Read the comments from a few of my regular righty trolls, and you’d think this was a black and white world in which Republicans are purely on the side of good, and Democrats are dark allies of evil. So I guess there’s a lot of cognitive dissonance this morning among those in the trolling community who read Joel Connelly’s expose on how Republican “revolutionaries” like Jennifer Dunn, Slade Gorton and George Nethercutt are cashing in by joining “the great GOP patronage machine and permanent government.”
Wait a minute! Wasn’t it Gorton who won a third term on the slogan, “He works for you”?
Wasn’t it Nethercutt who argued that House Speaker Tom Foley had become a creature of the capital? Who mocked Foley for building a home there? Who claimed Foley had lost touch with Spokane?
Um… yeah, it was. It was also Nethercutt who campaigned on term limits, only to break his own solemn pledge to voluntarily limit himself. What a liar.
But let’s not be distracted by Republican lies; it’s Republican greed and abuse of power that is the focus of Connelly’s column. Like Tom Delay’s fascist efforts to make our nation a one-party state by denying access to any lobbyist or trade group that hires or contributes to Democrats. Or the unmitigated gall that sends $37.74 per person in homeland security dollars to Utah, while 9/11 target New York only gets $5.41. Or the pork-barrel politics that provides only $220 million for the Alaska Way Viaduct, while Alaska gets $941 million for bridges to nowhere.
I’m not saying Democrats are pure as driven snow; never have, never will. And while I don’t tend to waste pixels on my own party’s foibles (quite frankly, that’s not the job of a partisan, progressive blogger,) no doubt there are some bad Democrats.
But those of you on the right who look the other way at the corruption and abuse of power that is rife within your own party — or who blithely dismiss the “business as usual” policies that enrich your so-called “revolutionaries” at taxpayer expense — simply aren’t living in the real world. Or perhaps you are living in the real world, and your just as much a bunch of lying hypocrites as your Republican party leaders.
Nethercutt is still the biggest weasel in Wa. State Politics.
hmm, here’s a quick pediction of Rightie troll posts coming up:
1) “The PI is a leftwing rag, so what they say is invalid!”
2) “Goldy’s Gay! or a Commie! or has bad taste in shirts!”
3) “But the Democrats did this! and this! and this!” (none of which are germaine to the point of the post)
4) “Bill Clinton!”
LEFTIST PINHEADS!
Goldy:
“I’m not saying Democrats are pure as driven snow; never have, never will. And while I don’t tend to waste pixels on my own party’s foibles (quite frankly, that’s not the job of a partisan, progressive blogger,) no doubt there are some bad Democrats.”
So it’s okay for you to turn a blind eye to Democrat excesses from the 50s to the 90s, but Republicans are hypocrites if they don’t criticize Repbulican pork? Nice double standard.
The current behavior of the many of the Republicans in Congress, and previously the Democrats, is the reason I’m for term limits. If term limits are good enough for the office of the President, then they are good enough for Congress. Downsizing the federal government would also reduce pork, but I doubt you are for this.
I think this post loosely fits under category 4 of windie’s post.
Only a left wing extremist would complain that a handout from the federal government is “only $220 Million”. Talk about wanting something for nothing!! Whats wrong, didn’t Mom in Tennis Shoes and Maria Can’t Vote Well bring home enough pork this time?
Are you saying that Murray and Cantwell can’t bring home the bacon?
Only a left wing extremist would describe a handout from the federal government as “only 220 million”. Whats the matter, didn’t Mom in Tennis Shoes, and Maria Can’t Vote Well bring home enough pork this time?
Wasn’t it Gregoire who ran on a “no new taxes” platform and then, in the dead of night snuck in the $8 billion gas tax that will now have to be defeated at the polls by the people?
garythemoron@3
Gary, Gary, Gary. Are you purposely dense? Alaska Way is a necessary project for the wellbeing of Seattle. The Alaskan Bridge is a huge pork project that will serve a tiny number of people.
If that point isn’t clear enough, look at the Homeland Security budgeting. They shot down a move to set homeland security spending by risk rather than by state… Do you get it yet?
Pork happens, and people pad their districts. But the Reps. are really going overboard, for some reason…
GREAT post, Goldy.
Another reason (as if wee needed more) to take back our country.
