Rebane's Ruminations
August 2011
S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

George Rebane

Now you’re free to believe that last night’s debt limit deal between the Repubs, Dems, and President is a solution to any of the ills our country faces.  But you would be wrong, because nothing has changed except another little shot of morphine to ease our cancer’s pain.

The deal, which may not even pass Congress, will continue to increase our national debt, ignore meaningful deficit reduction, and enlarge government over the next ten years.  The deal also sets up the Dubious Disciples – a committee of twelve, evenly split among Dems and Repubs – to manage kicking the can some more when it meets later this year.  The piddling cuts will not mount to a hill of beans in the grand scheme, and both sides will expect to get more of what they want from the next baked in crisis – Repubs real spending cuts, Dems real tax increases.

The credit rating arguments have been specious.  This deal will not affect them one iota, and will even affect less the lenders’ propensity to buy Treasuries.  Those bonds will sell or not based on the relative risk that the world’s borrowers present.  Uncle Sam, believe it or not, still seems to be sitting on top of that dung heap.

So this little exercise was all done for the politics of 2012.  And it will be a politics with a gaping, smoking hole where America’s ideological middle used to be.  Each side will accuse the other of stretching their ideological boundary away from the center, and each side will be right.  The progressives caught the conservatives napping in 2008 – Bush2 had damaged the right much more than anyone thought.  And then when all was set for the socialist road to utopia, up rose the people in the tea party movement and made history in 2010.

But our real destination has not changed since the country decided that it could borrow, tax, spend, and regulate our way into a prosperous and secure 21st century.  To change that destination will require a real crisis.

Dilbert1107

[2aug2011 update]  Congress has passed the compromise bill to raise the debt limit, and a promise to cut a tad of spending way out there in Neverland.  The tea parties are not happy about anything save introducing the idea that we should at least talk about spending cuts when we promise to increase borrowing.  Without going out on too much of a limb, I predict that the spending cuts from this legislation will not amount to one tenth of the projected (by whatever bamboozle you care to quote) $2.4T.


All we just did is to keep up the borrowing, and as predicted (at least here) the markets are behaving accordingly – there is no joy on Wall Street because national debt will be over $21T in ten years.  On TV, talking heads are wondering whether the Bernank is going to do a QE3.  Hell yes he’s going to pump more faith-based money into the economy, it’s the only play Team Obama has left from their Keynesian game book – bet the farm on it.

The reason for doing this was again intoned this morning by Dirty Harry in the Senate before it voted.  Harry was telling the world that continued stimulus is needed to help the tottering economy; that for every billion dollars the government pumps into the economy, 40,000 jobs are created.  No media pundit did the quick math and asked ‘Then where are the 32,280,000 jobs from Obama’s $807B ARRA stimulus?

Then another helping of ‘Bush2 did it!’ will once more be trotted out to be lapped up by those who reason light.  Even Fox News seldom mentions that Bush2 did inherit the dotcom recession along with plunged government revenues and, of course, 9/11.  New studies are now showing that, had W not pushed through his tax cuts, the recession would have been longer and deeper – but this again passes by the progressive board.  And somehow the long simmering housing bubble that went into full bloom in 2006 also slips the common mind.  All we remember is that it was W’s two ‘wars’ that took our economy down.

So we have now ballyhooed ourselves into thinking that something has been accomplished to avert disaster, default, destruction, you name it.  The markets have told us all along, and are telling us now that it doesn’t matter.  In a couple of months the 2012 budget comes due, and that will again throw everything into the air.  (You do remember federal budgets, don’t you?  Obama doesn’t.)  And then in December, the new Dubious Twelve are supposed to identify $1.5T in additional spending cuts and tax increases (any bets here?).  Absent that, the legislation calls for an “automatic” $1.1T of cuts to kick in, and a Balanced Budget Amendment introduced into Congress.

The BBA will be a joke with a snowball’s chance in hell of passing.  The automatic cuts are designed to begin castrating our military, since everyone knows that the world will be the same as it is now when the carrier task groups come home for the last time.  So what’s there not to like about this great piece of historic bi-partisan legislation that was born a bastard and will soon become an orphan?

