Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

DEBT: Stop blaming victims of the recession

Letter by Jo A. Jacobson, Gig Harbor on Jan. 27, 2012 at 11:16 am with 146 Comments »
January 27, 2012 1:29 pm

I watched both President Obama’s State of the Union address and the Republican response from Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels.

As a retired teacher, I got worried when I heard Daniels talk about cutting Social Security and Medicare. For most retirees, these are the only ways they are able to pay their bills and stay healthy.

Moreover, I don’t think it was either Social Security or Medicare that created the deficit. To me, we are in debt because big corporations have all these tax loopholes, and millionaires and billionaires actually have lower tax rates than a lot of middle-class folks here in Washington state.

Does anyone really think that our debt is caused by a little old lady who gets $1,000 per month in Social Security – benefits she paid for her whole life, by the way?

It’s time we stop blaming the victims of this recession – working families and retirees – and instead take an honest look at what needs to change in America.

Leave a comment Comments → 146
  1. olympicmtn says:

    Retired state teacher? Be glad you have a pension as many mnay do not and are tired of paying for overpaid teacher pensions.

  2. menopaws says:

    Good letter and I agree….This phrase “entitlements” has come to be talked about like it is some kind of handout…….It is programs that people paid into during their working years. It is NOT some gift from the government. The fact that the Republicans want to cut those programs—but not touch tax rates for corporations and the wealthy—sums up their agenda. It is time for ALL Americans to pay their fair share and those who have been the most protected during this economic crisis need to start putting their money to work for America. It makes good economic sense and frankly, it is part of the privilege of being an American. As far as the comment above, he paid into his pension, as did his employer……Same thing happens in the private sector. So, don’t behave like some over-burdened taxpayer who is being taken advantage of…….Those of us who worked hard got pensions…….and some of the money was provided by employees, some by employers…….It constantly surprises me how mean spirited people in this country have become…..Lots of envy, lots of anger…….How about trying to love thy neighbor for a change?

  3. BigSwingingRichard says:

    Let me point out that it was Obama and the Democrats who removed $550,000,000 from the medicaid program to fund ObamaCare. And it is Obama and the Democrats who have reduced and have continued to reduce the social security payroll tax rate by 2% which reduces the funding for social security.

    If you rely on Medicare and Social Security and expect them to exist in the future, you should be very, very concerned about those (Obama and the Democrats) who are undermining the solvency of these programs.

    For more years of Obama is four more years of damage to the Medicare and Social Security programs.

  4. aislander says:

    People paid into those programs, men, but they obviously didn’t pay FOR them…

  5. O’bummer threatens medicare, medicaid and ssi cuts when he should be cutting politicians salaries and their benefits, also their legal (???) inside trading which makes them rich. Property owners are just sick and tired of these unfair levies. We vote no on them all as there is no way we can afford more property tax. As it is we are struggling with our limited income while food and retail items continue to go sky high. Oh, guess I should thank our wonderful government for the huge $20/month raise I got, whoopie, now I can afford dish soap without it coming out of our food budget. Get real:(

  6. teacher’s pensions come out of their pay checks. stop blaming them for being responsible with their earnings.

    also, social security has not contributed a single dollar to the deficit. they keep taking money from SSI and putting it in the general funds. it is the most successful program in the history of this country.

    medicare is another thing altogether. medicare part d is a joke, just a giveaway to big-pharma that bush jr. lavished upon the drug companies. and health care costs (somewhat addressed in the healthcarereformact) have skyrocketed over the course of a few decades in our ignorant pay-for-service medical system (doctors shouuldnt be selling you their product like a used car-salesman).

    darlin — you are a joke and should be ashamed of your sorry self for your disrespectful and heinous blathering. wtf does YOUR president, barack obama, have to do with property taxes or your personal earnings? especially in this state, where the minimum wage is so ridiculously high, and thus so is the cost of living…

  7. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    As a retired teacher, I got worried when I heard Daniels talk about cutting Social Security and Medicare. For most retirees, these are the only ways they are able to pay their bills and stay healthy.

    To me, we are in debt because big corporations have all these tax loopholes, and millionaires and billionaires actually have lower tax rates than a lot of middle-class folks here in Washington state.

    Does anyone really think that our debt is caused by a little old lady who gets $1,000 per month in Social Security…

    Apparently, Jo missed a few of her own remedial reading and comprehension classes.

    “There is a second item on our national must-do list: we must unite to save the safety net. Medicare and Social Security have served us well, and that must continue. But after half and three quarters of a century respectively, it’s not surprising that they need some repairs. We can preserve them unchanged and untouched for those now in or near retirement, but we must fashion a new, affordable safety net so future Americans are protected, too.

    “Decades ago, for instance, we could afford to send millionaires pension checks and pay medical bills for even the wealthiest among us. Now, we can’t, so the dollars we have should be devoted to those who need them most.

    “The mortal enemies of Social Security and Medicare are those who, in contempt of the plain arithmetic, continue to mislead Americans that we should change nothing. Listening to them much longer will mean that these proud programs implode, and take the American economy with them. It will mean that coming generations are denied the jobs they need in their youth and the protection they deserve in their later years.

    “It’s absolutely so that everyone should contribute to our national recovery, including of course the most affluent among us. There are smart ways and dumb ways to do this: the dumb way is to raise rates in a broken, grossly complex tax system, choking off growth without bringing in the revenues we need to meet our debts. The better course is to stop sending the wealthy benefits they do not need, and stop providing them so many tax preferences that distort our economy and do little or nothing to foster growth.”

    Wow… proposing to change SocSec and Medicare benefits to the wealthy? So I guess the libs are on the side of the 1%’era on this one.

  8. i think we all can agree that means testing makes all the sense in the world.
    also, a complex tax system is the ONLY way to tax a people. just ask herman cain. he started with 9-9-9; then the plan had to incorporate tax numerous brackets and levels with corresponding triggers.
    no reasonable person can advocate a flat tax, even herman cain came to this conclusion when pressed.
    the reason for a complex tax code is that, for instance a ceo has the opportunity to name his salary and to divert a chunk to stocks and such which is taxed at a lower rate.
    people would simply duck tax brackets in order to avoid increased taxation. by having a complex tax code with numerous levels, people are disincentivised to make less for tax purposed.
    unfortunately though, capital gains are still taxes at a lower rate than actual wages through physical labor.
    mitt romney is proud of this fact and newt would prefer an even more grotesque tax-advantage for the wealthy.

  9. sandblower says:

    Don’t you love it when the best darlin can do is label our President, O’bummer. It is so classy and clever it makes one want to read more.

  10. jellee, Don’t forget that Herman Cain’s 999 Plan turned upside-down is 666! And we all know what THAT means!