See everybody Saturday.
BTW speaking of Saturday…how ’bout we set a HA meetup somewhere? Any ideas?
Windie: I don’t know the merits or the legislative history of the bridges to nowhere in Alaska, I doubt if you do either. I do know that the Alaska Way Viaduct is a gold plated boondoggle. If you think it is so essential, pay for it with tolls. It was good enough for the Narrows. BTW sorry for the double post.
@9
The tunnel concept is a gold-plated boondoggle. We need 2 highway accessways into Seattle. I-5 is bad enough.
And they’ll do toll once they figure out a good way to do it without pushing people over onto 2nd, 3rd, and 4th… which would make the situation much worse…
BOTH sides are equally guilty.
Only the foolish think their side is clean and the other dirty…
Dunno Thomas, everyone does it, true. But it seems worse right now.
Maybe its just that I’m more politically aware now than I was 5-15 years ago…
Goldy: “But those of you on the right who look the other way at the corruption and abuse of power that is rife within your own party – or who blithely dismiss the “business as usual” policies that enrich your so-called “revolutionaries” at taxpayer expense – simply aren’t living in the real world.”
Yes, one of the greatest failures of the Republican Congress has been not getting a hold of federal spending. They were elected on a platform for change – not business as usual, which it has become.
But, to pick up a point you made earlier, the voters like pork. They love federal dollars coming to them (but not necessarily paying for). A bridge in Alaska may not be important to you, but to those folks, it is “extremely important”, and vice versa, the Viaduct is important to you, but not so much for folks in Alaska.
All that said, if you think pork spending would be so radically different (with the exception of spending location) with Democrats running the show, well, you’re entitled to your opinion. They didn’t call ‘Scoop’ Jackson “Senator from Boeing” for nothing, you know.
Comment on 1
“Nethercutt is still the biggest weasel in Wa. State Politics.”
Nah, I think he’s #3, (very) slightly behind Chris Rants and Dino Sour, in that order.
Comment on 1
Also, you forgot to predict (5) “LEFTIST PINHEADS!”
Reply to 3
Handout? What handout? That’s your federal gas tax dollars going to Alaska to build a bridge that serves 50 people. Where’s the outrage, pal? Where’s your outrage?
Reply to 9
“I do know that the Alaska Way Viaduct is a gold plated boondoggle.”
Interesting conclusion as there isn’t a design yet. If you have one, will you share?
By the way, Gary, paying for AWV with tolls isn’t be necessary. We could rebuild AWV with the $125 million of gas taxes King County annually exports to other counties. How about we spend that money in King County, and they can pay for THEIR roads and bridges with tolls? I like that idea better.
Goldy, After your beach vacation, (of which I am totally jealous), I want to explain why the People’s Waterfront Coalition are correct about not rebuilding I-99 with either a tunnel or an elevated replacement. I’ll do my best to make the explanation clear, as always, but there’s little doubt it will be maligned and poo-poo’d and dissed right AND left. Transportation and land-use planning in Seattle is completely incompetent. Have a nice vacation.
Jon, you may have a good point that the bridge in Alaska is extremely important to them.
How many of them are there, compared to people who drive on the AWV every day? If every person in the involved Alaskan towns drove on their bridge every day, how many trips per day would they have to make to equal the traffic that already exists on AWV?
You, see: it’s really not all ‘relative.’ Some uses of money make sense, and others do not.
Thomas @ 11: “BOTH sides are equally guilty. Only the foolish think their side is clean and the other dirty.”
Wow. Truer words were never said. I never thought I’d find something on which to agree with you, but here it is.
One of the most frustrating things about politics and political discussions is that people aren’t willing to be honest and objective. I’ll be the first to admit that the GOP has its faults and its share of kooks. Do the Dems on HA feel their position is so weak that they can’t challenge their own party?
Sure we can pay for the new AWV with tolls only… Let’s see, here’s my rough calculation:
100,000 cars a day and $10 per car, we’d raise $365,000,000 annually. That should be enough to pay off those bonds on the new viaduct after about 20 years. That is assuming 100,000 cars use the viaduct on the weekends as well. But hey, we’re in right-wing fantasy world, so maybe that’s the case.
