The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
The Pledge to America
Salvation122
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
So, the Republicans are basically rolling out the Contract with America again. Have any of you guys read this thing? You probably should. (Go aherad. I know it says it's fifty pages long; it's lying. About half of that is pictures. Not, like, charts and graphs, but photographs of Mt. Rushmore and old people and Eric Cantor.)
This is the part where I call bullshit on things!
I just... I'm at a loss for words. I'd like to consider myself a (very) moderate Republican, but they make it really really hard.
This is the part where I call bullshit on things!
Oh, Jesus. I just went in and read the thing and I swear my brain is leaking out my ears.
Pledge to America policy issues, by page, ignoring the introduction:
This is true. It would behoove the Republicans to maybe not filibuster Democrat legislation that patches the hike in an attempt to kill an increase in taxes on the top 2% of American earners, who make over $250,000 a year.
You don't cut federal spending in a recession, especially since a huge chunk of that spending is going to subsidize the very small businesses the Republicans are promising to protect.
This is a de facto ban on new federal regulation. $100m is a rounding error in the current federal budget, let alone the GDP. All things being equal, more regulation is undesirable, but significant regulatory cuts led to the financial implosion in the first place.
Also on page 16 is an issue with 1099s; while the regulation in question is less than ideal, it's a fair-to-middling way to increase tax compliance. Ultimately, all it means is that the business's accountant gets a larger chunk of money. As I understand it this is all information that would be necessary in an audit anyway.
The stimulus plan is working. We've hit the trough. Climbing out of it takes time. Killing the stimulus now would likely send unemployment rates higher, and at the very least would lead to widespread employment of people in jobs far below what they're qualified for.
Spending caps are stupid. Sometimes you need to spend more than predicted. Shit happens. Like, say, hurricanes.
Hell, nobody's happy about it, but TARP spending beats the fuck out of a liquidity trap.
The only important and understaffed facet of the government is the military? Really? Because last I heard Treasury and Justice and State were severely understaffed, and had been for a while.
You're fighting the sunset clause on Bush's tax cuts right now! Why would other legislation be any different? Sunset clauses are already damn near everywhere in federal legislation!
And red states are overwhelmingly the ones that benefit the most from these programs. I know that I like having federal funding to make up shortfalls in the police and transportation and medicare budget in Mississippi.
That's because all our heavy manufacturing is done by robots, and it's flatly impossible to make money on light manufacturing with our current labor laws.
Yes, that's what happens when the economy goes into the fucking toilet. If federal spending remains stable and GDP drops, federal spending as a percentage of GDP goes up. This is no surprise to anyone who thinks about it for fifteen seconds.
Page 26 needs citations everywhere other than "The Actuary," and its abortion section is completely spurious considering that it's already illegal (by the Hyde Amendment) for federal funds to pay for abortion. (Money's fungible, so this is kind of a stupid provision anyway, but whatever.)
Page 27: There's too much stupid here too quote. Liability reform has already been implemented in many states; Even if malpractice costs were entirely removed, it would save only 2.4%. The Obama plan allows for the purchase of plans across state lines, HSAs were never intended to function as the almost entirely pure tax shelter they now act as, and killing recission and discrimination based on pre-existing conditions without a federal health insurance mandate will simply bankrupt the health insurance industry and put health care out of the reach of everyone but the independently wealthy.
Page 28's half-trillion in tax increases ignores that most people would not be subject to the tax penalty for not having insurance, because they have insurance or would be elligible for subsidized insurance.
Legislation will not be understood by all interested parties, because it is by necessity written in language that most people find indecipherable. Every bill is already up on Thomaslaw before the vote anyway, albeit admittedly not by 3 days.
Yes, and that's usually by design, and the Rehnquist Court was the most "activist" Court in the history of the nation and passed overwhelmingly conservative verdicts, so quit your bitching?
Yeah, I don't think tacking "necessary and proper" or "interstate commerce" on the end of every fucking bill is going to do anyone any good, or, you know, change anything at all.