  11. buddyandelliott says:

    BSD: So Medicare money was moved to Obamacare? What exactly do you thing Medicare pays for?

  12. denismenis says:

    Do you remember when teachers, PBS, NPR, and public employees and retirees crashed the stock market, collapsed the housing market, gutted our 401Ks, dried up retirement funds, spilled millions of gallons of oil in the Gulf, and still took millions of dollars in bonuses – and paid no taxes?

    No, me neither.

  13. tree_guy says:

    To me, we are in debt because big corporations have all these tax loopholes, and millionaires and billionaires actually have lower tax rates than a lot of middle-class folks here in Washington state.” Jo

    What are the tax rates that “a lot of middle class folks here in Washington have?” I wasn’t aware that we even had an income tax.

  14. menopaws says:

    What in the hell???? This letter writer was talking about his pension and how Republicans treat it like it’s a gift……From there, we went to the usual diatribe against President Obama(by the way—it is PRESIDENT OBAMA—I loathed Bush, but I always called him President—try some respect and good manners sometime, people!!!) So, the usual crowd hurling the same old insults………Get some new stuff people—live in the land of reality and comment on this letter……….Honor the letter writer and his ideas–save your old crap for boring people at your dinner table, please!

  15. Harry_Anslinger says:

    As a deeply jaded, cynical, independent I want to mention that when it comes to ‘news’, or information in general involving politics it still amazes me at the gall of those who hunker down in their ‘information vacuum’ that is corporate media in general and certainly the Fox (read Roger Ailes and the GOP) right wing mouthpiece. That’s where the Darlin mindset comes from. I listen to and watch as much right leaning radio and television as I do left in order to get a better perspective of truth, opinions, and facts. The frustration of the GOP is that they essentially are a circular firing squad and can’t come up with a ‘not Mitt’ candidate that is electable. They seem to want the economy to struggle or tank as neither ‘Fast and Furious’ nor Solyndra are going to reach high enough to tarnish PRESIDENT Obama.

  16. “it was Obama and the Democrats who removed $550,000,000 from the medicaid program”

    What they removed was fraud and waste. Do you think fraud and waste are a good thing?

  17. ItalianSpring says:

    Wow Jo. You are completely ignorant and are obviously incapable of simple math.

  18. Rescind the Bush tax cuts.

  19. “The anti-business, class warfare line showed her ignorance and those that agree with this letter. We have the highest corp tax rates in the world”

    We also had the highest corporate tax rates in 2001, when George W Bush and the GOP controlled all three branches of government. What did they do to lower them?

  20. menopaws says:

    Like I said—our PRESIDENT is not the issue here………..Try actually reading the letter before you go back into the land of Fox sound bites………Each writer has the right to expect people to read and comment on their letter………As I keep saying–take your issues to therapy or your own dinner table. Those of us who actually read the letters are really tired of this anti, anti-: name -calling stuff. Not very original and frankly has NOTHING to do with this letter……the letter was about cutting pension benefits—not YOUR issues with President Obama……..Again, about retirees and pensions—-how hard it is for older Americans these days……Why don’t we talk about them??—-Your issues are the same in every post regardless of what the letter is about……And that, is YOUR problem–not ours!!!!

  21. aislander says:

    Bandito writes: “Rescind the Bush tax cuts.”

    First you can’t “rescind” a tax cut. A cut is an action. You can only raise or–preferably–lower the rates.

    If we go back to the Clinton-era rates, Bandito, you will be raising the taxes of the “99%” (God, I hate that stupid term) FAR more than on the stinking, evil, filthy, rich who actually pay the vast bulk of the tax bill now.

    You should thank the rich for carrying YOUR sorry ass…

  22. Your a little nastier than usual today. Speak softly in the confessional tomorow.

    Wikipedia: “… rescission has been defined as the unmaking of a contract between parties. Rescision is the unwinding of a transaction. This is done to bring the parties, as far as possible, back to the position in which they were before they entered into a contract.”

    Merriam Webster: Take back, cancel, rescind abrogate, make void, repeal.

    So why can’t a tax cut be rescinded?

  23. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Sorry paws, but dems and BHO own this economy. They are fair game and they are what needs to be changed. Asking the public to ignore the failures of te current dem leadership is a pathetic tactic.

  24. aislander says:

    I believe rescind is the wrong term to describe the undoing of an action. Perhaps “revert” would be a better choice, since that was the word used to describe what would happen if the rates were allowed to sunset.

    There is no doubt, though, that reverting to the Clinton-era rates would have more of an impact on low earners than on the “rich” (although, I don’t believe anyone who depends solely on earned income is truly rich).

    As for my reaction to Bandito: I just despise snipers, and that is what he does…

  25. concernedtacoma7, regarding your comment on JAN. 28, 2012 AT 10:57 AM  

    I have a few questions…

    ct7: “The debt is not caused by one little old lady, it is caused by millions of them taking checks and getting near free healthcare.”

    QUESTION: Can you PROVE this?

    ct7: “The average person will receive much, much more then they paid in”

    QUESTION: Do you have any documentation to verify this statement?

    ct7: “Entitlements are currently the largest part of our federal budget and growing rapidly. Yet BHO funds them less and only adds more people to rolls.”

    QUESTION: Do you have proof that this is actually true, and verifiable?

    ct7: “We have the highest corp tax rates in the world, and even after all the scary ‘loopholes’, industries like oil still pay 30%+.”

    QUESTION: Is there any documented reference you can cite tio back-up this opinion?

    ct7: “Tax the rich 100% and our deficit does not go away.”

    QUESTION: Have you actually done the math to prove/disprove this statement.

    ct7: SS morphed into something it was never designed to be,”

    QUESTION: Can you provide a documented explanation of what SS was originally meant to be, and then provide a comparative analysis as to what it is today?

    ct7: “I am sur you brainwashed thousands o students with leftish crap, so you have cost society enough already.”

    QUESTION: Who filled your brain with rightish crap?

  26. concernedtacoma7 says:

    I have proved this all time and again. Disprove me. Or admit you ignore facts and live by lib emotions

  27. ct7, You’ve proven nothing. You never do. And, by now, everyone knows it.

  28. Pacman33 says:

    CT7 ~
    “..it is caused by millions of them taking checks and getting near free healthcare.”

    Opponent of information and logic said ~
    “QUESTION: Can you PROVE this?”

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-06-06-us-debt-chart-medicare-social-security_n.htm

    Muck, why you post on a new publication? as much as you do? There are numerous blogs where you would fit right in with others who refuse to inform themselves like Facebook, etc. There is something very disturbing about posting on an information source, when it’s clear you have no desire of partaking in reading it. Your jaw-dropping display obtuseness above is one of many examples. It would have taken almost the same amount of time to Google each item of concerned’s comment, learning how foolish you would have appeared posting them first.