Of course that also doesn’t take into account the number of people who would stop using the viaduct and start using I-5 and 1st Ave downtown due to avoid the $10 toll. But I’m sure there’s plenty of excess capacity on I-5 for that. It’s the same excess capacity we’ll be using when the reality world viaduct collapses. The commute through downtown on I-5 is a highlight of any Seattle native’s day.
Math was never a strong suit for the dittoheads though, so who can blame them. The remedial math lesson wasn’t included on today’s memo from John Carlson.
If the rest of the state doesn’t want to pay for “Seattle projects” fine – we’ll stop exporting tax money their way. It works both ways. If they want to balkanize the state, I say give them what they want. They don’t have to pay a few extra cents for gas – fine. King County will stop paying for their schools, roads and prisons. Sounds like a fair deal to me.
I think we know who comes out ahead in that deal.
@22
not if by ‘we’ you mean the whiners/separatists… they have no idea.
Mark @ 21
You making accusations, essentially following Limbaugh’s mantra, the Liberals are in lockstep with our party. that simply isn’t t the truth and history is on our side to back up that statement.
The real point you’re making, and I’m agreeing with you, relates to the maxim that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Right now the Republicans practically have a stranglehold on power and if they pick up enough seats to catapult them to 60 seats in the Senate, then they will have absolute power and we’ll be in for another dark period of American history. Without exception the radical right wing will will absolutely ramrod through legislation and judgeships with overly conservative ideals.
Personally, I’m not a big fan of JFK or LBJ. I really like Jimmy Carter, but he came in during the worst time imaginable for a president. He couldn’t manage to get the economic house in order, but a really intelligent man never the less and true to his Christian beliefs on social issues. Of course I believe that Clinton was the best president we’ve had in the last 50 years and certainly far superior to the current administration.
Roger @ 18: “We could rebuild AWV with the $125 million of gas taxes King County annually exports to other counties.”
Uh… no, you can’t. The pricetag is $4 BILLION — and that is before changes, overruns and a little pocket-lining by unions.
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/Viaduct/
Remember, the Big Dig in Boston was supposed to be $2.5 billion ($4 Billion in today’s dollars) and ended up being FOURTEEN-PLUS BILLION dollars and years overdue before it was completed.
And, of course, that all assumes we don’t run into some “cultural artifacts” that will gut the entire project like it did up in Port Angeles.
GBS @ 24: “You making accusations… the Liberals are in lockstep with our party.”
Actually, I’m saying that a great number of (but not all) Liberals on this blog are Kool-Aid-sipping, MorOn.org-bullet-point-spouting, foul-mouthed automatons. Then again, the Right has its share on here, too. Too bad cooler heads can’t prevail.
Personally, I think we could do a lot better than the current administration, too. You may hate the guy, but I happened to like Reagan and think he was far better than either Bush. Clinton had his good points, too, and the Right improperly attacked him, but he also put in some serious shovel time digging his own grave. Hillary didn’t help his cause, either.
Gary @ 3, 5
“Only a left wing extremist would complain that a handout from the federal government is “only $220 Million”.
I don’t know how you define “left-wing extremist,” but in my book it would be a pretty fringe group seeking to remove class distinctions in radical ways. True Communists, as well as Anarchists, would pretty much fit into this category. Socialists (of the actual Marxist variety) would not be extreme enough; Kim Il-Sung’s Juche philosophy, however, would probably fit the bill from an ideological (although not practical) standpoint.
In that light, I don’t think your statement is defensible, as none of those types of groups would be concerned with “federal handouts.”
Mark @ 25
OK, so the main point is everyone has their foibles. I agree with you on that point. I would disagree with you, however, on your characterization that a great deal of us are kool-aid drinking, bullet point talking, potty mouths. However, The Good Lord knows I’ve fired my mouth off mightily when I think someone needs it on this blog. So there you go, I’ve got my potty mouth, too when it’s appropriate. But, in typical Liberal fashion I’ll blame the government because I spent 10 years in the Navy. You know how us sailors swear too much, drink way too much, and we’ve been know to chase a few too many skirts as well. But I enjoyed it.
I wasn’t a big fan of Regan for a variety of reasons A) I witnessed how he screwed up California’s politics, B) He was not in favor of Civil Rights legislation C) He was very anti-union/worker among my top complaints. But I’d take Regan over W any time, and that pains me to think I’d rather have Regan in the WH. Now for me, that’s saying something.
