Fiscal conservative doesn't mean anything. It means you don't like wasting money right? It's nonsense, that applies to everyone.
I want them to come out and admit that they want to abolish Medicare and SSI, because without taxes that's the only way to fix the deficit.
Defense
You could actually cut the entire defense budget (wars excepted) and it wouldn't fix the deficit. About half, IIRC.
But why would we do that anyway. Defense budget employs a shitload of people directly and peripherally in this country. It's not like those jobs don't matter.
The wars require a shit-ton of money, and most of the companies with defense contracts could lose them and be fine. Like Xe and Boeing!
Fiscal conservative doesn't mean anything. It means you don't like wasting money right? It's nonsense, that applies to everyone.
I want them to come out and admit that they want to abolish Medicare and SSI, because without taxes that's the only way to fix the deficit.
Defense
You could actually cut the entire defense budget (wars excepted) and it wouldn't fix the deficit. About half, IIRC.
But why would we do that anyway. Defense budget employs a shitload of people directly and peripherally in this country. It's not like those jobs don't matter.
The wars require a shit-ton of money, and most of the companies with defense contracts could lose them and be fine. Like Xe and Boeing!
The second statement regarding Boeing is simply not true.
Exaclty. The narrative has been that they're new and are trying to weed out all the crappy incumbants, be they Democrat or Republican but I think when the dust settles, they Tea Party will just meld back into the republicans.
She says permanently eliminating the "death tax" will create 5 million new jobs.
O"Donnell challenges that "we are not creating a culture of dependency. ... What do we want Delwareans to be receiving, food stamps or paychecks?"
Coons: "To simply denounce people as being dependent because they are applying for food stamps ... is plainly slandering people because of difficult times."
O'Donnell charges Coons of wanting to stop tax cuts for "the so-called rich." But those people are small business owners, she said.
Coons interrupts: "We are going to have a conversation rather than a diatribe."
Chris Coons said that he was surprised to see Christine O’Donnell quoted recently as saying that the Constitution, not her religious beliefs, would guide her votes in Washington. He questioned whether that was a true statement -– and wondered about past controversial statements.
“These aren’t just random statements on some late-night TV show,” he said.
O’Donnell has said she supports the Constitution. This led Coons to ask which Constitution? Is it the Constitution of the 1920s and 1930s? The 1970s? He alluded to the 1970s ruling by the Supreme Court that legalized abortion. Does O’Donnell follow and respect such rulings? he asked. O'Donnell has opposed abortion, except in cases in which the mother's life is threatened.
It was noted that under the new healthcare law, children can now stay on their parents' health insurance policies and that insurance companies cannot end coverage.
Christine O’Donnell was asked it it’s true that she wants to repeal those provisions in the sweeping healthcare bill passed this year.
Republican O’Donnell answered by denouncing the high cost of medical care. She suggested that medical malpractice costs drive up overall health costs and suggested other savings. O’Donnell eventually said that she would work to overturn most of the provisions of the healthcare law.
She also alleged that the new legislation has driven up costs.
Democrat Chris Coons said that rather than repeal the law, it should be implemented in a responsible manner. He also challenged his opponent to show how the bill has raised costs.
A feisty, aggressive Ms. O’Donnell called Mr. Coons a Marxist whose beliefs came from a socialist professor and said he would “rubber stamp” the policies of the Democrats in Washington. Mr. Coons raised questions about whether Ms. O’Donnell’s faith would drive her positions on social issues like abortion, prayer and evolution.
Pressed by CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer, Ms. O’Donnell refused to say whether she believed evolution was a myth, saying that “what I believe is irrelevant.” As she did throughout the first half of the debate, Ms. O’Donnell quickly tried to return the focus to Mr. Coons, saying, “I would argue there are more people who support my Catholic faith than his Marxist belief.”
Mr. Coons responded that the source of her charge – an article he wrote as a student – was “a joke” that his Republican friends at the time conceived when he registered as a Democrat.