    The quality of discourse would drastically improve if you took half the time you spend wallpapering and used it informing yourself. Those topics in your post are commonly known to most and are easy to research. It is no wonder you prop up Obama the way you do, when knowing nothing of the national debt. Most might not know that SS and Medicare combine to equal $47 trillion of the total $65 trillion. But most DO know they make up the vast majority of it. It is neither a mystery that the plausible reason for Medicare’s $25 trillion portion might be from more going out than going in.

    What is it like not to fear or feel the emotion of embarrassment?

  29. Pacman33 says:

    That would be ‘news’ publication.

  30. ManuelMartini says:

    “Retired state teacher? Be glad you have a pension as many mnay do not and are tired of paying for overpaid teacher pensions.”

    Those pensions were negotiated in lieu of wages. Maybe you should have worked a union job.

  31. ManuelMartini says:

    “Sorry paws, but dems and BHO own this economy. They are fair game and they are what needs to be changed. Asking the public to ignore the failures of te current dem leadership is a pathetic tactic.”

    Pity the poor majority and leadership of the House and the “filibusterabiliy” of the Senate.

  32. ManuelMartini says:

    Run an internet search on “Obama and the Democrats who removed $550,000,000″ and see what you get.

    NOTHING

  33. menopaws says:

    Well, same old crap same old voices………By the way, all you righties on this blog……..Any party that worships at the altar of Donald Trump, Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich has NO business criticizing President Obama……… You people and YOUR party has a serious problem………People who live in glass houses should learn not to throw stones……..Your party has had numerous debates and most of them have merely highlighted the current whack job of the month……….Trust me—these days it’s far more a comedy show than any serious discussion of policy……So, keep beating that same old drum—are you aware that most of America is laughing at you???? The party of family values—but watch your daughters around Newt……Seriously?????

  34. aislander says:

    Pacman33: The goal is to muddy the waters and dilute the opinions of opponents through sheer volume of verbiage. You can’t embarrass someone–nor, apparently, can he embarrass himself–who is on such a mission.

    When this site has been destroyed as a place of reasonable discussion, well, then it will be “mission accomplished…”

  35. ManuelMartini says:

    When you see “$24.8 trillionObligation” as part of a “news story”, you can be fairly sure it’s an opinion piece and not an unbias story.

    Didn’t the baby boomers pay into Medicare?

    menopaws – if not for the Republican debates, where would comedians get their fresh material?

  36. ManuelMartini says:

    “The quality of discourse would drastically improve if you took half the time you spend wallpapering”

    BUZZWORD.

    Who uses “wallpapering”?

  37. aislander says:

    Nothing, huh? This from CNN (hardly a right of center source):

    http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/19/pf/medicare_proposals.moneymag/index.htm

    It talks about $500 billion taken from Medicare, but what’s $50 billion these days?

  38. aislander: “Pacman33: The goal is to muddy the waters and dilute the opinions of opponents through sheer volume of verbiage. You can’t embarrass someone–nor, apparently, can he embarrass himself–who is on such a mission.”

    Can anyone tell me, EXCEPT Pacman33 and his alter-ego aislander, why anyone should provide proofs and documentations to 6 opinions posted by concerned…7, other than concerned…7 himself?

    Concerned…7 offers these OPINIONS of his as facts, but provides NO proof that makes them facts.

    aislander even AGREES and CONCURS that concerned…7 provide only OPINIONS and NOT FACTS, when he describes the comments of concerned…7 as ” the opinions of opponents”. Thank you aislander for CONFIRMING the TRUTH that concerned…7 posted ONLY his unsupported OPINIONS.

    The MISSION here, at least with my QUESTIONS to concerned…7 was to CLEAR THE MUDDY WATERS by asking him to turn his unfounded OPINIONS into FACTUAL EVIDENCE to support his case, but he won’ or PERHAPS HE JUST CAN’T PROVE HIS OPINIONS TO BE at all factual.

    Just because concerned…7 may have posted comments on some other thread, this is a new thread, an new letter, and he needs to post his proof here, alongside his opinions, if he can, but apparently he can’t.

    And, besides that, only concerned…7 can answer my 7th question as to who filled his brain with crap. Can’t look that one up on the net!

  39. 2 things,

    1. The last line of my 9:45 AM post above should have read: And, besides that, only concerned…7 can answer my 7th question as to who filled his brain with RIGHTISH crap. Can’t look that one up on the net!

    2. aislander would be the one to know all about “tactics” as he is a student of propaganda, Saul Alinsky and now Bill Ayers. If you want any advice on what tactics to use here on these blogs, ask ailinsklander. Most of the rest of us just post comments, responses, opinions, questions and FACTS! You know, regular kinds of conversation. That is most of us who are NOT RIGHTISH.

  40. ManuelMartini says:

    muckibr – kinda funny when someone can’t think beyond the end of his nose and YOU become the problem “muddying the waters”

    So conservative….

  41. aislander says:

    Thanks, guys, for chiming in to provide examples. QED…

  42. ManuelMartini says:

    “It talks about $500 billion taken from Medicare, but what’s $50 billion these days?”

    What’s $50 billion? 10% of $500 billion. The “cuts” are over 10 years, which would mean they could be subject to change, based on demand.

    Maybe the reason why I couldn’t find a link is that the CNN story didn’t blame Obama, as the conservatives are so fast to do.

    Classic conservative misrepresentation. Muddying the waters….LOL

  43. ManuelMartini says:

    Thanks for continuing to “muddy the waters”, aislander

  44. ManuelMartini says:

    “See, Pacman33, THAT’S one of the tactics: fixate on one word–”wallpaper” in this case–and use it to try to divert the conversation down another rabbit hole.”

    We learned it from the champ, aislander_nos.

    You just never enjoy when we use your tactics.

  45. aislander says:

    All we have to do, lefties, is count the words you throw up against the wall–if we were so inclined.

    Pretend that words are ammunition and you’re running short, so you have to make them count. That’s what I do, and that’s why I get under your skin.

    If I didn’t, you wouldn’t devote so much wallpaper to the subject of ME…

  46. aislander, “All we have to do, lefties, is count the words you throw up against the wall–if we were so inclined.”

    Instead of just counting the words, why don’t you try reading them. You might LEARN something that way.

  47. ManuelMartini says:

    Got a rock in your pocket?

  48. aislander says:

    I just learned, mucky, that you CAN post a comment of fewer than a thousand words! Kudos!