The traditional Republicans, and you seem to be one of them, have lost control of their party. Where is the smaller government? The less intrusive government? The fiscally responsible government? The contract with America government where Tom DeLay had the audacity to say they were going to be “cleaning up the corruption” in congress?
The truth is that American politics is most successful when it’s more like Ying and Yang. One without the other is a recipe for failure. My dad taught me a lot of adages when I growing up to give me to give me an insight to philosophical thinking. The adage that applies here is: “When everyone is thinking alike, only one person is thinking.”
I fear that is the level of thinking with W’s administration in particular and congress in general. With the worsening possibility that the judicial branch may be thinking one way in the not too distant future..
GBS @ 26
I, too, am concerned that there isn’t enough critical thinking in the current administration (or that they push out and/or try to stifle people like Powell or McCain). I have to say that I’m frustrated with the Dems because all I see is criticism and no alternative ideas. For example, I recall seeing an interview with Teddy Kennedy in which he was asked what he’d do about Iraq. He said his solution would be to come up with a plan.
What I see a glaring lack of on HA is the Left “naming names” when they think someone or something in their own party is out of line. Instead, all I see is “they did it first, so we’re justified.”
Mark @ 27
This is truly refreshing, having a “discussion” from someone on the right.
I agree with your perception that there seems to be a “lack” of ideas/legislation coming from the left. The challenge for the Dems is that they have zero control over any congressional committees, which means all of their ideas and proposals have been stalled in committee. This is a real PR problem for the Dems but a bigger problem for the American public.
The truth is the Dems enjoyed a long run controlling congress and became complacent in their thinking that things would always remain the same. Then they had a rude awakening. I see the same things happening with the Rep’s in congress today.
That said, I don’t think there’s an viable argument from the right that Clinton wasn’t a master of economics. The policies he enacted in ’93 and especially ’95 proved his philosophical approach to national and global economics were the best model. I strongly believe that the Dem’s in congress, and future dems to come, have learned their lesson regarding complacency and if they remain to the Clinton model of economics we’ll enjoy another period of booming growth.
The numbers speak for themselves on this subject.
Mark & GBS: If you two keep this rational & decent discussion up, and people might get the wrong ideas about the comments on this blog! :)
@ 27
What I see a glaring lack of on HA is the Left “naming names” when they think someone or something in their own party is out of line. Instead, all I see is “they did it first, so we’re justified.”
I see this too, and at times, I find myself being drawn in to comparative arguments. It’s good to know history, but it isn’t good to know history just to make exceptions for what is transpiring today.
I feel it is important to know your history so that when you see it being repeated in the present, the collective “we” should respond to our leaders to let them know we are not satisfied with the manner in which they are governing. And, if they don’t listen the speak with your vote. That to me is the ideal term limit.
Jon @ 29
Who the in the Hell asked you to chime in you monkey?!?!
Just kiddig! Thank you for noticing. Please jump in any time.
In the beginning of 2001 we had a Federal surplus of 80 billion. The projected federal budget deficit —the amount by which payments exceed revenues in the current fiscal year2005 —is anywhere from $249 to $368 billion. Wazup with that!
1. Out and out looting of the federal treasury.
a. Massive tax breaks to the 1/100(the 100th of 1% of the riches citizens, about 29,000 out of a population of 296,835,000).
b. A major increase in the collection of taxes on labor coupled with a major failure to collect taxes on capital (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137284,00.html).
This trend has only recently reversed itself (http://www.twincities.com/mld/.....144541.htm)
2. Corporate welfare on a scale never before seen, even during the error of Reaganomics. The latest example is the 85 billion in subsidies and tax breaks in the 2005 energy bill. (http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=4041).
3. Totally clueless economic policies. What sort of moron passes massive tax cuts during a war? (http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITI.....sacrifice/).
4. Totally clueless officials of the government who could not manage their way out of a paper bag. War profiteering and fraud that are looked to with a blind eye by those who are suppose to be guarding the public purse. (http://www.thenation.com/doc.m.....;s=editors)
GBS……reagan screwed up california politics? are you serious? as a californian i can tell you first hand that he cleaned them up after the crap we went through with edmond GEE-what-can-i-screw-up-now- brown.and then of course old brown produced governor moonbeam…and what a swell time that was too. it’s funny how in california the dems ALWAYS leave the state bankrupt. always. that’s why we end up with so many republican governors there versus here where you have had one party rule for so long it’s like a communist country.
but you make a very good point when you point out the lack of naming names in one’s own party. and both sides are guilty of that….and it is so destructive because then the politicians can play shell games with our lives while we are at each other’s throats.
Heath @ 20: “How many of them are there, compared to people who drive on the AWV every day? If every person in the involved Alaskan towns drove on their bridge every day, how many trips per day would they have to make to equal the traffic that already exists on AWV?”
I can’t disagree with you there. But since when has federal dollars for transportation projects ever truly been based on need or level of use? I can show you some nice roads around Spokane thanks to Tom Foley, I-605 in Tacoma (thanks Maggie), or nice federally funded projects in South Dakota or West Virginia. Don’t get me wrong, I think the AWV is more important too, but the pork goes to the party in power, no matter who that may be.
30
“I feel it is important to know your history so that when you see it being repeated in the present, the collective “we” should respond to our leaders to let them know we are not satisfied with the manner in which they are governing. And, if they don’t listen the speak with your vote. That to me is the ideal term limit.
Hear, hear.
GBS and xmasG, I agree that for realistic dialogue, each side must be ready to acknowledge the faults of the “icons” of the different parties. I am neither a republican, nor a democrat. Never have been. And I wouold even disagree with GBS abnout Clinton’s economic policies. While Clinton was definitely correct on taxes, he was wrong on NAFTA. Clinton was correct on the Balkins, but wrong on continual bombing of Irtaq with depleted uranium shells.
Anyway, this might be of interest for folks. A political test to determine hoq right-left, authoratorian-libertarian you are.
Keep in mind that in the UK “neoliberalism” is the equivialent of “neo-conservatism” here.
http://www.politicalcompass.org/
BTW I fall exactly with Ghandi on the spectrum. Very liberal and moderately Libertarian.
What happened to the Karl Rove witch hunt? Did that propaganda effort run out of steam?
Goldy – When you have to quote Joel Connely for your propaganda, that is really pathetic.
Well I have to agree that tolls should be part of the financing for road projects. I grew up back east and they have tolls everywhere — yes it is annoying but it makes perfect sense: the people who use the roads pay for them. I don’t understand how the western region of the country has gotten away without any toll roads for so long. It won’t pay for the entire project but why should the viaduct replacement be free? Or the floating bridges for that matter. People expect to pay for the ferries. Why not the bridges and tunnels?
Or the pork-barrel politics that provides only $220 million for the Alaska Way Viaduct, while Alaska gets $941 million for bridges to nowhere.
let’s see….it probably costs more to build bridges in Alaska than it does to build them here. Next…Alaska is providing the west coast with most of it’s gas ( I saw the governor say that on Bill Mahrer’s show) …last The people stumping for federal money in Alaska happen to come from the ruling party. the people stumping for money here come from the drooling party. Before you get your titties in a ringer remember the same thing happened when Clinton was in office’ it’s called partisan politics. deal with it.
Donna @ 35
Hmmm… interesting quiz.
I ended up just a smidge to the right of dead center. 2.25 to the right and .36 up.
pbj @ 36: Don’t mean to be picking fights with you, but in Connelly’s defense, he has taken the Democrats to task very effictively.
From a recent column:
“Not only do liberals need help with packaging, but the quality of the product also requires work. [Professor George] Lakoff is, however, provocative and on the mark in assessing why President Bush won re-election last year…But in public appearances here, he did not seem willing to prick the self-satisfaction of Seattle liberals. Lakoff spoke twice to sold-out audiences at Town Hall, with Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., serving as master of ceremonies on the second night. As is frequently the case, the Town Hall audience on Friday a) was 99 percent white; b) welcomed McDermott onstage with a standing ovation; c) gave speeches in lieu of asking questions; an d) fastened on to left conspiracy theories, lately the Downing Street Memo.”
That’s why I like Connelly; he isn’t wedded to one side.