“I am not now nor have I been anything but a clean-shaven capitalist,” Mr. Coons said.
Coons was 21 at the time. In the same debate: O'Donnell: "This election cycle should not be about commnts I made on a comedy show over a decade and a half ago."
IT IS THE GODDAMN SAME DEBATE!
The article:
I spent the spring of my junior year in Africa on the St. Lawrence Kenya Study Program. Going to Kenya was one of the few real decisions I have made; my friends, family, and professors all advised against it, but I went anyway. My friends now joke that something about Kenya, maybe the strange diet, or the tropical sun, changed my personality; Africa to them seems a catalytic converter that takes in clean-shaven, clear-thinking Americans and sends back bearded Marxists.
The point that others ignore is that I was ready to change. Experiences at Amherst my first two years made me skeptical and uncomfortable with Republicanism, enough so that I wanted to see the Third World for myself to get some perspective on my beliefs.
Couscous on
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
edited October 2010
At least it sounds like Coons is acting like a professional.
O'Donnell knows she's got to be swinging for the fences at this point. She either gets some soundbite from him that translates into a media shitstorm, or she loses yet another run for political office.
That means she has to be even crazier than normal.
Joe Miller's old boss, former-Mayor Jim Whitaker, has come out and said that Miller was almost fired for an ethics violation.
Republican U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller was nearly fired from his job as a borough attorney in 2008 after using borough computers in an attempt to oust the chairman of the Republican Party of Alaska, former borough Mayor Jim Whitaker said Wednesday.
Whitaker said Miller’s actions violated the Fairbanks North Star Borough’s ethics policy but did not result in a termination because the borough needed Miller to continue working on its lawsuit about how much to tax the trans-Alaska pipeline system. Miller eventually resigned from borough employment on Sept. 1, 2009.
Probably won't really do any damage in the long run, but if we're lucky people will start having second thoughts about him. Article is up here.
Obama expressed optimism to me that he could make common cause with Republicans after the midterm elections. “It may be that regardless of what happens after this election, they feel more responsible,” he said, “either because they didn’t do as well as they anticipated, and so the strategy of just saying no to everything and sitting on the sidelines and throwing bombs didn’t work for them, or they did reasonably well, in which case the American people are going to be looking to them to offer serious proposals and work with me in a serious way.”
I asked if there were any Republicans he trusted enough to work with on economic issues. The first name he came up with was Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, who initially agreed to serve as Obama’s commerce secretary before changing his mind. But Gregg is retiring. The only other Republican named by Obama was Paul Ryan, the Wisconsin congressman who has put together a detailed if politically problematic blueprint for reducing federal spending. The two men are ideologically poles apart, but perhaps Obama sees a bit of himself in a young, substantive policy thinker.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Obama expressed optimism to me that he could make common cause with Republicans after the midterm elections. “It may be that regardless of what happens after this election, they feel more responsible,” he said, “either because they didn’t do as well as they anticipated, and so the strategy of just saying no to everything and sitting on the sidelines and throwing bombs didn’t work for them, or they did reasonably well, in which case the American people are going to be looking to them to offer serious proposals and work with me in a serious way.”
I asked if there were any Republicans he trusted enough to work with on economic issues. The first name he came up with was Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, who initially agreed to serve as Obama’s commerce secretary before changing his mind. But Gregg is retiring. The only other Republican named by Obama was Paul Ryan, the Wisconsin congressman who has put together a detailed if politically problematic blueprint for reducing federal spending. The two men are ideologically poles apart, but perhaps Obama sees a bit of himself in a young, substantive policy thinker.
"I'm sure they're going to be dickbags" isn't a terribly useful message to be putting out as an executive that's staring down the barrel of a hostile congress.
We need to stop those dickbags from getting elected is a better message. Try to you know, win.
I agree. As do the president's people, which is why he's been traveling for campaigns pretty much nonstop for the last several weeks.