  49. aislander says:

    Nah. I already threw it. But mine wasn’t the first…

  50. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Muck- since what I wrote is yesterday’s news, proven with hard facts on these very blogs, why should I do it again? Will you stop your cheerleading for BHO? Will you admit facts don’t matter to extreme left that you are a part of? Will you pull the ‘R’ lever next election?

    Example- do you really think people pay for their own entitlements? Do you think grandma paid an equal amount to govt then she will get? These are not things that require documentation.

    SS is largest part of fed budget, about 20%, followed by Medicare, also about 20%. BHO’s own debt commission said this growing segment of the budget needs to be addressed. With the boomers retiring and living longer, the current system is unsustainable. But try to talk about this like adults and dems scare old people. All fact, no need to prove it again.

  51. Even more unsubstantiated OPINIONS with no proof from concerned…7.

    The FACTS DON’T MATTER to CONCERNED…7! That much is obvious.

  52. concernedtacoma7 says:

    It’s like dealing with 2 year olds.

    Go to the SS wiki page.

  53. ManuelMartini says:

    Medicare makes up 23% of the fed budget.

    Social Security makes up 20% of the fed budget.

    Defense makes up 20% of fed budget.

    Which two of the three are paid by payroll taxes devoted specifically to the funds?

    There is some adult talk for you.

    Here is some more. Medicare is paid with a 1.45% tax. Social security is a 6.2% tax. How much does each taxpayer spend on Defense?

    How much of Medicare’s fund goes for consituent services?

    How much of Social Security’s fund goes for constituent services?

    How much of the Defense budget is in “assets” (read: weapons inventory)?

    I’d rather see the majority of the federal budget go for constituent needs instead of a stockpile of nuclear weapons.

    Adult talk.

  54. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Which one is only paid for by half the citizens?

  55. aislander, you shouldn’t feel ashamed or embarrassed that most people on these blogs have a far greater command of the written word than you do. You can console yourself that at least you are a little better than concerned…7 and almost as good at SPeters.

    If it will make you feel better aislander, you can always go back to your “Word of the Day Calendar” and pick a big fancy word to plug into your next comment, so you can try to make people think you are really really smart. You haven’t done that in a while, so maybe that’s why you are tense now.

    Now, does anyone ELSE have anything to add as regards the topic of this blog: DEBT: Stop blaming victims of the recession? Let’s try to get some FACTS instead of just off-base off-toic opinions.

    The Rightish types always want to blame the victims of the debacle they caused by deregulation of the financial industry. How is it that when a financial company does something that should clearly be illegal, like FRAUD, it gets a bailout, but if a person tries to sell Fake Maple Syrup then that person can go to jail for 5 years.

    Don’t believe me? Well, Jay Leno told this joke about the U.S. Senate. This is not exactly what he said, but it went something like…

    The US Senate is hard at work on a bill to make it illegal to sell fake maple syrup.

    It’s good to see that the Senate has its priorities straight.

    You sell worthless stocks and bonds and bankrupt your company, you get a federal bailout.

    You sell fake Mrs. Butterworth’s and its 5 years in the big house.

    Leno tells it better than I can write it, so take a look at this link:

    http://www.nbc.com/the-tonight-show/video/monologue-part-1-10-25-11/1364559

  56. aislander says:

    The funds are “paid into,” but not “paid for.”

    As for what you’d “rather see,” that sounds an awful lot like an unsupported opinion.

    Why don’t you provide some facts laying out the relative value of your favored programs versus the defense budget?

    Such facts don’t exist–only opinions and preferences.

    Here’s a fact: Defense is specified in the Constitution as a legitimate function of the Federal government. Social Security and Medicare are not (except under a tortured interpretation of the General Welfare clause).

    Here’s another: We stayed out of a shooting war with the Soviet Union because we (the good guys) had a credible threat of devastating retaliation…

  57. aislander says:

    Still living rent-free in mucky’s cobwebby head, I see…

  58. Votetherock says:

    To all on this thread: BOTH PARTIES ARE TO BLAME! When you all get that we can then begin to improve the condition we are in. Part of the problem is that all you want to do is point fingers and blame each other! OMG!

    Work to clean up your own party by getting involved and make the changes you see fit. We ALL have been asleep at the wheel letting the parties that do NOT represent the people anymore take over by hijacking the language and using fluffy phrases to sell you their version on keeping us all under their control! You all are participating just as they have designed it! Remove yourself from Their Matrix and get in there and do the work!

    The ‘right’ or the better word is conservatives has begun that through the uprising of the Tea Party. What have you in the left or Liberal side done to clean up yours?

    The bottom line is put up or shut up! Get out of the house, get involved, find an issue that is important to you and dig, and educate and go to a meeting!!! City Council, County and State! The only place that real change takes place is in your own home and at the local level!

  59. ManuelMartini says:

    “Which one is only paid for by half the citizens?”

    The same one that isn’t paid by oil companies, et al.

    Uh…Vote….your partisanship is showing. When you quit thinking that the “TEA Party” is anything but a rhetorical name for the conservative wing of the GOP, come back for a conversation.

  60. ManuelMartini says:

    “The funds are “paid into,” but not “paid for.”

    Rhetorical roulette by you know who.

    Social Security is PAID FOR well into to BORROW FROM.

  61. ManuelMartini says:

    make that “well enough”

  62. ManuelMartini says:

    “Here’s a fact: Defense is specified in the Constitution as a legitimate function of the Federal government. Social Security and Medicare are not (except under a tortured interpretation of the General Welfare clause).
    Here’s another: We stayed out of a shooting war with the Soviet Union because we (the good guys) had a credible threat of devastating retaliation…

    I see. We are going for the “constitutional” functions. Please tell us, Mr. Constitution, where does the elimination of abortion come in the Constitution.

    Now for the “Soviet Union” example…..LOL….they did’t blow us up because they knew we’d blow them up?

    Good one.

    Reminds me of the poster “Who won?” that was popular in the 1960s and 1970s.

    The United States military budget and inventory surpasses 13 countries that follow – COLLECTIVELY – and it didn’t stop 24 terrorists on 9/11/01.

    Try again.

  63. aislander says:

    It was called “mutually assured destruction,” and, since it never happened, the deterrent…well…deterred.

    The fact that 9/11 happened in no way delegitimatizes our defense posture. If you are guarding against an attack by a crocodile and get stung by a bee, you still need to protect yourself against the crocodile.

    While you’re at it, see if there are more bees, and kill them before they can sting again…

  64. aislander says:

    Social Security is solvent only to the degree that (now downgraded) Federal debt is solvent, since those IOUs (non-transferable Treasury bonds) are all that compose the fund.

    Abortion (how did we get on THAT?) is not mentioned in the Constitution, but life is–in the Bill of Rights.

