America's coming civil war -- makers vs. takers Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/op

[JakeStarkey]

Darn straight, Zoom. The mainstream GOPs are beating the far right wacks in the race for controlling the party.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So that damn race war is finally going to happen? I have been hearing it was coming my entire life.

What race war? This has nothing to do with race you racist piece of fucking shit.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Says the wannabee totalitarian and fascist, bigrebnc, working with the fascist Big Lie technique. You are among those on this Board that hate traditional American values. He so wants to be a Leader.

Ignorant rightist idiocy.



Nonsense.

America’s growth and prosperity during the 20th Century was the consequence of public and private sectors working together.

Total fucking horse shit, you're an idiot.

Says the wannabee totalitarian and fascist, bigrebnc, working with the fascist Big Lie technique. You are among those on this Board that hate traditional American values. He so wants to be a Leader.

So you agree with a liberal nothing new their fucking liberal.

 

[JakeStarkey]

When you lie and demagogue and get outed over it, I would agree with John Galt if he were the one who outed you.

You are being pimped by the far right extremists and then will be discarded.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

When you lie and demagogue and get outed over it, I would agree with John Galt if he were the one who outed you.

You are being pimped by the far right extremists and then will be discarded.

Every time you call yourself a republican you lie might as well get this lying thing out of the way.

 

[flacaltenn]

Emote all you want. But the FACTS don't support what you parrot.

The LARGER picture...

CBO’s Long-Term Budget Outlook

Here is the 'rub'...We are on The Extended-Baseline Scenario trajectory 'Obama, Pelosi and Reid and the radicals' put us on. If Congress does nothing the Extended-Baseline Scenario is already in place.

IF the Bush tax cuts don't expire and the AHA is not fully implemented or repealed the The Alternative Fiscal Scenario is the trajectory Teapublicans will take us if they gain enough power.

the CBO lays it out perfectly clear...CRYSTAL.

Federal Debt Held by the Public Under CBO’s Long-Term Budget Scenarios (Percentage of gross domestic product)

The chart shows 2 scenarios. For all practical purposes, you can call the Extended-Baseline Scenario the Democrat scenario and the Alternative Fiscal Scenario the Teapublican scenario.


The Extended-Baseline Scenario adheres closely to current law. Under this scenario, the expiration of the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and most recently extended in 2010, the growing reach of the alternative minimum tax, the tax provisions of the recent health care legislation, and the way in which the tax system interacts with economic growth would result in steadily higher revenues relative to GDP.

The Alternative Fiscal Scenario
The budget outlook is much bleaker under the alternative fiscal scenario, which incorporates several changes to current law that are widely expected to occur or that would modify some provisions of law that might be difficult to sustain for a long period. Most important are the assumptions about revenues: that the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and extended most recently in 2010 will be extended; that the reach of the alternative minimum tax will be restrained to stay close to its historical extent; and that over the longer run, tax law will evolve further so that revenues remain near their historical average of 18 percent of GDP. This scenario also incorporates assumptions that Medicare’s payment rates for physicians will remain at current levels (rather than declining by about a third, as under current law) and that some policies enacted in the March 2010 health care legislation to restrain growth in federal health care spending will not continue in effect after 2021.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obama spending binge never happened

Government outlays rising at slowest pace since 1950s

Here are the facts, according to the official government statistics:

• In the 2009 fiscal year — the last of George W. Bush’s presidency — federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

• In fiscal 2010 — the first budget under Obama — spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

• In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

• In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

• Finally in fiscal 2013 — the final budget of Obama’s term — spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO’s latest budget outlook.

Over Obama’s four budget years, federal spending is on track to rise from $3.52 trillion to $3.58 trillion, an annualized increase of just 0.4%.

There has been no huge increase in spending under the current president, despite what you hear.

Why do people think Obama has spent like a drunken sailor? It’s in part because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the federal budget.

What people forget (or never knew) is that the first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress. The president only begins to shape the budget in his second year. It takes time to develop a budget and steer it through Congress — especially in these days of congressional gridlock.

The 2009 fiscal year, which Republicans count as part of Obama’s legacy, began four months before Obama moved into the White House. The major spending decisions in the 2009 fiscal year were made by George W. Bush and the previous Congress.

All of that is as phoney as a 2nd rate circus sideshow..

There HASN'T been an approved Congressional Budget in over 2 years. Spending is on autopilot. And the CBO makes LUDICROUS assumptions because they HAVE to.

Like the fact that ALL (everyone) of the BUsh Tax Cuts will expire. That GM will repay every penny of their "loans". That Congress will TRUELY CUT $500Bill from Medicare like the Dems promised in the ACA costing.

The baseline doesn't show DRASTICALLY increasing Medicare and Soc Sec payouts. In fact, looking at that flatline -- there's no inkling of the impending CRISIS that everyone knows is coming.

It's crap.. based on BUDGETS that don't exist. And everytime Congress spends extraordinary amounts of money (like the phoney stimulus) the argument is "how ya gonna pay for that?". Never an answer.. OUTSIDE the budget -- not shown in the baseline.

It's exactly like the MASSIVE LIE that the S.S. has OODLES of cash in it --- just waiting to repay the folks who got the Surplus stolen from under them all those years. A fabrication to cause you and me to quarrel, while Congress escapes responsibility for mismanaging the massive taxes that they already recieve.

In fact --- everything I told you is in the quote for the "alternative scenario" which turns out to be the REAL SCENARIO. To wit..

The Alternative Fiscal Scenario
The budget outlook is much bleaker under the alternative fiscal scenario, which incorporates several changes to current law that are widely expected to occur or that would modify some provisions of law that might be difficult to sustain for a long period. Most important are the assumptions about revenues: that the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and extended most recently in 2010 will be extended (they will); that the reach of the alternative minimum tax will be restrained to stay close to its historical extent (it will, in fact the Stimulus addressed that); and that over the longer run, tax law will evolve further so that revenues remain near their historical average of 18 percent of GDP. This scenario also incorporates assumptions that Medicare’s payment rates for physicians will remain at current levels (rather than declining by about a third, as under current law) (see -- i told you) and that some policies enacted in the March 2010 health care legislation to restrain growth in federal health care spending will not continue in effect after 2021.

THAT's actually the much more likely scenario.. Given that Dems have been giving Seniors a wink and saying that the Medicare cuts are just rhetoric. Because if they DIDN'T do that -- they'd have to put wheelchair spike strips into the Capitol ramps..

Yes, unfortunately it is the most likely scenario, because our government has been hijacked by the opulent who have no need for programs that save millions of middle class jobs, which the stimulus did. And we no longer have a free press, we have corporate puppets who repeat everything they are told by 5 huge corporations who OWN the press.

We are headed for a civil war, when the truly dependent (children and the elderly) are harmed or extinguished.

Medicare is by far the greatest accomplishment in our nation's history. It took the elderly from being the most likely to live in poverty, and living under the specter of losing everything they worked their entire lifetime for with one illness, to the least likely to face poverty.

IT is too valuable, and MUST be funded.

We have all made mistakes. But Dante tells us that divine justice weighs the sins of the cold-blooded and the sins of the warm-hearted on different scales. Better the occasional faults of a party living in the spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a party frozen in the ice of its own indifference.
President John F. Kennedy

Then perhaps both parties ought have been booted for stealing from the FICA surplus.

Perhaps we should have replaced the parties with a TRUE conservative and TRUE leftist option --- Neither of which would have us bombing 4 countries a month.

Perhaps we should have concentrated on R&D funding and not subsidies.

Don't talk to me about how all this is one partys' fault. I've been working in 3rd Party politics for 15 years BECAUSE the writing was on the wall..

As Libertarian as I am --- Soc Sec and Medicare OUGHT to be grandfathered in for those that have counted on it. But PRETENDING these programs are UNIVERSAL insurance isn't gonna be possible. UNIVERSAL programs don't last more than a lifetime. Because the Govt is INEPT, INEFFICIENT and CORRUPT. So I'd just assume transition them to welfare and still require UNIVERSAL participation in paying for them.

I'm not in favor of changing the rules on either PUBLIC service employees or Seniors just as they are ready to get that watch and a placque.

 

[JakeStarkey]

bigrebnc, you have said repeatedly you are not GOP, and you sure have not acted like anyone a decent Republican would want in the party.

The TPM and militia nuts here don't like me at all, but they know better to mess with the GOP mainstreamers here that are in charge.

Son, understand this: we don't care what you guys think. We will do what we know is best in saving the party from you and your comrades. That is simply it. That discussion is done.

 

[Unkotare]

Darn straight, Zoom. The mainstream GOPs are beating the far right wacks in the race for controlling the party.

Uh-oh! Time for Wapner!

 

[Unkotare]

they know better to mess with the GOP mainstreamers here that are in charge.

Definately, definately mainstream. Definately mainstream. Mainstream, yeah, mainstream. Uh-oh! Time for Wapner!

 

[Bfgrn]

All of that is as phoney as a 2nd rate circus sideshow..

There HASN'T been an approved Congressional Budget in over 2 years. Spending is on autopilot. And the CBO makes LUDICROUS assumptions because they HAVE to.

Like the fact that ALL (everyone) of the BUsh Tax Cuts will expire. That GM will repay every penny of their "loans". That Congress will TRUELY CUT $500Bill from Medicare like the Dems promised in the ACA costing.

The baseline doesn't show DRASTICALLY increasing Medicare and Soc Sec payouts. In fact, looking at that flatline -- there's no inkling of the impending CRISIS that everyone knows is coming.

It's crap.. based on BUDGETS that don't exist. And everytime Congress spends extraordinary amounts of money (like the phoney stimulus) the argument is "how ya gonna pay for that?". Never an answer.. OUTSIDE the budget -- not shown in the baseline.

It's exactly like the MASSIVE LIE that the S.S. has OODLES of cash in it --- just waiting to repay the folks who got the Surplus stolen from under them all those years. A fabrication to cause you and me to quarrel, while Congress escapes responsibility for mismanaging the massive taxes that they already recieve.

In fact --- everything I told you is in the quote for the "alternative scenario" which turns out to be the REAL SCENARIO. To wit..



THAT's actually the much more likely scenario.. Given that Dems have been giving Seniors a wink and saying that the Medicare cuts are just rhetoric. Because if they DIDN'T do that -- they'd have to put wheelchair spike strips into the Capitol ramps..

Yes, unfortunately it is the most likely scenario, because our government has been hijacked by the opulent who have no need for programs that save millions of middle class jobs, which the stimulus did. And we no longer have a free press, we have corporate puppets who repeat everything they are told by 5 huge corporations who OWN the press.

We are headed for a civil war, when the truly dependent (children and the elderly) are harmed or extinguished.

Medicare is by far the greatest accomplishment in our nation's history. It took the elderly from being the most likely to live in poverty, and living under the specter of losing everything they worked their entire lifetime for with one illness, to the least likely to face poverty.

IT is too valuable, and MUST be funded.

We have all made mistakes. But Dante tells us that divine justice weighs the sins of the cold-blooded and the sins of the warm-hearted on different scales. Better the occasional faults of a party living in the spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a party frozen in the ice of its own indifference.
President John F. Kennedy

Then perhaps both parties ought have been booted for stealing from the FICA surplus.

Perhaps we should have replaced the parties with a TRUE conservative and TRUE leftist option --- Neither of which would have us bombing 4 countries a month.

Perhaps we should have concentrated on R&D funding and not subsidies.

Don't talk to me about how all this is one partys' fault. I've been working in 3rd Party politics for 15 years BECAUSE the writing was on the wall..

As Libertarian as I am --- Soc Sec and Medicare OUGHT to be grandfathered in for those that have counted on it. But PRETENDING these programs are UNIVERSAL insurance isn't gonna be possible. UNIVERSAL programs don't last more than a lifetime. Because the Govt is INEPT, INEFFICIENT and CORRUPT. So I'd just assume transition them to welfare and still require UNIVERSAL participation in paying for them.

I'm not in favor of changing the rules on either PUBLIC service employees or Seniors just as they are ready to get that watch and a placque.

As a JFK liberal, I can place the blame where it clearly belongs. And you parrot the sick mantra of the man who destroyed this country. He was not a conservative, he was the antithesis of what conservatism used to be.

How Ronald Reagan and Alan Greenspan Pulled off the Greatest Fraud Ever Perpetrated against the American People

When Ronald Reagan became President in 1981, he abandoned the traditional economic policies, under which the United States had operated for the previous 40 years, and launched the nation in a dangerous new direction. As Newsweek magazine put it in its March 2, 1981 issue, “Reagan thus gambled the future — his own, his party’s, and in some measure the nation’s—on a perilous and largely untested new course called supply-side economics.”

Essentially, Reagan switched the federal government from what he critically called, a “tax and spend” policy, to a “borrow and spend” policy, where the government continued its heavy spending, but used borrowed money instead of tax revenue to pay the bills. The results were catastrophic. Although it had taken the United States more than 200 years to accumulate the first $1 trillion of national debt, it took only five years under Reagan to add the second one trillion dollars to the debt. By the end of the 12 years of the Reagan-Bush administrations, the national debt had quadrupled to $4 trillion!

Ronald Reagan and Alan Greenspan pulled off one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated against the American people in the history of this great nation, and the underlying scam is still alive and well, more than a quarter century later. It represents the very foundation upon which the economic malpractice that led the nation to the great economic collapse of 2008 was built. Ronald Reagan was a cunning politician, but he didn’t know much about economics. Alan Greenspan was an economist, who had no reluctance to work with a politician on a plan that would further the cause of the right-wing goals that both he and President Reagan shared.

Both Reagan and Greenspan saw big government as an evil, and they saw big business as a virtue. They both had despised the progressive policies of Roosevelt, Kennedy and Johnson, and they wanted to turn back the pages of time. They came up with the perfect strategy for the redistribution of income and wealth from the working class to the rich. Since we don’t know the nature of the private conversations that took place between Reagan and Greenspan, as well as between their aides, we cannot be sure whether the events that would follow over the next three decades were specifically planned by Reagan and Greenspan, or whether they were just the natural result of the actions the two men played such a big role in. Either way, both Reagan and Greenspan are revered by most conservatives and hated by most liberals.

If Reagan had campaigned for the presidency by promising big tax cuts for the rich and pledging to make up for the lost revenue by imposing substantial tax increases on the working class, he would probably not have been elected. But that is exactly what Reagan did, with the help of Alan Greenspan. Consider the following sequence of events:

1) President Reagan appointed Greenspan as chairman of the 1982 National Commission on Social Security Reform (aka The Greenspan Commission)

2) The Greenspan Commission recommended a major payroll tax hike to generate Social Security surpluses for the next 30 years, in order to build up a large reserve in the trust fund that could be drawn down during the years after Social Security began running deficits.

3) The 1983 Social Security amendments enacted hefty increases in the payroll tax in order to generate large future surpluses.

4) As soon as the first surpluses began to role in, in 1985, the money was put into the general revenue fund and spent on other government programs. None of the surplus was saved or invested in anything. The surplus Social Security revenue, that was paid by working Americans, was used to replace the lost revenue from Reagan’s big income tax cuts that went primarily to the rich.