Laughing at the “Connelly isn’t wedded to one side”…ouch
But on topic; isn’t Maria the biggest moocher from her revolving door; that is, using inflated money to get her seat, then getting it repaid by special interst groups? She gets her dream job, gets a pension, and lives well…
pbj @ 36 —
Why did you call it a “Karl Rove witchhunt”? The witches were innocent.
Karl Rove is a traitor.
pbj @ 36 “What happened to the Karl Rove witch hunt? Did that propaganda effort run out of steam?”
You really read more than right wing blogs, listening to right wing radio and watching FOX news.
The Rove-Traitor scandle just keeps up digging up the dirt. Just need to be patient for the indictments and prison sentences.
And Of course more explosions from Novak.
GBS: You mention that the Dems have zero control over the committees, etc.; therefore they can’t get their ideas out to the public. Welcome to the real world the Repubs dealt with from 1954 – 1994. I have to disagree with not getting thier ideas out. Anything Chucky or Harry or Dicky wanted to say something about Abu Ghraib or Club Gitmo, they call a press conference and the usual MSM suspects are there with their noses up their rear ends salivating over every word. If your party has some great ideas, why hasn’t Chucky, or Harry or Dicky called the press conference and the usual MSM suspects would be there with their noses up their rear ends publish their “This is a ‘wonderfully’ great counter position to GWB and the Congressional Republicans.” I’d be willing to give them an ear to their “ideas”. Problem is, your party has no new ideas except class warfare, taxing and spending, and income redistribution. Those are the same ideas from the 1960s thru 1980s playbook. Problem is that most of the lefty “great senators” are fossils, soon to become fossil fuels. Soon HRC will become a fossil.
Additionally, Joe Lieberman has had some great ideas. Ben Campbell has had some great ideas. Those ideas are diametrically opposed to the loony Loocy left. The loony Loocy left stifles them so they is drowned out by the noise!
Donna @ 42,
And yet, all Goldy can come up with is some 10 yr old gripe about Nethercutt. I guess the steam is out of the Rove witch hunt eh?
“class warfare, taxing and spending, and income redistribution”
Gosh, Pud, those sound like stock GOP talking points to me. You know, having reframed a dem-originated term (“class warfare”) for your own purposes, balloon its usage until it is linked with Dems. (The rhetorical Kool-Aid sure has worked.) Or “tax and spend,” as in “tax-and-spend liberal,” again an attempt to tag a political orientation with a simple reality of government (no taxes, no spending, right?—unless you live in Bush’s “don’t-tax-and-spend-more” world). And how about “income redistribution” — is that some sort of bizarre GOP rhetorical device to identify Dems. with Marxist socialism?
This is terrible. Those wascally wepuwicans are just awful. Why, the next thing you know, they’ll be stealing a million dollars from poor kids in NYC to put into their kooky talk radio station. Have they no shame?
GBS @ 31: I spoke too soon.
Puddybud @ 43
Getting your message or complaint out through the MSM is one thing, but it’s hallow compared to not having your legislative ideas come to the floor for vote. MSM is noise, legislation is action. I wouldn’t disagree with you that from ’54-’94 Republicans were stuck in legislative purgatory. That is essentially the prerogative of the controlling party. But, does that mean the Republicans didn’t have any “good” ideas? No. Same thing for the Democrats
Here’s where I would take exception to your comments “Problem is, your party has no new ideas except class warfare, taxing and spending, and income redistribution.”
Here’s a fact: from ’93-’03 1 trillion dollars flowed from blue states to the federal government and wound up in red states. The irony here is that in general, the people who are against wealth redistribution are the biggest benefactors of it. Wealth redistribution is the Right’s way of attacking welfare recipients without realizing how much it impacts there lives on other matters. Take the disparity in allocation of funds to WA for the AWV vs. how much AK is getting for their bridges.
Second: Tax and spend? C’mon. Republicans have lost the high ground here. That there is no doubt. 2-4 years ago it was speculation, today it’s fact. Case in point; tax cuts during a time of war. Bringing back the 30 year treasury bond that Clinton got rid of. Why pass on our debt to our children and grandchildren? Someone is going to have to pay for the massive debt the Republicans are accumulating. The only way the government can raise money is through taxes. That is just a simple fact of life. Where I think you and I agree on is not paying taxes, but please spend our money WISELY! This used to be the mantra of the right, but their deeds do not match their action. Clinton on the other hand delivered balanced budgets and rid the American people of the mounting debt left by GHW Bush that led to the largest economic expanse in the history of the world. Now, we’re trying it the Republican way again, and the results are not nearly as effective as the Democratic policies.