  65. Harry_Anslinger says:

    Saying the Tea Party is getting the GOP house in order is kind of like calling hand grenades ‘crowd control devices’.

  66. aislander says:

    Republicans have, for FAR to long, acted like Democrat-Lite, still heading for the cliff, but at a slower pace. Trouble is: once we go over that cliff, we will achieve terminal velocity–with emphasis on “terminal.”

    I know Tea-Party people, and they are small-business owners (not to mention those who would LIKE to own small businesses, which includes a lot of blue-collar folks), and others who have a clear view that America is intended to be the land of freedom and opportunity and NOT the land of handouts and shared mediocrity. In other words: the salt of the Earth and backbone of the nation.

    So yeah, the Tea Party will not only put the Republicans’ house in order, but that of the whole country…

    And I don’t think too many likely voters buy the demonized caricature of the Tea Party…

  67. The Deficit Chart Republicans Hate
    —By Kevin Drum
    | Wed May. 11, 2011 7:48 AM PDT

    “I get a little bored repeating over and over that our short-term deficit is almost entirely not Barack Obama’s fault. It’s mostly the fault of the Bush tax cuts, the Bush wars, and the financial collapse that happened during the Bush presidency. At this point, though, this is more in the nature of a religious debate than a factual one, and conservatives are going to keep repeating the same tired disinformation about the deficit regardless of any evidence one way or the other.”

    “Still, just on the off chance that a few people are still persuadable on this, it’s nice of CBPP to update its chart showing the source of the deficit over the next decade. (Farther out than that, Medicare is largely responsible for most deficit projections.) As you can see, by 2013 or so, virtually the entire deficit is due to Bush-era policies/disasters. So cut this out and post it on your refrigerator.”

    http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/05/deficit-chart-republicans-hate

  68. aislander says:

    Wars are over, and never cost more than $100 billion per year, anyway–only a fraction of the Obama red ink.

    So…if the Bush tax rates are at fault, but revenues never fell off until the recession–as revenues always do during recessions–then Drum of Mother Jones(!) must be talking about projected revenues, an area in which libs are notoriously inaccurate.

    I will agree with this lefty about the effects of the recession on revenues and spending, but Obama has had three years to deal with the recession with little or no improvement–especially with respect to spending and revenues–to show for it.

    Bottom line? It’s Obama’s spending and fecklessness with regard to improving the economy that keep us mired in red ink and mediocrity…

  69. menopaws says:

    Newt Gingrich joke told on CNN by a REPUBLICAN strategist, Alex Castellanos……When Newt was elected Speaker of the House and Bob Dole was minority leader in the Senate, Newt asked Senator Dole” Why is it that so many people dislike me when they barely know me? Bob Dole looked at him and said “Saves a lot of time” Continue living in this months fantasy—serious people aren’t buying……..To the letter writer—wonderful job pointing to a serious issue—these blogs usually turn into spoiled milk…….Keep writing and fighting….thanks.

  70. Harry_Anslinger says:

    I think fecklessness is actually a great term; however aislander the graph muck refers to is not inaccurate and you did exactly what he said you would by ignoring it without digesting it’s validity and implications. The other thing is your Tea Party aspirations are suspect as those who genuinely hopped on with the notion of a grass roots conservative movement seem too willing to ignore the fact the movement has been co-opted by none other than the far right base that is more than happy to have people like you carrying the water for them. The GOP is not coming up with an electable candidate and seems to be helping Obama more than hurting him.

  71. aislander says:

    The graph is dishonest and misleading because the tax cuts occurred in 2001 and 2003, but revenues weren’t reduced (in fact they increased) until the onset of the recession, and the graph doesn’t begin until that point. And as I pointed out, it then depends on projections.

    Furthermore, the graph seems to project the continuation of the wars. Does Mother Jones (herself a bloodthirsty war hawk, btw) know something no one else does?

    And I didn’t read the part in which mucky predicts my reaction to the Mother Jones piece. Do you have a pipeline into that…er…interesting psyche that no one else has (or wants to have)?

    I will agree with you regarding finding an electable candidate, but you never know what you have until some distance in the future. Reagan became Reagan after he was in office for a while, and the Dems were very happy to have him to run against–at first.

    Obama is an object lesson in not knowing what a candidate is about until he is in office–much to the regret of many who thought he was going to unite the nation and who didn’t want to look too closely at his background.

  72. concernedtacoma7 says:

    BHO had a monopoly and extended the CURRENT tax rates. Worse, he recently fought a battle to underfund SS even more.

    Iraq is over. Recession is officially over. His big govt solutions are not cheap and not working. TARP worked and we can thank Bush.

    He ignored HIS OWN DEBT COMMISSION. Why? To avoid tough decisions. Focus is on the next election, not America.

  73. Lowering wages only make matters worse.

  74. I see that aislander still believes in talking wallpaper.

  75. ManuelMartini says:

    Abortion (how did we get on THAT?) is not mentioned in the Constitution, but life is–in the Bill of Rights.

    As is “welfare”. Kinda like the Bible, the Constitution is constantly up for interpretation. Ask the justices that say corporations are a person.

  76. ManuelMartini says:

    Interesting how conservatives talk about “life” before “life” begins.

    No…wait…we KNOW the “founding fathers” said life begins at conception….right?

    Like I said “interpretation”.

    Let’s leave the Constitution out of the discussion unless you’re going to quote it verbatim. I’m not interested in the right wing’s idea of my “rights”.

    Aside from that, there are all kids of laws that are not constitutionally based.

  77. ManuelMartini says:

    “The fact that 9/11 happened in no way delegitimatizes our defense posture.”

    Tell me what good a pile of nukes does when someone strikes first. Bee or crocodile.

    Much like handguns, nuclear weapons make you a target for the person who wants to use nuclear weapons first. If you don’t have them, you are not much of a threat to them.

    More than one way to see “defense” when your mind is open.

  78. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Mm_nos, please limit your attempts to shift topics.

    We all know you want to avoid real facts and would prefer an emotional issue over BHOs failed economic policy.

    Weren’t you banned from this site?

  79. aislander says:

    So…you guys believe in a “living, breathing” Constitution, huh? Come on over to my place for a game of poker. We use living, breathing rules.

    Don’t worry: I’LL tell you what the rules are at any given time…

  80. ManuelMartini says:

    Are you saying you’d be doing something new?

    Tell me, where in the Constitution, does it say “corporations are a person”.

  81. ManuelMartini says:

    concerned – yeah, I was banned from this site and I live in the paranoia of your mind.

    Next ridiculous question?

    I know how much “on topic” my “being banned” is.

    Go back to your substance.

  82. aislander says:

    People have the right to petition their government and to support policies and candidates, whether as individuals or in groups, and that IS in the Constitution.