Posted in , , ,

64 responses to “The Debt Deal – Nothing Ventured, Nothing Gained (updated 2aug2011)”

  1. Mikey McD Avatar

    Lame stream media still using the term “Cut” when they should be using the phrase “grow a bit less than normal.”
    The plan adds at least $7 trillion to our debt over the next 10 years and it NEVER BALANCES.
    Rand’s piece P/R nails it: http://paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=280

    Like

  2. John Galt Avatar

    Thanks for the link McD. Perhaps others will abosorb the fact that a reduction of a projected increase is not an actual cut.
    I agree George that the markets and rating services are more concerned with the proportion of the interest and principal payments to the total budget than they are with a temporary interruption in payments. Mathematically speaking, preventing an increase in the debt would have been very helpful.
    Clearly, it’s time to retire The Boehnehead.
    The only good thing about this whole episode is that it highlighted this as a major issue facing the next President…and simultaneously exposed why people have come to realize that Obama is O.B.A.M.A

    Like

  3. Steve Enos Avatar
    Steve Enos

    Regardless if one is an R or D or any other party you must say that Rep. Gabrielle Giffords showed a lot when she walked into the House chamber for the first time since being shot in the head in Tucson last January and voted.
    Inspiring, regardless of which party one belongs to.

    Like

  4. George Rebane Avatar
  5. RL Crabb Avatar

    Clearly, the debt compromise is a total failure for both factions in their unending struggle to become the dominent voice of American politics. The proper solution would have been to stick to the party line, go into default, and let the chips fall where they may.
    In the back of their walnut-sized brains, however, it was clear to both sides that the collapse of the world economy would severely hinder their chances of being reelected. Americans would have tossed both parties into the alligator pit and rallied around any independent pragmatic leader who could sift through the bull manure and come up with real solutions to the spiraling economy. That would not do.

    Like

  6. George Rebane Avatar

    BobRLC – Are you still convinced that without this bill being signed into law Obama would have directed Geithner not to pay our debt service even though we have the money? That has been the great ‘default scare’ that has so fixated the nation. In short, were you among the fixated?
    PS. I draw your attention to the markets during the last week or so as the deal was coming together, and especially to today as the it was all signed (without a single walnut-sized brain at the President’s side), sealed, and delivered. I think history books will give this great bamboozle of American politics its very own name.

    Like

  7. Mikey McD Avatar

    Our country needs a leader in the White House.

    Like

  8. RL Crabb Avatar

    When you’re entering uncharted territory no one really knows what the consequences will/would have been. Maybe you’re right, and Geitner would’ve pulled out his magic wand made the scary debt go away. Or maybe there would’ve total panic and meltdown and the seven headed demon would’ve risen from the sea and devoured the Lincoln Memorial. It’s like the financial collapse of ’08. Conservatives seem to think it was a ruse, but it scared enough of the big guys that even Hank Paulson soiled himself.
    The attitude of the right seems to be that letting the world fall into chaos is a good thing, and that after a few weeks of confusion a new, bright shiny economy would appear without unions and entitlements. And you think I have an imagination?

    Like

  9. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    I just watched a liberal on a cable channel who says even though we don’t have a clue if the stimulus worked, we need another one.

    Like

  10. George Rebane Avatar

    Bob, Geithner doesn’t have a magic wand that can make “the scary debt go away”. It seems that you’re not willing to engage in the simple notion that we have the money to service our national debt. Even Geithner changed his tune in the last three weeks and started saying that after 2 Aug we “wouldn’t have the money to pay all our bills.” He never said that we would default on our debt service, because he knew that wasn’t true. But the lamestream and the usual politicians just kept repeating that “we will default” if didn’t raise the debt limit. And now no one wants to admit that such a default would never have happened.
    As exhibit A I draw attention to your own side-step dance with the bogeyman of “uncharted territory”, a territory we had no need to enter.

    Like

  11. RL Crabb Avatar

    I wouldn’t dispute that the money was there. Tell it to Standard and Poor’s, Moody’s and all those nervous foreign markets. Real or not, the perception was there and that in itself could trigger a panic. Remember, it’s human beings we’re talking about. Didn’t the stock market just drop 250 points? That kind of stuff used to happen when Alan Greenspan sneezed.