That doesn't change the fact that when you're directly asked about how you plan to approach the other side, you give a pat answer about your hope for working together.
Christine O’Donnell, the Republican Senate candidate in Delaware, stumbled during the debate tonight when asked for a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that she disagreed with.
“I know that there are a lot,” she said. But she couldn’t come up with one, evoking memories of Katie Couric’s 2008 interview with Ms. Palin when she could not identify newspapers or magazines that she read.
“I will put it up on our Web site,” O’Donnell promised.
CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer suggested Roe v. Wade, the case which legalized abortion as a possibility.
“She said recent,” Ms. O’Donnell said, but then seized on the case to rescue her from the awkward moment, noting that overturning Roe v. Wade would not make abortion illegal but would give the issue back to the states.
Clearly thinking about court decisions, Ms. O’Donnell then added that “there are several when it comes to pornography. Federal court decisions to give terrorists Miranda rights.”
Given the same opportunity to name a case he disagreed with, Chris Coons, the Democratic candidate, quickly cited the Citizens United case which legalized political spending by corporations.
“The free speech rights of corporations, I don’t think deserve the free speech rights of living breathing humans,” Coons said.
*FACEPALM*
Couscous on
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
edited October 2010
Yeah, I'm not sure what would have been gained by saying "I'm gonna give those crapburgers the worst time they've ever had."
Obama expressed optimism to me that he could make common cause with Republicans after the midterm elections. “It may be that regardless of what happens after this election, they feel more responsible,” he said, “either because they didn’t do as well as they anticipated, and so the strategy of just saying no to everything and sitting on the sidelines and throwing bombs didn’t work for them, or they did reasonably well, in which case the American people are going to be looking to them to offer serious proposals and work with me in a serious way.”
I asked if there were any Republicans he trusted enough to work with on economic issues. The first name he came up with was Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, who initially agreed to serve as Obama’s commerce secretary before changing his mind. But Gregg is retiring. The only other Republican named by Obama was Paul Ryan, the Wisconsin congressman who has put together a detailed if politically problematic blueprint for reducing federal spending. The two men are ideologically poles apart, but perhaps Obama sees a bit of himself in a young, substantive policy thinker.
Whelp, better start stocking up on ADAM now, people.
Ryan is also the only Republican that has put forward anything besides platitudes in over a year.
He can't point to anyone else on that side of the aisle that actually has anything to be discussed.
His plan is also essentially platitudes. With fake numbers.
Being the best Republican is like being the best Detroit Lion of the last decade. You still lost 80% of your games.
Granted. But it's something.
Sometimes you have to find something nice to say about the other guys. If that means highlighting their nearest non-fail, then so be it.
That doesn't mean you're looking to institute the opposition's ideas wholesale.
I suspect when they're impeaching him for being President while black/Democratic, he'll still be saying these things.
I'd like the Democratic Party to at some point draw a line, tell the people they stand for some things and tell the Republicans they and their morally and intellectually bankrupt ideas can go fuck themselves.
In slightly more polite language but still.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Why God why would I read the comments on a post as ridiculous as that?
The comments are the second best part (after the fact that Pat Motherfucking Sajak wrote it)!
Expect it to be a plank in the GOP's 2012 party platform.
Just the premise is ridiculous.
How in the hell do you draw a legitimate line around what is or isn't a sufficient conflict of interest to justify denying participation in American democracy?
How in the hell does one even say something like this without their brain slapping them hard enough to knock teeth loose?
Why God why would I read the comments on a post as ridiculous as that?
Well, it's partially Pat's fault, the article was so short I didn't even have to scroll down to see the comments, they were already on my screen waiting to mercilessly attack my eyes
Christ, I can feel my brain fighting off the stupid.
Basically, under Mr. Sajak's master plan here, school teachers would never be allowed to vote. Schools are funded primarily by the state, but also by local property taxes and trickles of federal grant money that is highly dependent on earmarking and executive orders. So teachers, given that they're basically constantly voting for the people they want to be collecting checks from, just wouldn't be able to vote.