Yeah, what they really mean here is 'We're planning on owning Congress for the next four years or so, so we're going to grant ourselves the power to kill any bill by defunding it. We'll scream bloody fucking murder when the Democrats do it after we lose power again, though.'
YOU'RE THE ONES DOING THAT!
Yeah, actually, they do. 14th Amendment; substantive liberty and equal protection applies to "persons," not "citizens," under the jurisdiction of the United States. There is a whole lot of case law to back that up.
Page 39: The Iranians have absolutely no compelling interest to build ICBMs, but I guess fearmongering in support of our defense contractor buddies is pretty cool. Immigration law is explicitly Federal domain under the Constitution, so I don't know what they're talking about there except that they like racists in Arizona I guess?
Pledge to America policy issues, by page, ignoring the introduction:
Page 14 wrote:During the 1990s, a Republican Congress enacted pro-family policies such as marriage penalty relief and the child tax credit. Unless action is taken, a $3.8 trillion tax hike will go into effect on January 1, 2011 that will unravel these policies.
This is true. It would behoove the Republicans to maybe not filibuster Democrat legislation that patches the hike in an attempt to kill an increase in taxes on the top 2% of American earners, who make over $250,000 a year.
Page 15 wrote:The American people know that to boost the economy, spending must be slashed, tax increases must be prevented, and small businesses must have certainty that the rules won’t change every few months so they can get back on their feet.
You don't cut federal spending in a recession, especially since a huge chunk of that spending is going to subsidize the very small businesses the Republicans are promising to protect.
Page 16 wrote:To provide stability, we will require congressional approval of any new federal regulation that has an annual cost to our economy of $100 million or more. This is the threshold at which the government deems a regulation “economically significant.”
This is a de facto ban on new federal regulation. $100m is a rounding error in the current federal budget, let alone the GDP. All things being equal, more regulation is undesirable, but significant regulatory cuts led to the financial implosion in the first place.
Also on page 16 is an issue with 1099s; while the regulation in question is less than ideal, it's a fair-to-middling way to increase tax compliance. Ultimately, all it means is that the business's accountant gets a larger chunk of money. As I understand it this is all information that would be necessary in an audit anyway.
Page 21 wrote:Throwing more money at a stimulus plan that is not working only wastes taxpayer money and puts us further in debt.
The stimulus plan is working. We've hit the trough. Climbing out of it takes time. Killing the stimulus now would likely send unemployment rates higher, and at the very least would lead to widespread employment of people in jobs far below what they're qualified for.
We will set strict budget caps to limit federal spending on an annual basis.
Spending caps are stupid. Sometimes you need to spend more than predicted. Shit happens. Like, say, hurricanes.
Americans are rightly outraged at the bailouts of businesses and entities that force responsible taxpayers to subsidize irresponsible behavior.
Hell, nobody's happy about it, but TARP spending beats the fuck out of a liquidity trap.
Page 22 wrote:We will impose a net hiring freeze on non-security federal employees and ensure that the public sector no longer grows at the expense of the private sector.
The only important and understaffed facet of the government is the military? Really? Because last I heard Treasury and Justice and State were severely understaffed, and had been for a while.
We will adopt this requirement at the federal level to force Congress to determine if a program is worthy of continued taxpayer support.
You're fighting the sunset clause on Bush's tax cuts right now! Why would other legislation be any different? Sunset clauses are already damn near everywhere in federal legislation!
The most recent edition of the Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance listed 2,050 different assistance programs available to states, local governments, for-profit and nonprofit organizations, groups, and individuals.
And red states are overwhelmingly the ones that benefit the most from these programs. I know that I like having federal funding to make up shortfalls in the police and transportation and medicare budget in Mississippi.
Page 23 wrote:Indeed, today more Americans work for one level of government or another than work in all the goods-producing industries, such as manufacturing, combined.
That's because all our heavy manufacturing is done by robots, and it's flatly impossible to make money on light manufacturing with our current labor laws.
According to the Obama Administration’s most recent budget forecast, government spending as a percentage of the economy will be, on average, several percentage points higher over the next ten years than it was during either the Clinton or Bush presidencies.
Yes, that's what happens when the economy goes into the fucking toilet. If federal spending remains stable and GDP drops, federal spending as a percentage of GDP goes up. This is no surprise to anyone who thinks about it for fifteen seconds.
Page 26 needs citations everywhere other than "The Actuary," and its abortion section is completely spurious considering that it's already illegal (by the Hyde Amendment) for federal funds to pay for abortion. (Money's fungible, so this is kind of a stupid provision anyway, but whatever.)
Page 27: There's too much stupid here too quote. Liability reform has already been implemented in many states; Even if malpractice costs were entirely removed, it would save only 2.4%. The Obama plan allows for the purchase of plans across state lines, HSAs were never intended to function as the almost entirely pure tax shelter they now act as, and killing recission and discrimination based on pre-existing conditions without a federal health insurance mandate will simply bankrupt the health insurance industry and put health care out of the reach of everyone but the independently wealthy.
Page 28's half-trillion in tax increases ignores that most people would not be subject to the tax penalty for not having insurance, because they have insurance or would be elligible for subsidized insurance.
Page 33 wrote:Legislation should be understood by all interested parties before it is voted on.
Legislation will not be understood by all interested parties, because it is by necessity written in language that most people find indecipherable. Every bill is already up on Thomaslaw before the vote anyway, albeit admittedly not by 3 days.
Further, it has too often drafted unclear and muddled laws, leaving to an unelected judiciary the power to interpret what the law means and by what authority the law stands.
Yes, and that's usually by design, and the Rehnquist Court was the most "activist" Court in the history of the nation and passed overwhelmingly conservative verdicts, so quit your bitching?
We will require each bill moving through Congress to include a clause citing the specific constitutional authority upon which the bill is justified.
Yeah, I don't think tacking "necessary and proper" or "interstate commerce" on the end of every fucking bill is going to do anyone any good, or, you know, change anything at all.
Structure dictates behavior, so we will let any lawmaker — Democrat or Republican — offer amendments to reduce spending.
Yeah, what they really mean here is 'We're planning on owning Congress for the next four years or so, so we're going to grant ourselves the power to kill any bill by defunding it. We'll scream bloody fucking murder when the Democrats do it after we lose power again, though.'
We will end the practice of packaging unpopular bills with “must-pass” legislation to circumvent the will of the American people.
YOU'RE THE ONES DOING THAT!
Page 38 wrote:Foreign terrorists do not have the same rights as American citizens, nor do they have more rights than U.S. military personnel.
Yeah, actually, they do. 14th Amendment; substantive liberty and equal protection applies to "persons," not "citizens," under the jurisdiction of the United States. There is a whole lot of case law to back that up.
Page 39: The Iranians have absolutely no compelling interest to build ICBMs, but I guess fearmongering in support of our defense contractor buddies is pretty cool. Immigration law is explicitly Federal domain under the Constitution, so I don't know what they're talking about there except that they like racists in Arizona I guess?
I just... I'm at a loss for words. I'd like to consider myself a (very) moderate Republican, but they make it really really hard.
Salvation122 on
0
Posts
This election isn't really about policies.
Rigorous Scholarship
The gist of that Daily Show segment was that the words of the GOP leadership when announcing this supposedly new Pledge are almost word for word the same shit they've been saying for like 10 -12 years. They demonstrate this with archival video clips.
The pledge is pandering bullshit that, like the original Contract On America, won't be followed through on. That, at least, is the best thing about the shitty thing.
not really even pretending anymore, are they?
I'm not sure how anyone can be a member of the Republican party with a straight face these days. I swear, a good fourth of my daily entertainment comes from their hilarious antics.
I guess it sucks for those who live actually in the U.S. though. Seems like your political choices range between bizarrely ineffectual but not actively damaging/dynamic but absolutely horrible.
I'm still pretty entertained though.
or was it years.
Actually, I was referring to the Contract with America. Didn't that contract lead to the shut down of the federal government for like, a week?
Yes and no.
I propose we change the thread title to Clinton's excellent "Contract On America"
Yes, yes it is.
One might say they're The Most Trusted Name In News.
Heh, loving someone the people over at reason.com hate furiously shouldn't be this pettily satisfying, but it is.
Eh. I'm not real big on sensationalism.
Man, I'd love it if it was only sensationalism and not a reasonable assessment of that garbage.
we still have the PBS news hour
Yeah but then I get bored?
Since it's just semi-boilerplate pablum I actually found the most interesting parts of it to be the pictures and iconography that they apparently feel best represent America. The only living things in there that aren't white are the horses, and the only places that aren't rural appeared exurban. Apparently 35-82% of the country simply does not exist.
I know it's pretty much a ploy that will be forgotten about in April, but is the gist of it saying they will do the job they were actually elected to do in the first place?
The obsession with tax cuts is getting comical or it would be if people weren't so straight faced about it
Well that explains why they keep saying that the American People overwhelmingly reject X, Y, and Z that the arrogant Democrats and Obama are forcing upon them. I mean, as long as you pretend that half the population doesn't exist, it makes perfect sense!
It's a policy guideline that's basically just the tl;dr of their party platform focusing on the more popular bits. So, I honestly don't understand your confusion. Mind elaborating?
I'm really enjoying the fact that they're now touting the things in the healthcare bill that they said would kill grandma as good things that they're totally going to do next year because they didn't take effect yesterday at all no sir.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
as an example of the teaparty POV on this
IE isn't not conservative or crazy enough
I tried reading that. My brain melted when I got to the all-caps bit about mandates.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I keep wondering where the GOP draws the line on shamelessly lying. Apparently it's nowhere on this planet.
To be fair (and for those who don't watch), Jon himself considers this an indictment of modern journalism/news media.
The fact that a comedy show wins journalistic awards over actual journalists is pretty damning.
Which isn't to do a disservice to the incredible amounts of work that go into both shows. But seriously... the MSM needs a swift kick in the pants.
That said, the Daily Show crew do pride themselves on having one of the finest and broadest video/news archives. These guys can find shit on just about anyone from a fucking decade ago in, like, an hour.
Anyone got any links for that?
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/23/gop-pledge-aca/
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
What the fuck?
We basically have Nixon's plan. Well, will have Nixon's plan in 4 years.
Also we currently have what is essentially the health care reform plan that Congressional Republicans offered as an alternative to what was impolitely termed "Hillarycare" back during Clinton's administration.
Also we currently have the health care plan that today's Republican party is apparently going to ramrod through Congress after they repeal the health care plan we currently have.
EDIT: DUDE! I totally just realized that it's finally our turn to make ludicrous claims about what's in their health care plan!
THE REPUBLICAN HEALTHCARE PLAN WILL CURB ENTITLEMENT GROWTH BY LIMITING HOW MUCH MEDICARE MONEY IS SPENT COLLECTIVELY ON BABY BOOMERS AS THEY APPROACH THE MANDATORY SIGN-UP AGE OF 65 YEARS.
ALSO IT NOW WORKS LIKE THE FEDERAL STUDENT LOANS PROGRAM IN THAT IT'S A FEDERALLY-GUARANTEED LOAN YOU TAKE OUT FROM A PRIVATE FINANCIAL INSTITUTION, BUT YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PAY IT BACK.
Health Care Reform bill: unpopular
Stuff the HCR bill actually does: popular
Hence, come out against unpopular stuff and for popular stuff. Neither the media nor the voters are smart/informed enough to notice they are the same thing.
Boehner in time-traveling stereo made me lose my shit.
Steam ID XBL: JohnnyChopsocky PSN:Stud_Beefpile WiiU:JohnnyChopsocky
Student loans don't work that way anymore, it's now all through Direct-Loan starting this school year.
HOW VERY FUCKING CONVENIENT!
Wait, no, that turned out pretty well, didn't it?
Then ammend that to a sincere tone rather than a sarcastic one. No need to issue a full retraction on that one, eh boys?
of course none of that shit works without mandates
and their talk of taxes associated with the HCR bill assume that EVERYONE in the country will take the fine instead of getting insurance