    Like

  12. RL Crabb Avatar

    I’ll say it again: The real problem with our political system is the Tea Party and the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Both want it all, and are willing to take the country down to make their point. There are solutions to these problems, but the Tea Party can’t wait to get into power so they can implement a radical social agenda, and the progressives seem to believe if they just pump a few more trillion into government and regulate the feces out of business that all will be well again. It’s a no-win situation unless someone breaks the logjam and gets serious about fixing the broken tax system and raising the bar on SSI and Medicare.

    Like

  13. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    So, let me understand your point. All our lives the mushy middle has been running things and they put us into this mess which then gave rise in the last two years to the Tea Party who want to put a stop to the profligate spending and return the country to it Constitution. I was under the impression that is what you desired and your cartoons so explicitly say. Now that the TPP are having an impact on the spending you become opposed to them because you claim they have a social agenda so you can’t support them. Same with the left it appears. So, from your words it appears you want to return to the mushy middle who made this mess. I think you are confused.

    Like

  14. George Rebane Avatar

    The “radical social agenda” of the tea party movement that “will take the country down” –
    • A fiscally responsible and smaller government,
    • Govern by the Constitution,
    • Support capitalism and free markets,
    • Maintain freedom and individual liberties.
    Period. Any add-ons to this “extremist agenda” are put there by the people seeking a “balance” with the progressive socialists who, in their own words (e.g. truthout.com) maintain that –
    • Capitalism only creates wealth for the wealthy,
    • Socialism provides the greatest good for the greatest number,
    • Wealth must be redistributed by force,
    • A comprehensive government is the solution.
    And indeed, “both want it all”. Therefore we are two societies – the makers and the moochers – locked within common borders. I have subscribed to the above principles of the tea party movement before it arrived, and will vote for candidates that convince me they will be guided by those principles when they get elected. In the eyes of the progressive elites, I and those who think like me are described as “hostage takers” and “radical terrorists”. This is how it starts.

    Like

  15. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    George, there are some people who cannot take a “side” in any argument or discussion and in my experience they are the real problem in all this mess. The government we have is the result of compromise because if it wasn’t, then we would have either a left or right hegemony. California and New York states are the best example of leftist hegemony and as we can see, the federal government is becoming California. The left has had the reins with a small conservative contingent shouting in the wilderness here. We get to see its results and how someone in the middle can still be in the middle is beyond my comprehension.

    Like

  16. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    Still not sure what sort of radical agenda Bob thinks the TP would implement. The major problem remains that no matter who is in office, we still have a large portion of the population that thinks the river of life flows from D.C. I have no idea what percentage of the population would be in that camp, but it’s clear there is certainly a majority in the major urban areas that are pretty well hooked on the govt teat. The latest news along those lines is the “right” of a citizen to a free cell phone. As a nation, we are hopelessly divided on the way to move forward. Those of the conservative side would like to move forward in the true progressive liberal way pointed to by the founding fathers. The modern left and libs want a return to a Machiavellian all powerful paternalistic govt that bestows goodies and favors to the favored serfs fortunate enough to be kept alive by the wave of the royal hand. I’m not saying they want a ruling dynasty along the lines of the old euro families, but it certainly looks the same in operation. Already we are tolerant of the idea of a royal govt that is allowed to live by a different and elevated set of rules that we citizens are denied. The idea that we have a middle of the road that is moderate and wise is a crock. Most of the great MOTR types I’ve talked to have no idea what is going on with the govt and can’t be bothered. By default they throw in with the lefties in wanting a big momma govt. The solution is in the educational system and the left has already won. I think it’s rear guard action for the conservatives from now on. Time will tell and it will happen in my lifetime.

    Like

  17. George Rebane Avatar

    ToddJ and ScottO well summarize the sentiments of conservetarians like me. Sadly, it has been the ‘tolerant’, ‘moderate’ who have tolerated autocracy and then allowed it to proceed into totalitarianism. These folks have no clear and stable ideology that they can communicate, so they just blow in the prevailing winds, bowing here and there while seeking to avoid contention and trouble.
    Unfortunately boundaries and principles do exist, and our country was founded on a pretty good collection of them.