I'm sure there are even more egregious examples available of how ridiculous this is (something along the line of contractors voting for people who will give them million dollar contracts vs police/fire crews not being able to vote because of some ill-defined conflict of interest is probably even more stupifying), but that's what jumped into my head since I'm currently studying school finance.
Posts
The wars require a shit-ton of money, and most of the companies with defense contracts could lose them and be fine. Like Xe and Boeing!
The second statement regarding Boeing is simply not true.
Exaclty. The narrative has been that they're new and are trying to weed out all the crappy incumbants, be they Democrat or Republican but I think when the dust settles, they Tea Party will just meld back into the republicans.
CNN cut away to Breaking News of another miner coming to the top before the debate concluded.
NintendoID: Nailbunny 3DS: 3909-8796-4685
IT IS THE GODDAMN SAME DEBATE!
The article:
That means she has to be even crazier than normal.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Joe Miller's old boss, former-Mayor Jim Whitaker, has come out and said that Miller was almost fired for an ethics violation.
Probably won't really do any damage in the long run, but if we're lucky people will start having second thoughts about him. Article is up here.
*facepalm*
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
That doesn't change the fact that when you're directly asked about how you plan to approach the other side, you give a pat answer about your hope for working together.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Fuck Paul Ryan. He's a shallow twit who never emerged from adolescence and realized that Ayn Rand was a terrible human being.
He can't point to anyone else on that side of the aisle that actually has anything to be discussed.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
His plan is also essentially platitudes. With fake numbers.
Being the best Republican is like being the best Detroit Lion of the last decade. You still lost 80% of your games.
Sometimes you have to find something nice to say about the other guys. If that means highlighting their nearest non-fail, then so be it.
That doesn't mean you're looking to institute the opposition's ideas wholesale.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
I suspect when they're impeaching him for being President while black/Democratic, he'll still be saying these things.
I'd like the Democratic Party to at some point draw a line, tell the people they stand for some things and tell the Republicans they and their morally and intellectually bankrupt ideas can go fuck themselves.
In slightly more polite language but still.
There's a point when even the peacemakers have to stand up and defend themselves.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
You would think that point is somewhere around "illegitimate Marxist Nazi terrorist sympathizer" and yet...
Impeachment is a direct legislative attack by elected representatives.
In one of those two situations non-engagement is a debatably valid strategy. In the other it isn't.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Elected representatives have made those attacks.
Expect it to be a plank in the GOP's 2012 party platform.
Impeachment is a much bigger deal than mudslinging. How is this not obvious?
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
How in the hell do you draw a legitimate line around what is or isn't a sufficient conflict of interest to justify denying participation in American democracy?
How in the hell does one even say something like this without their brain slapping them hard enough to knock teeth loose?
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
What...
why...
ohgod WHAT!?
Sigh.
Sometimes, I hate this place and these people.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Well, it's partially Pat's fault, the article was so short I didn't even have to scroll down to see the comments, they were already on my screen waiting to mercilessly attack my eyes
:winky:
That's all I got out of your post.
It's bad enough felons can't vote, but he wants to strip voting rights from federal and state workers?
Basically, under Mr. Sajak's master plan here, school teachers would never be allowed to vote. Schools are funded primarily by the state, but also by local property taxes and trickles of federal grant money that is highly dependent on earmarking and executive orders. So teachers, given that they're basically constantly voting for the people they want to be collecting checks from, just wouldn't be able to vote.
I'm sure there are even more egregious examples available of how ridiculous this is (something along the line of contractors voting for people who will give them million dollar contracts vs police/fire crews not being able to vote because of some ill-defined conflict of interest is probably even more stupifying), but that's what jumped into my head since I'm currently studying school finance.
Jesus christ pat sajak. G_ suck a c_ck.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
But only for federal and state elections, respectively.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad