh? After his death, his computer was sold for $150 and its hard drive wiped clean. Everything in his apartment was thrown away.
Danny Casolaro
He was working on a book that tied together the scandals surrounding the presidency of George H. W. Bush. He told his friends he was going to "bring back" the head of the Octopus. Instead, his body was found in a hotel in Martinsburg, West Virginia, on August 10, 1991, an apparent suicide.
Mark Lombardi
He was an accomplished conceptual artist who, while chatting on the phone with a banker friend about the Bush savings and loan scandal, started doodling a diagram and was inspired to create a complex series of drawings and sketches that charted the details of the scandal. According to the New York Times, "He was soon charting the complex matrices of personal and professional relationships, conflict of interest, malfeasance and fraud uncovered by investigations into the major financial and political scandals of the day; to keep facts and sources straight, he created a handwritten database that now includes around 12,000 3-by-5-inch cards."
On the evening of March 22, 2000, Mark Lombardi was found hanging in his loft, an apparent suicide.
James Hatfield
Mr. Hatfield was the author of Fortunate Son, an unauthorized biography of George W. Bush. The book detailed Bush's cocaine use and cover up of a cocaine arrest. He was found Wednesday, July 18, 2002 in a motel room, an apparent suicide.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[sfo] Politics - World (context)
The paleocons are getting restless
2003-09-06 10:30:05
"Had there been any doubts about the direction the Republican Party is headed, they vanished last week when Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie visited New Hampshire.
During a cheerful and pleasant meeting (that’s the kind of guy Gillespie is) at The Union Leader offices, the party’s new chairman, energetic and full of vigor, said in no uncertain terms that the days of Reaganesque Republican railings against the expansion of federal government are over.
No longer does the Republican Party stand for shrinking the federal government, for scaling back its encroachment into the lives of Americans, or for carrying the banner of federalism into the political battles of the day.
No, today the Republican Party stands for giving the American people whatever the latest polls say they want. The people want the federal government to tell states how to run local schools? Then that’s what the Republican Party wants, too. The people want expanded entitlement programs and a federal government that attends to their every desire, no matter how frivolous? Then that’s what the Republican Party wants, too.
The party’s unofficial but clear message to conservatives is: Where else are you going to go? To the Democrats? To the Libertarians? They don’t think so. "
www.thesakeofargument.com/archives/000116.html
......................
"In three years, Bush has managed to wreak so much havoc with the nation's finances it's very hard to see who could do worse. In his first three years, you have an increase in domestic discretionary spending of 20.8 percent, compared to a decrease of 0.7 percent for Bill Clinton. If a Democrat had this record, do you think Republicans would let him off the hook? Here's Tom DeLay in 1995: "By the year 2002, we can have a federal government with a balanced budget or we can continue down the present path towards total fiscal catastrophe." If Clintonomics was a "fiscal catastrophe," what would an intellectually honest DeLay say about Bush? (I know an intellectually honest Tom DeLay is a bit of magical realism, but bear with me.) We don't just have big tax cuts; we have a big leap in discretionary spending, huge hikes in agricultural subsidies, no reform of corporate welfare, a huge new entitlement for prescription drugs, big jumps in the number of people employed indirectly by Uncle Sam, and on and on. Looking ahead, the future looks even worse - and that's even before we try and tackle the entitlement crunch of the boomer retirement. The GOP has to be punished for this. They run the Congress; and they're now officially worse than Democrats at keeping government solvent or small. Clinton was way, way better. Honest conservatives know this. Dishonest partisans look the other way."
www.andrewsullivan.com/index.php
the place is falling apart...
2003-09-06 10:53:47
Who's gonna pay for it?
"America's infrastructure is full of cracks, leaks and holes and is getting worse, according to an analysis by civil engineers that concludes the nation's transportation, water and energy systems have shown little improvement since they were given an overall grade of D-plus in 2001.
A report by the American Society of Civil Engineers released Thursday assessed trends over the last two years in the condition of 12 categories of infrastructure, including roadways, bridges, drinking water and energy.
...
There was no progress for schools, which received the worst grade — D-minus — from the engineers in 2001. The report said three out of four school buildings are inadequate. They estimate it will cost more than $127 billion to build new classrooms and modernize outdated schools.
Energy transmission earned a D-plus two years ago, and the engineers said the trend is getting worse. Investment in transmission fell by $115 million annually, to $2 billion a year in 2000 from $5 billion in 1975. Actual capacity increased by only 7,000 megawatts a year, 30 percent less than needed to keep up with power demand. "
story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030904/ap_on_re_us/aging_infrastructure_3
.......................................................
hey we don't talk much but? < ibRightandLeft > 09/06 11:36:39
can you explina the debt rise with the so called "clinton budget surpluses?
www.treas.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/fed-debt.html
"Poverty Harvest at CancГєn
Will the Hate America Firsters even notice this body blow to the 3rd world by their socialist buds?:
'Rather than tackling the problem of their high agricultural tariffs and lavish farm subsidies, which victimize farmers in poorer nations, a number of rich nations derailed the WTO talks.
The failure by 146 trade delegates to reach an agreement in Mexico is a serious blow to the global economy. And contrary to the mindless cheering with which the breakdown was greeted by antiglobalization protesters at CancГєn, the world's poorest and most vulnerable nations will suffer most.
It is a bitter irony that the chief architects of this failure were nations like Japan, Korea and European Union members, themselves ads for the prosperity afforded by increased global trade. '
www.nytimes.com/2003/09/16/opinion/16TUE1.html "
Will the Hate America Firsters even notice this body blow to the 3rd world by their socialist buds?:
'Rather than tackling the problem of their high agricultural tariffs and lavish farm subsidies, which victimize farmers in poorer nations, a number of rich nations derailed the WTO talks.
The failure by 146 trade delegates to reach an agreement in Mexico is a serious blow to the global economy. And contrary to the mindless cheering with which the breakdown was greeted by antiglobalization protesters at CancГєn, the world's poorest and most vulnerable nations will suffer most.
It is a bitter irony that the chief architects of this failure were nations like Japan, Korea and European Union members, themselves ads for the prosperity afforded by increased global trade. '
www.nytimes.com/2003/09/16/opinion/16TUE1.html "
Monday, September 15, 2003
Chappawhocares
FYI, Teddy wasn't driving < RoughJustice > 09/09 13:49:56
He wasn't even in the car. The next morning he was shooting the breeze with hotel guests until visited by one of his henchmen. TK listened, turned white as a sheet, and ran off. Apparently he'd abandoned Mary Jo when he thought the police were chasing them. She drove off the bridge by herself; he walked back to the party and got a ride home, woke up fit as an Irish fiddle with nary a care in the world until he got the news.
http://forums.craigslist.org/?ID=8687918
FYI, Teddy wasn't driving < RoughJustice > 09/09 13:49:56
He wasn't even in the car. The next morning he was shooting the breeze with hotel guests until visited by one of his henchmen. TK listened, turned white as a sheet, and ran off. Apparently he'd abandoned Mary Jo when he thought the police were chasing them. She drove off the bridge by herself; he walked back to the party and got a ride home, woke up fit as an Irish fiddle with nary a care in the world until he got the news.
http://forums.craigslist.org/?ID=8687918
Saturday, September 06, 2003
The paleocons are getting restless ...
"Had there been any doubts about the direction the Republican Party is headed, they vanished last week when Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie visited New Hampshire.
During a cheerful and pleasant meeting (that’s the kind of guy Gillespie is) at The Union Leader offices, the party’s new chairman, energetic and full of vigor, said in no uncertain terms that the days of Reaganesque Republican railings against the expansion of federal government are over.
No longer does the Republican Party stand for shrinking the federal government, for scaling back its encroachment into the lives of Americans, or for carrying the banner of federalism into the political battles of the day.
No, today the Republican Party stands for giving the American people whatever the latest polls say they want. The people want the federal government to tell states how to run local schools? Then that’s what the Republican Party wants, too. The people want expanded entitlement programs and a federal government that attends to their every desire, no matter how frivolous? Then that’s what the Republican Party wants, too.
The party’s unofficial but clear message to conservatives is: Where else are you going to go? To the Democrats? To the Libertarians? They don’t think so. "
http://www.thesakeofargument.com/archives/000116.html
"In three years, Bush has managed to wreak so much havoc with the nation's finances it's very hard to see who could do worse. In his first three years, you have an increase in domestic discretionary spending of 20.8 percent, compared to a decrease of 0.7 percent for Bill Clinton. If a Democrat had this record, do you think Republicans would let him off the hook? Here's Tom DeLay in 1995: "By the year 2002, we can have a federal government with a balanced budget or we can continue down the present path towards total fiscal catastrophe." If Clintonomics was a "fiscal catastrophe," what would an intellectually honest DeLay say about Bush? (I know an intellectually honest Tom DeLay is a bit of magical realism, but bear with me.) We don't just have big tax cuts; we have a big leap in discretionary spending, huge hikes in agricultural subsidies, no reform of corporate welfare, a huge new entitlement for prescription drugs, big jumps in the number of people employed indirectly by Uncle Sam, and on and on. Looking ahead, the future looks even worse - and that's even before we try and tackle the entitlement crunch of the boomer retirement. The GOP has to be punished for this. They run the Congress; and they're now officially worse than Democrats at keeping government solvent or small. Clinton was way, way better. Honest conservatives know this. Dishonest partisans look the other way."
www.andrewsullivan.com/index.php
"Had there been any doubts about the direction the Republican Party is headed, they vanished last week when Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie visited New Hampshire.
During a cheerful and pleasant meeting (that’s the kind of guy Gillespie is) at The Union Leader offices, the party’s new chairman, energetic and full of vigor, said in no uncertain terms that the days of Reaganesque Republican railings against the expansion of federal government are over.
No longer does the Republican Party stand for shrinking the federal government, for scaling back its encroachment into the lives of Americans, or for carrying the banner of federalism into the political battles of the day.
No, today the Republican Party stands for giving the American people whatever the latest polls say they want. The people want the federal government to tell states how to run local schools? Then that’s what the Republican Party wants, too. The people want expanded entitlement programs and a federal government that attends to their every desire, no matter how frivolous? Then that’s what the Republican Party wants, too.
The party’s unofficial but clear message to conservatives is: Where else are you going to go? To the Democrats? To the Libertarians? They don’t think so. "
http://www.thesakeofargument.com/archives/000116.html
"In three years, Bush has managed to wreak so much havoc with the nation's finances it's very hard to see who could do worse. In his first three years, you have an increase in domestic discretionary spending of 20.8 percent, compared to a decrease of 0.7 percent for Bill Clinton. If a Democrat had this record, do you think Republicans would let him off the hook? Here's Tom DeLay in 1995: "By the year 2002, we can have a federal government with a balanced budget or we can continue down the present path towards total fiscal catastrophe." If Clintonomics was a "fiscal catastrophe," what would an intellectually honest DeLay say about Bush? (I know an intellectually honest Tom DeLay is a bit of magical realism, but bear with me.) We don't just have big tax cuts; we have a big leap in discretionary spending, huge hikes in agricultural subsidies, no reform of corporate welfare, a huge new entitlement for prescription drugs, big jumps in the number of people employed indirectly by Uncle Sam, and on and on. Looking ahead, the future looks even worse - and that's even before we try and tackle the entitlement crunch of the boomer retirement. The GOP has to be punished for this. They run the Congress; and they're now officially worse than Democrats at keeping government solvent or small. Clinton was way, way better. Honest conservatives know this. Dishonest partisans look the other way."
www.andrewsullivan.com/index.php
Tuesday, September 02, 2003
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)