    Like

  18. Mikey McD Avatar

    Crabb, your comments show extreme ignorance. #1- Re: Tea Part: Perhaps the most enduring characteristic of the Tea Party is THE FACT THAT THE MOVEMENT DOES NOT HAVE A SOCIAL AGENDA.
    “Tea Party can’t wait to get into power so they can implement a radical social agenda”
    Re: Central Planning Economics: On the basis of fear you appear to advocate the bailouts, QE1, QE2, Stimulus, extended unemployment benefits, higher debt ceiling, etc while acknowledging that such reckless spending and control helped create the 2008 (and current) fiasco. It is like telling an addict to overcome their addiction by taking more drugs.
    In order for capitalism to work the business cycle must be allowed to play out.

    Like

  19. RL Crabb Avatar

    You keep telling yourself the Tea Party doesn’t have a social agenda and maybe people will believe it. And I didn’t endorse the bailouts, I merely point out that the consequences of doing nothing might have been more severe than all of you seem to think.
    You all go ahead and mock the “mushy middle”. I can’t deny that it’s led to some classic bad decisions over the years. There really isn’t one magic bullet to fix this mess, although the partisans will never stop telling you so.
    I’ll shut up now, so you (left and right) can go on telling yourselves how you’ll save the world.

    Like

  20. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    Mikey
    What does “play out” mean ? Can you explain to me how it would manifest itself in the near future and how long would it take to settle in. I know that’s a lot to explain but I’m intrigued with the concept because what we is happening now doesn’t seem to work.

    Like

  21. George Rebane Avatar

    Bob, we belong to the Tea Party Patriots, and have been members since it started a couple of years ago. I have been privileged to be included in the organization’s planning and know its leadership personally. I have never heard of a single social agenda item accepted for action by the TPP. I invite you to attend our gatherings, any and all, as an observer (Anna Haynes joins us occasionally), talk to people and decide for yourself. Limiting your input to MSNBC, CNN, etc does explain away why you harbor your beliefs.
    I am not mocking any “mushy middle”, but I do cite the historical use of that ideological sector by political extremists.
    And please note in these pages that I have not been sanguine about my ideology saving the world, frankly because that opportunity has passed. You folks claiming to hew to the middle will be swept up by the siren song of socialism, at which time blogs like this will be outlawed. (Note that I am also personally called a “terrorist” and the “biggest threat to the US” in ‘Perhaps Muslim …’ comment stream. Heavy stuff.)
    Finally, I would dearly like to have you tell us what in the TPP’s pursuit of the listed principles you find to be of the radical right persuasion, specifically in there what do you personally find abhorrent? To answer (which I hope you will), please assume that my characterization of the TPP is correct – in other words, your answer can start, ‘If George is correct about the TPP, then …’. Then you can again disclaim everything.

    Like

  22. RL Crabb Avatar

    Here’s another opinion on how Republicans can make their agenda work…
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60561.html

    Like

  23. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    The mushy middle (MM) had the country in a tizzie because they said if we don’t add 2.4 trillion to the debt of our granchildren, the very life of America would perish, or at the very least, change into something really bad. Now what is wrong with that picture of concern? The MM won the day and kicked the crumpled debt can resolution down the trail and said “we have saved America”!. What did they save? They maintained the status quo (increased debt) and made debt of the country a solution to present day problems! These same MM’s have been relentlessly criticizing the same Federal government (politicians) for overspending but that did not seem to make them support the very people and institutions (Tea Party, Grover) that wanted to stop the debt! So, what I gathered from comments from the MM’s here and elsewhere is they would rather fantasize they saved the country from an imaginary conclusion (raise the debt ceiling ) than the actual saving of the country from that debt’s real world consequences.

    Like

  24. Mikey McD Avatar

    Paul, the brief answer (“What does play out mean ?”) is let the banks fail, let the UAW cannibalize it’s employer, let the markets set interest rates (not The FED), don’t print fiat money…
    First off the 2008 financial crisis COULD NOT have occurred without a menage a trois between the FED, Congress and big banks. Moral hazard was discounted, underwriting standards ignored and for that the banks involved should have been allowed to die a violent death as a warning to future banks. Note: several banks never lowered there lending standards/underwriting and they would have just survived, but thrived as depositors moved to stronger banks. As quick as Lehman failed another capitalist would have taken their place, and thrived. Instead, we have encouraged the FED, Congress and the banks to act like idiots knowing that ‘failure’ will not result. We have gone from ‘too big to fail’ to ‘too enormous to fail.’