    Nothing new to see here…

  83. “So…you guys believe in a “living, breathing” Constitution, huh?”

    And you believe that black people should still be counted as 3/5 of a person?

  84. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Why the moniker change then? And why change topics with every post?

    We are talking about the economy, and you shift topics to Citizens United?

  85. concernedtacoma7: “Mm_nos, please limit your attempts to shift topics.”

    As pronounced by “THE GREAT DEFLECTOR” himself. (No name-calling there either, eh?_)

  86. eHill, Apparently aislander is not completely familiar with the Amendment Process, or the other body of U.S. Laws outside of Constitutional Law that is defined, protected and supported by Constitutional Law.

    You would think that someone who PRETENDS to be an AUTHORITY as to how THE FOUNDERS thought, when they were creating this nation and it’s government, would have a better understanding of The CONSTITUTION than he obviously does.

  87. aislander says:

    No…I don’t believe that slaves should be counted as 3/5ths of a person (and that part of the Constitution was in reference to slaves, not free blacks), but that was rendered moot by amendment, NOT judicial fiat, which is what we WERE talking about, right?

    Incidentally, that 3/5ths thing was written into the Constitution to weaken the congressional representation of slave states, so it was actually an antislavery measure on the part of the framers.

    The Constitution is designed to be subject to change, but the process is purposely difficult, so that changes cannot be made on the whims of judges…

  88. aislander says:

    …and I say that with all due affection…

  89. ManuelMartini says:

    “Why the moniker change then? And why change topics with every post?”

    The mind is a terrible thing to waste. Who says I changed anything, much less with every post?

    Seek help, quickly

  90. ManuelMartini says:

    “People have the right to petition their government and to support policies and candidates, whether as individuals or in groups, and that IS in the Constitution.
    Nothing new to see here…”

    A CORPORATION is not necessarily a group of individuals. It can be one person’s opinion or power with the protection of a law. So I’ll repeat – why would a person under the banner of “corporation” be allowed unlimited donations, while a REAL person is limited.

    OH..and where does THE CONSTITUTION state that it’s so, which is the real discussion, not how you or anyone else interpret a corporation.

  91. ManuelMartini says:

    Just so that denial doesn’t kick in….

    http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/contriblimits.shtml

  92. aislander says:

    Please…muck…your willful–and I hope for your sake that IS willful–obtuseness is giving me a headache. I was talking about change by amendment, to which I alluded in the first paragraph of my response to ehill.

    WHAT is your major malfunction, anyway? Don’t you EVER think before you type?

  93. I do. But, obviously given your very near 3rd award of the BEST BLOG “DOUBLE-TALK” AWARD, you apparently DON’T think before you write. And, we have three examples of that, between this and the OBAMA: Krauthammer threads.

    Once could be a slip-up.

    Twice could be a coincidence.

    But Three Times is a confirmation.

    That’s LOGIC my friend! You can’t fight logic! (Even though you have tried, and failed.)

  94. So far this blog has been used by some to simply point the finger of blame at who they think caused the problems with the Federal Deficit and National Debt, but this part of Jo Jacobson’s letter has been practically ignored…

    “It’s time we stop blaming the victims of this recession – working families and retirees – and instead take an honest look at what needs to change in America.”

    So, how about we stop all the finger-pointing, and off-topic nonsense, and come up with some ideas as to how to fix it?

    Bandito suggested that “The Bush Tax Cuts” be rescinded, but then somebody got all huffy about the word rescind. So. let’s NOT say rescind.

    Since “The Bush Tax Cuts” were supposed to be temporary, and had an expiration date that they were supposed to expire on, how about we tell our government to let “The Bush Tax Cuts” expire now, and NOT be extended? That could raise revenue right! And it’s NOT raising taxes at all! It is simply allowing a temporary tax measure to expire like it should have in the first place, to go back to the normal rates that were in place before the TEMPORARY cuts were inacted.

    What other suggestions are there to fix the current financial problems our country is facing? Anyone?

  95. aislander says:

    Reverting to Clinton-era rates will, according to the Obama admin, net $70 billion per year from those making over $250K, but $400 billion from everyone else. That would cover about a third of the Obama deficit, but do we REALLY want to raise taxes on lower earners?

    The solution to the financial squeeze is to cut spending and reform entitlements…

  96. aislander says:

    …oh, yeah: do something that actually works to get the economy moving. Raising taxes ought to do it!

  97. ManuelMartini says:

    Watch the price of a hamburger increase in the next week or so.

    Do you think that the fast food chains are concerned about “the economy” or “the bottom line”?

    Gasoline is going up. Do the oil companies say “the economy won’t recover if we raise prices”?

    Raise taxes on those that have the most to tax. Just because someone makes $1,000,000 a year, that doesn’t mean that they spend proportionately to a $50,000 wage earner. Both probably spend close to the same amount each year, it’s just that the $50K earner has nothing left and the $1,000,000 earner has plenty.

  98. Where, exactly, in the following words are corporations given personhood?

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

  99. “Raise taxes on those that have the most to tax. Just because someone makes $1,000,000 a year, that doesn’t mean that they spend proportionately to a $50,000 wage earner. Both probably spend close to the same amount each year, it’s just that the $50K earner has nothing left and the $1,000,000 earner has plenty.”

    aislander, do you see that? Did you read that?

    “That’s LOGIC my friend! You can’t fight logic!”

    Thank you Manuel, for the great statement of irrefutable logic! I just hope aislander and his other alts get it this time.

  100. ManuelMartini says:

    beerBoy – I’m certain that the answer will have something to do with you not being smart enough to understand. ;)

  101. concernedtacoma7 says:

    I cannot believe Mm_nos’s comment was posted by an American. The steal from the rich movement is out of control and detrimental to our future.

  102. ManuelMartini says:

    I can believe that concerned’s comment was from concerned. I demonstrates a lack of knowledge of the word “steal”

  103. ManuelMartini says:

    Since the definition of “tax” is:

    “money paid to government: an amount of money levied by a government on its citizens and used to run the government, the country, a state, a county, or a municipality”

    no theft is involved.

    Anyone wishing to avoid paying taxes for the privilege to live in America, is welcome to leave and try the tax base in another country.

  104. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Verb:
    Take (another person’s property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it:

    No legal or moral right. Certainly would not be returned.

  105. aislander says:

    So…taxing is not stealing, if it is the involuntary confiscation of property? Can you volunteer someone else, just because other people don’t have as much?

    If I see a person on the street who has no coat, and someone else with a nice warm coat who is about to step into an even warmer car, do I have a right to take the coat and give it to the person who has none?

  106. “So…taxing is not stealing, if it is the involuntary confiscation of property?”