5) In 1987, President Reagan nominated Greenspan as the successor to Paul Volker as chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. Greenspan continued as Fed Chairman until January 31, 2006. (One can only speculate on whether the coveted Fed Chairmanship represented, at least in part, a payback for Greenspan’s role in initiating the Social Security surplus revenue.)

6) In 1990, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York, a member of the Greenspan Commission, and one of the strongest advocates the the 1983 legislation, became outraged when he learned that first Reagan, and then President George H.W. Bush used the surplus Social Security revenue to pay for other government programs instead of saving and investing it for the baby boomers. Moynihan locked horns with President Bush and proposed repealing the 1983 payroll tax hike. Moynihan’s view was that if the government could not keep its hands out of the Social Security cookie jar, the cookie jar should be emptied, so there would be no surplus Social Security revenue for the government to loot. President Bush would have no part of repealing the payroll tax hike. The “read-my-lips-no-new-taxes” president was not about to give up his huge slush fund.

The practice of using every dollar of the surplus Social Security revenue for general government spending continues to this day. The 1983 payroll tax hike has generated approximately $2.5 trillion in surplus Social Security revenue which is supposed to be in the trust fund for use in paying for the retirement benefits of the baby boomers. But the trust fund is empty! It contains no real assets. As a result, the government will soon be unable to pay full benefits without a tax increase. Money can be spent or it can be saved. But you can’t do both. Absolutely none of the $2.5 trillion was saved or invested in anything. I have been laboring for more than a decade to expose the great Social Security scam.

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history."
President Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

[Listening]

Screw John Kenneth Galbraith

 

[Bfgrn]

Screw John Kenneth Galbraith

Yea, the truth hurts.

 

[Listening]

Screw John Kenneth Galbraith

Yea, the truth hurts.

Good thing JKG or you wouldn't know truth if it jumped up and bit you on your tiny little dicks.

 

[Steelplate]

When you lie and demagogue and get outed over it, I would agree with John Galt if he were the one who outed you.

You are being pimped by the far right extremists and then will be discarded.

Every time you call yourself a republican you lie might as well get this lying thing out of the way.

Same with you and your boys...everytime you call yourself a patriot.

 

[Steelplate]

Screw John Kenneth Galbraith

Yea, the truth hurts.

Good thing JKG or you wouldn't know truth if it jumped up and bit you on your tiny little dicks.

But you would....because the right wing media told you so, right? Fuck you, you hypocritical douchebag.

 

[Bfgrn]

Screw John Kenneth Galbraith

Yea, the truth hurts.

Good thing JKG or you wouldn't know truth if it jumped up and bit you on your tiny little dicks.

Care to debate me on any topic? I will bury you.

Pick one...

I''ll be waiting........................

 

[Cowman]

I'm not willing to kill you over our political differences and the direction our country is headed.

Are you willing to kill me? I'll let you. You're the one who would have to live with the willful stripping of your humanity. I'd only have to die.

 

[Steelplate]

Don't you know by now? You can't debate....really debate with these people. They've been taught to call anything they don't understand, or not on the RW agenda a "librul" talking point....then they'll call you a fucking commie....debate ended.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I know, son, that you hate being told you are not in the mainstream, but, sorry, you are not, and your silly politics only hurt the country.

Son, understand this: we mainstream Republicans don't care what you guys think. We will do what we know is best in saving the party from you and your comrades. That is simply it. That discussion is done.

they know better to mess with the GOP mainstreamers here that are in charge.

Definately, definately mainstream. Definately mainstream. Mainstream, yeah, mainstream. Uh-oh! Time for Wapner!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

When you lie and demagogue and get outed over it, I would agree with John Galt if he were the one who outed you.

You are being pimped by the far right extremists and then will be discarded.

Every time you call yourself a republican you lie might as well get this lying thing out of the way.

Same with you and your boys...everytime you call yourself a patriot.

I realize your need to defend one of your own. But what the fuck is a patriot? Everybody calls themselves one, but do patriots allow someone to fundamentally change the country?