    Like

  25. Mikey McD Avatar

    Crabb, you can’t cite 1 single ‘radical social agenda’ promoted by the Tea Party. Not 1. They leave immigration, abortion, etc out of their politics.
    • A fiscally responsible and smaller government,
    • Govern by the Constitution,
    • Support capitalism and free markets,
    • Maintain freedom and individual liberties.

    Like

  26. RL Crabb Avatar

    Well, there’s that ‘forty year plan’ for starters. The Tea Party itself has been careful to avoid these divisive issues, but the candidates they vote for certainly have them on the to-do list and I don’t hear anyone in the various non-parties complaining about it.

    Like

  27. George Rebane Avatar

    Bob, why don’t you start with the forty-year plan and tell us what is radical to you about it? And supporting candidates that do what you ask them, and then being held responsible for their other policies that you didn’t cover – wow! That is some devastating logic for accusing people of being radicals. How would that work on the other foot where everyone – say Democrats – is taken to task for the total behaviors of every candidate they backed?
    My 826am comment stands.

    Like

  28. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    Mikey
    Thanks for the response.I agree with much, though not all, of what you say. You can add the insurance companies that allowed betting on failure to that list. I suggest a viewing of the film “Inside Job” for a perspective of the situation that I favor. http://www.sonyclassics.com/insidejob/

    Like

  29. RL Crabb Avatar

    It’s not that it’s radical, George, just that it exists when you keep saying it doesn’t.

    Like

  30. George Rebane Avatar

    Bob, 1) it is only your attribution of “radical” that is of concern in this thread (so is the TPP no longer radical???), and 2) I have made no statement as to the existence of any tea party plan, and most certainly I have not repeatedly (“… keep saying …”) made any such claims.

    Like

  31. RL Crabb Avatar

    Reading the comments tonight here and on the other side’s blog, I can feel the hatred and contempt you have for each other. It radiates heat from my computer screen and if I tip it up on its side I can fry an egg while I take it all in.
    How long before this pot boils over? Rational human beings of both sides would have sat down in good faith and hammered out an agreement that really had some teeth, and set a course for a true recovery.
    George, I don’t have time to look up every instance that you and/or others have said the Tea Party has no social agenda, and nothing I say will convince anybody here anyway. If your eventual candidate can avoid stumbling over his or her own words and win the White House, we’ll meet here in a couple years and see how much social engineering takes place.
    Till then, I’ll hide out with Dilbert until this all blows over and both sides have destroyed each other. The geeks shall inherit the earth.

    Like

  32. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    Todd, if: “Crabb, you can’t cite 1 single ‘radical social agenda’ promoted by the Tea Party. Not 1. They leave immigration, abortion, etc out of their politics. ”
    then explain 649 hits for immigration and Tea Party at Flickr:
    http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=tea+party+immigration&ss=2&z=e
    and another 540 hits for Tea Party Abortion:
    http://www.flickr.com/search/?z=e&ss=2&w=all&q=tea+party+abortion&m=text
    Look at the signs and repeat your first statement again, with feeling, vim, and vigor!

    Like

  33. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    Todd, it is possible that Crabb can’t, but I sure can.
    “Crabb, you can’t cite 1 single ‘radical social agenda’ promoted by the Tea Party. Not 1. They leave immigration, abortion, etc out of their politics.”
    On Flickr, over 540 shots come up with the search for Tea Party Abortion, take a peek:
    http://www.flickr.com/search/?z=e&ss=2&w=all&q=tea+party+abortion&m=text
    It gets even better with immigration, well over 600:
    http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=tea+party+immigration&z=e&ss=2
    Can you explain these signs, Todd?

    Like

  34. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    “First off the 2008 financial crisis COULD NOT have occurred without a menage a trois between the FED, Congress and big banks.”
    You left out every real estate person and every mortgage broker with 1/2 a brain, who stood to profit from the game. Anyone with any experience could have seen what was coming.

    Like

  35. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    First post appeared to have disappeared, so I did it again.