    So… the difference between legal and illegal is just a technicality?

  107. ManuelMartini says:

    Paying tax isn’t involuntary. You assume the liability when taking up residence.

    Don’t like it? Move.

    We are dealing with some very intellectually stunted people here. These are the same people trying to interpret The Constitution and rewrite the dictionary, to suit their political leanings.

    People who don’t like the taxes in Tacoma, can move to Chehalis. Those who don’t like the taxes in the US can move where they think they’ll pay no taxes. No one is forcing them to stay. It’s VOLUNTARY.

  108. ManuelMartini says:

    ehill – repossession could be “involuntary confiscation” and yet not illegal.

    We must keep in mind the limited intellectual resources of those who are pleading this “stealing” issue.

  109. ManuelMartini says:

    “concernedtacoma7 says:
    Jan. 30, 2012 at 12:27 pm Verb:
    Take (another person’s property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it:
    No legal or moral right. Certainly would not be returned”

    See, even when the words are their own, they don’t see it.

    Taxes are issued BY LAW.

  110. Taxes are like anything else in this country. If they are prescribed by laws, passed by governments or popular vote of the people, they are NOT stealing in any way.

    If people don’t like the taxes they are required to pay by the government, they have a right to redress the government to ask those taxes be repealed through proposed bills making new law, referendum, initiative, or many other means of changing the law, including addressing the courts to rule against tax laws.

    No one, who is an American, and truly believes in the American form of government, can honestly call taxes stealing. That’s plainly unpatriotic. We The People ultimately make the laws that we live under, via our representative form of government, and designed by The Founders.

  111. aislander says:

    So…it isn’t stealing when money is taken from you as taxes even if you don’t get a benefit from what the tax money is spent on?

  112. aislander says:

    Should Congress, with the approval of the Supreme Court (tacit or otherwise), be able to pass any law it wants to? Should it pass a law imprisoning American citizens on US soil without benefit of due process, as happened during both world wars?

  113. aislander says:

    …and if it passes such a law, should we, BEING the government, accept that as being justified? When does the government we install overstep, and when should we, as Jefferson advised, do something about it?

  114. “So…it isn’t stealing when money is taken from you as taxes even if you don’t get a benefit from what the tax money is spent on?”

    No. Taxes are used for many purposes, not ALL of which directly benefit YOU. Indirectly, all taxes are meant to benefit us all in some way.

    The rest of your questions in you following two posts are silly deflections and not worth answering.

  115. aislander says:

    You SAID “We The People ultimately make the laws that we live under, via our representative form of government…”

    Since YOU opened the door, my questions are certainly pertinent…

  116. ManuelMartini says:

    “So…it isn’t stealing when money is taken from you as taxes even if you don’t get a benefit from what the tax money is spent on?”

    I won’t dignify this ignorance with a response.

  117. aislander says:

    Democrat Grover Cleveland plainly stated that tax money should not be spent unless it benefits all Americans equally. He refused to send aid to farmers in Texas who were harmed by inclement weather using that rationale, and citing the Founders as the source for it…

    So tax money should not have been spent to benefit cities, states, regions, and certainly not individuals….

  118. MM – I accept that there are a number of anti-intellectuals who, feeling resentment at individuals whose accomplishments within academic pursuits reinforces their sense of inferiority, feel the need to lash out by challenging others’ intelligence. The usual taunt I have received is something along the line of “Hey professor you aren’t so bright”.

    Since the few times I have shared my experiences in higher education it has usually been a criticism of idiots with PhDs, I find it a little odd that some would think I have lorded my academic profession over them but….they are anti-intellectuals after all so it follows that their logical processes are a little convoluted.

  119. aislander says:

    beerBoy: Someone demeaned you because of your profession and credentials? I’d like to know who would do such a thing. Certainly, I’VE never accused anyone of being obtuse unless said person has displayed a truly breathtaking degree of that regrettable quality.

  120. “Since YOU opened the door, my questions are certainly pertinent…”

    No, they aren’t. I made my statements in the context of discussing taxes. your comments in those two following posts have nothing to do with taxes. Thus, they are silly attempts at deflecting the conversation away from taxes.

    P.S. I did a search on Grover Cleveland and found NOTHING to substantiate your claims regarding his tax policies. Provide your reference link and maybe I will reconsider it when reading the statement “in context.” Otherwise your mention of Grover Cleveland is non sequitur.

  121. beerBoy

    aislander wrote to you: “I’VE never accused anyone of being obtuse”

    obtuse |əbˈt(y)oōs; äb-|
    adjective
    1 annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand : he wondered if the doctor was being deliberately obtuse. See note at stupid .

    I can easily see how that description can apply to aislander, especially given his last few comments on this thread alone. I don’t see it applying at all to you, or for that matter to Manuel, eHill, or me to name a few.

  122. aislander says:

    I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the general government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that, though the people support the government, the government should not support the people. The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow-citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood.
    –Grover Cleveland, in his veto message of the Texas Seed Bill

  123. aislander, I wrote “Provide your reference link and maybe I will reconsider it..”

    The keyword there is “link” okay!

    I don’t quite trust your selective clipping of text to suit your own needs. I’d prefer to read the whole thing, in context, okay!

  124. BTW, I did find this interesting factoid on President Cleveland:

    Grover Cleveland
    584 total vetoes, including 238 pocket vetoes (414 first term, 170 second term).

    Grover Cleveland vetoed more bills in his two terms than all other presidents to that date combined. Only Franklin Roosevelt, who had four terms to Cleveland’s two, vetoed more. Strongly opposed to what he perceived as “pork barrel” spending, and favoring limited government, he vetoed more than 200 private bills granting pensions to individual Civil War veterans. Reacting to these vetoes, Congress passed a bill that would have granted a pension to any disabled veteran. He vetoed this bill, as well. This is widely perceived to have been a factor in the defeat of his 1888 bid for re-election.

    In addition to these, he also vetoed a bill that would have distributed seed grain to drought-stricken farmers in the American west, and bills increasing the monetary supply. He also refused to sign, but did not veto, the Wilson-Gorman Tariff Act.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_vetoes

  125. aislander says:

    You mean you couldn’t find wiki, mucky? Someone who holds himself in the high esteem you obviously do should find his ego quite threatened at this egregious inability to use Google.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover_Cleveland

    Now, if you can’t find your way around the web page, just refer to my post above, which contains the entire message.

    Glad I could help.

  126. aislander, you REALLY should have gone to the link within the wiki page to the entire text of the Cleveland veto, because it clearly states there were several other reasons that the president vetoed the special appropriation of ten thousand dollars, including the facts that: 1. there was a regular appropriation of one hundred thousand dollars for such purposes, 2. plus the farmers of Texas had already received the kind of assistance this small $10k special appropriation could have provided, 3. plus the Commissioner of Agriculture had the authority to send seed grain to Texas if he decided it necessary, without the need for the special $10k appropriation Cleveland vetoed.

    aislander, you REALLY should read the entire text, rather than simply pulling a bit out of context to support your own narrow view.

    Here is just the last 4 paragraphs of Cleveland detailed veto. The link below it will take you to the entire text. (This is how you can learn and grow.)

    “It is within my personal knowledge that individual aid has, to some extent, already been extended to the sufferers mentioned in this bill. The failure of the proposed appropriation of ten thousand dollars additional, to meet their remaining wants, will not necessarily result in continued distress if the emergency is fully made known to the people of the country.”

    “It is here suggested that the Commissioner of Agriculture is annually directed to expend a large sum of money for the purchase, propagation, and distribution of seeds and other things of this description, two-thirds of which are, upon the request of senators, representatives, and delegates in Congress, supplied to them for distribution among their constituents.”

    “The appropriation of the current year for this purpose is one hundred thousand dollars, and it will probably be no less in the appropriation for the ensuing year. I understand that a large quantity of grain is furnished for such distribution, and it is supposed that this free apportionment among their neighbors is a privilege which may be waived by our senators and representatives.”

    “If sufficient of them should request the Commissioner of Agriculture to send their shares of the grain thus allowed them, to the suffering farmers of Texas, they might be enabled to sow their crops; the constituents, for whom in theory this grain is intended, could well bear the temporary deprivation, and the donors would experience the satisfaction attending deeds of charity.”

    http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Cleveland%27s_Veto_of_the_Texas_Seed_Bill

  127. aislander says:

    “A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that, though the people support the government, the government should not support the people.”

    None of that stuff you posted to “expand” on Cleveland’s veto message is pertinent. Talk about going off-topic!

    In any case, this was how the relationship of government to the people was viewed before the advent of the disastrous progressive era…

  128. I didn’t “expand”on Cleveland’s veto. That was actual text taken verbatim from Cleveland’s veto you twit!

  129. aislander, you accuse others of having delusions of grandeur, but here you are stating that of the 10 paragraphs written by President Grover Cleveland, in his veto of the Texas Seed Bill, YOU the great and grand exalted aislander, have yourself determined that only the one paragraph YOU have chosen “out of context” is the one and only paragraph that counts.

    You have no room to accuse anyone else of delusions of grandeur after such a grandiose and preposterous demonstration of your own extraordinary conceit.

    Through this blatant display of your own foolishness, you have only proven that you, aislander, lack the intellectual capacity to discuss such matters intelligently.

  130. ManuelMartini says:

    “Democrat Grover Cleveland plainly stated that tax money should not be spent unless it benefits all Americans equally.”

    Is this in The Constitution? (

    isn’t that the conservative line for everything?)

  131. aislander says:

    Why in the world would I waste bandwidth posting paragraphs that have nothing to do with the point I wish to make? It’s called brevity and focus…

  132. No aislander, it’s called Cherry-Picking, and you do it all the time!

  133. aislander says:

    As for “delusions of grandeur,” I was merely redirecting MM’s comment in the proper direction…

  134. No aislander, you were Deflecting, and you do that all the time too!

  135. aislander says:

    I wish–and I mean this sincerely, muck–that YOU would cherry pick more, so that threads wouldn’t be so burdened with your seemingly interminable verbiage…

  136. ManuelMartini says:

    “I don’t see it applying at all to you, or for that matter to Manuel, eHill, or me to name a few.”

    But…but…but….muckibr….I thought we were all the same person???

  137. ManuelMartini says:

    “As for “delusions of grandeur,” I was merely redirecting MM’s comment in the proper direction…”

    OH…I see. The old “I’m rubber and YOUR glue” bit. How clever!

  138. ManuelMartini says:

    Why does this not surprise me?

    “Cleveland was the leader of the pro-business Bourbon Democrats who opposed high tariffs, Free Silver, inflation, imperialism and subsidies to business, farmers or veterans. His battles for political reform and fiscal conservatism made him an icon for American conservatives of the era

    They so love to toss the word “Democrat” around as if we are stupid enough to buy it and not notice that he was a conservative, sort of like the racist Democrats of the South, that today’s conservatives love to being up, as if it were contemporary fact.

  139. aislander says:

    So…ManuelMartini…you’re for imperialism? How Wilsonian of you!

  140. aislander says:

    Not to mention inflation and subsidies for business (such as oil companies!)…

    The “inflation” part is consistent with today’s libs, but those subsidies for business–ouch! Where else do you disagree with Cleveland?

  141. “We must keep in mind the limited intellectual resources of those who are pleading this “stealing” issue.”

    That’s why I use short posts and small words.

  142. “it isn’t stealing when money is taken from you as taxes even if you don’t get a benefit from what the tax money is spent on?”

    I got no benefit from the war in Iraq. You wanna pay my share?

  143. aislander – if you truly think taxation is theft then it is your patriotic duty to refuse to pay your taxes. Otherwise one might think that your “principled” stance is just more of the same blowhard, selfish, something for nothingism that fits the stereotype of teapotters.

  144. aislander says:

    beerBoy: You misread me. I DON’T believe taxation is theft. I DO believe the Federal government has no constitutional brief to take people’s money to give to other people. THAT’S theft. The states have the right to do that if they wish.

    If some states become welfare havens and others choose not to, that will give the citizens of the US a choice as to which system they prefer, as the Founders intended. That will certainly result in the financial collapse of some states–as if that’s not happening anyway, right!–but the nation as a whole would remain solvent. But we’ll have an A-B comparison of socialism versus a rational system…

  145. aislander says:

    For a real-world A-B contrast of nations, look at the relative economic positions of Singapore and, say, Greece or Portugal…

  146. beerBoy, “..fits the stereotype of teapotters.”

    Just to clarify, the term is “tea baggers” and not “tea potters”.

    The evolution of the term ‘tea bagger’ … as it relates to the Tea Party.

    “Feb. 27, 2009

    At the first anti-stimulus “New American Tea Party” rally in Washington D.C., a protestor carries a sign reading “Tea Bag the Liberal Dems before they Tea Bag You!!” The Washington Independent’s David Weigel calls it “the best sign I saw.” 

    … skipping ahead …

    “April 14, 2010

    Prominent conservative Andrew Breitbart posts a video on the site Big Government in an attempt to reclaim the term. “I’m Proud to be a Tea Bagger” currently has over 90,000 views.”

    http://theweek.com/article/index/202620/the-evolution-of-the-word-tea-bagger

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0