    Like

  36. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    DK, again you cite me but I am not the one you are quoting. Try harder.
    Though I don’t belong to the TPP, I support their fiscal and Constitutional positions. I haven’t seen a “leader” of the TPP nationally citing social policies which are on the “platform”. Could Keachie supply that for us so we can then see whey he and Crabb are alleging?
    I would like Crabb to tell us how a candidate is supposed to run and not have opinions or beliefs on other issues. It seems to me you would be hard pressed to find anyone from any party or from any belief system who was as one dimensional as you think a TPP candidate should be. If the candidate supports the fiscal policy of the TPP are you saying they cannot have a policy on child abuse?
    Based on the opinions I read from Crabb on these threads I would say if anyone should not have an opinion on anything it is he. Since he bashes all partys for their opinions I would say a “no” opinion better reflects a middle of the roader.

    Like

  37. RL Crabb Avatar

    I don’t know why my middle of the road political philosophy is so hard for you to understand. It really boils down to being fiscally conservative and liberal/libertarian on rights of all citizens to be treated equally under the law. It’s a position that seems to resound with a good number of Americans who are fed up with the excesses of the Democrats and Republicans.
    By the way, that “liberal” icon Jon Stewart did a great piece on atheists last night that pretty much mirrors my own views on the subject. It will replay a couple of times today, or you can see it on The Daily Show online.

    Like

  38. George Rebane Avatar
    George Rebane

    Gentlemen, it seems that in this discussion you are not separating the stated principles of the tea party movement from all the other disparate beliefs that individual members or the candidates they back may or may not hold. It makes you go around in circles that leads to no resolution.
    No reasonable person would accuse the Democratic party of being communist just because certain of its members subscribe to the tenets of communism. Similarly, it is unreasonable to ascribe the entire collection of tenets held by individual tea party members to the tea party movement.
    When I joined the TPP, I did not do so for their lack of social agenda, but neither did I have to leave my own social ideology (which differs from that of other members) at the door. All I committed with my membership is to work together with other members to promote the TPP’s limited agenda as stated in its principles (see 826am comment).
    When such separation is not accessible to discussants, then they tend to make the silly connections that we see above.

    Like

  39. RL Crabb Avatar

    Despite the Tea Party position of having no position, can anyone deny that the candidates they will vote for next year will be anyone other than socially conservative Republicans? It’s a great way to achieve an agenda without having to say so.

    Like

  40. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    If the critics of the TPP and their alleged social positions were consistent they would also be as adamant about, say, the Peace and Freedom Party. They were against the war and fairly one dimensional for many years. The Greens were fairly one dimensional too but I don’t see the critics squirming in their seats about them as well. The best example on a one dimensional political system is in Great Britain. They have hundreds of partys in their system. Watch the election returns during the Parliamentary elections and you will get to see how people band together with one or two policies. The reason the TPP is freaking out the supposed MOTR folks is because they are HUGE. Their simple ideas have resonated with people of all backgrounds and it has sustained for two years! The same people that complain endlessly about the R’s and D’s and who say we should let the “people” run things, deny the TPP that place in the system. What that says to me is certain people, including Jon Stewart (who rarely bashes the left) are simply never satisfied. It is better to stay on the sidelines taking potshots at TPP members than to see the positive influence it is having on the political discourse of America. Crabb reminds me of a fellow who would always show up at the BOS meetings and have an opinion on everything. His opinion was as a complainer, never a solution. After a while it was very predictable. Even things that were universally agreed to by us this fellow would complain about. We would say to him, so what is your solution then since you never agree with us on any topic. Well, he would get up and walk out. So, perhaps those that complain about the TPP should go to their meetings and give some input, hopefully positive, rather than just potshots of negativity and distrust.

    Like

  41. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    Todd, you and MickeyD have the exact same icon, and you’ve intermingled your posts right next to one another. My glaucoma impaired vision does miss details from time to time.

    Like

  42. RL Crabb Avatar

    What utter bullshit. Just because I point out the inconsistancies of partisan politics, Toddy doesn’t think I have any values worthy of discussion. I’m always glad to see people work out their differences in a civilized manner to benefit the greatest number of people and do the least damage. One of the reasons I like smaller government is because it brings the issues closer to the governed. It gives me the opportunity to have a front row seat in the sausage factory, and maybe even a voice that can be heard.
    I’m sorry that liberals were mean to you when you were a supervisor, Toddy, but maybe you were asking for it. The current conservatives on the Board don’t seem to have that problem.

    Like

  43. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    “I haven’t seen a “leader” of the TPP nationally citing social policies which are on the “platform”. Could Keachie supply that for us so we can then see whey he and Crabb are alleging?”
    Since the Tea Party represents a very wide spectrum of political views and opinions on social policies, it should be a piece of cake for ToddJ to find a leader in that party who is either pro abortion or pro immigration in their non official Tea Party capacities. I suppose that Sarah Palin, who appears to be a Tea Party supporter, is not going to make the “A” list on these issues.
    I have found you over a thousand images of Tea Party supporters who are on one side of those issues, let’s see you find one such image for the other side.
    Would you like to take bets on my probably half life if I tried to march in a Tea Party parade with a sign that said, “I’m a Tea Party member and I support open borders and abortion on demand.”
    Now that brings up a very interesting question, who decides who is and who is not a Tea Party member? If I support the three or four main tenants of the party, which I suspect both I and Crabb do, is there ANY reason I could not declare myself a member of the Tea Party? I actually was on the mailing,list for awhile, until they figured out who I was. Who kicked me off?
    No social agenda? HA! The Tea Party interpretation of the Constitution is a very strong social agenda in itself, and “no taxes/smaller government,” establishes a strong social agenda against those who need help, education, and mass transportation.

    Like

  44. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    A trio of sociologist did attend many meetings of the Boston Tea Party group, and what they learned is quite interesting, in terms of understanding the Tea Party demographics, fancy word for “who are these guys/gals?”
    http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2011/07/11/scenes-from-the-tea-party/

    Like

  45. George Rebane Avatar

    “George, I don’t have time to look up every instance that you and/or others have said the Tea Party has no social agenda, …”
    Agreed Bob, no need to waste your time. Providing just ONE citation of, say, the TPP claiming a social agenda tenet will do.
    BTW, there is no reasonable basis for accepting DougK’s blanket charge that the tea party principles themselves subsume a social agenda. That goes against the norms of national debate that even the progressives have long acknowledged, and accepting the proposition would effectively end this discussion thread.

    Like

  46. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    “That goes against the norms of national debate that even the progressives have long acknowledged”
    Love to see your proof of this.

    Like

  47. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    And yes indeed it would end this discussion thread.
    Score:
    Progressives 1
    Tea Party 0

    Like

  48. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Crabb just can’t hack it when his superfluous ideas are exposed so he attacks me personally. Childish is as childish does. No, I could care less Crabb about what you think happened when I was Supervisor. I voted for balanced budgets and we had them. We needed new roads and we got them. We had low unemployment and lots of jobs then. No, I could care less about your childish rants because I have kept my philosophy and did not become a wishy-washy like liberals are. If you have one social policy from George to place here to back up your claim, then put it here. Since you are unwilling to do that, we must assume you are making it up. Oh and what sacrifices have you made for your fellow Nevada Countyians to make the place better? Nothing personal, just curious.

    Like

  49. George Rebane Avatar

    DougK, if we cannot discriminate between notions such as social agenda, foreign policy agenda, fiscal agenda, etc and set effective boundaries for their tenets, then there is no possibility of any reasonable discussion. And there, perhaps, your objective may be met.
    Within that frame you may indeed celebrate another victory for the progressives. So are we then done with the debate as to whether the tea party, per se, has/promotes a social agenda?

    Like

  50. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    Does the Tea Party support or disavow T Boone Picken’s bid for corporate socialism?
    “These are not purely technical topics for debate among petroleum professionals. The marketing of the shale gas phenomenon has been so effective that important policy and strategic decisions are being made based on as yet unproven assumptions about the abundance and low cost of these plays. The “Pickens Plan” seeks to get congressional approval for natural gas subsidies that might eventually lead to conversion of large parts of our vehicle fleet to run on natural gas. This might commit the U.S. to decades of natural gas exports at fixed prices in the face of scarcity and increasing prices in the domestic market. Similarly, companies have gotten permits from the government to transform liquefied natural gas import terminals into export facilities that would commit the U.S. to decades of large, fixed export volumes. If reserves are less and cost is more than many assume, these could be disastrous decisions. ”
    Slashing taxes comes before any other bold moves on Rebane’s Blog.

    Like

Leave a comment