I also would say that more Americans would feel that we are more divided today than at any point in our history since the Civil War. I don’t believe GWB has been honest on many issues, but the I’m a uniter not a divider was the biggest whopper. And, many polls are beginning to reveal the American public is not as trusting of Bush as they once were. This could spell real trouble for the Republicans in congress.
The November elections will be the ultimate poll, however. And I believe the next elections will firmly put America at the crossroads. Either we need to accept the fact that America is going to be philosophically Conservative for a long time to come, or we’re going to see a significant shift back to the left.
It’ll be interesting to see how it turns out.
Jon @ 47
I hope you know my post at 31 was just tounge and cheek. No offense was intended, I hope none was taken. My apologies if you were put off by my comment.
Gee, you cracked the code. We know they all lie. That’s not the story. The story is that progressives want to take all of our money, and view government as good.
Thanks, you continue to make our case for us over and over again. It doesn’t even matter if we’ve got just as many typical politicians when the only message / campaign strategy from the left is that Bush is evil and the cause of all problems.
Read about why you continue to fail:
http://www.suntimes.com/output.....eyn07.html
Oh, and how come no mention of the Air America mess? Aren’t you concerned that government funds that could have gone to a progressive cause were diverted? Then why all the pixels about I-912?
Ammendment @ 48
The 10 year time frame was 1991-2001 and the $$ was $1.7 trillion not $1 trillion.
GBS @ 48
‘Clinton on the other hand delivered balanced budgets..’
My recollection is that Clinton was dragged kicking and screaming to the balanced budget. He kept saying things like – we cannot balance the budget in less than 11 years, and then – we need at least 9 years to balance the budget, then 7 years, then OK, we will try it like the repubs say. He did sign all the laws during the period, yet he fought the spending restraint which was lessened with increased tax receipts and reduction in military personnel. The repubs, newly energised after getting control of Congress, were the real impetus behind the budget balance. They have since lost that zeal and now spend like we all remember the dems doing previously.
pbj @ 45 keep telling yourself that, and keep sucking your thumb if it helps you sleep at night.
NoWonder – Your memory is perfect. And to amplify, it was Newt Gingrich’s brilliant “Contract With America” that brought us a balanced budget.
GLT @ 50
Where on earth did you get those ideas? Aside from being illogical, they also suffer from being untrue.
Referring to the end of your first paragraph, above (didn’t reprint for some reason).
21
“One of the most frustrating things about politics and political discussions is that people aren’t willing to be honest and objective. I’ll be the first to admit that the GOP has its faults and its share of kooks. Do the Dems on HA feel their position is so weak that they can’t challenge their own party?”
Repugs don’t concede an inch, so why should we?
GBS: You are right about this and next years elections. Regarding the $$$ flow from the blue to the red, well it could be that they were paying for all the food the red ships to the blue.
Are you still stating that Clinton balanced the budget in 93 and 95? You need to revisit those comments. In 93 Clinton put one of the biggest tax increases on us. Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky (D) PA 01/03/1993 – 01/03/1995 was the deciding yes vote and her ass was shown the door by PA voters. The 95 budget was forced because he could not just put any budget there anymore like 93 & 94.
26
Well, if you want Reagan back, she’s available and can legally run for a third term.
@ 52
You were piecing together the makings of good argument then you spoiled it at the end.
We can parse Clinton’s words all day long. Here’s the main point. Go back and look at when Clinton got his economic polices through congress, no matter how many times he had to shut down the federal budget because Newt wouldn’t play ball. Ol’ Newt blinked and the rest is history. If you want to see the historical facts just look at the number produced on the Dow. You’ll see they correlate with Clinton’s economic changes. These are the same polices that the Republicans said wouldn’t work, can’t over tax the 1% it will destroy the incentive to create new jobs. . . So, while Newt and the Republicans were running around convincing their base that the sky was falling, history tells the real story.
To get back to your point, that the current Republicans have lost their zeal is reason enough for Republicans to not support them today. Especially, if they, as you say are spending like the Dems USED to.
27
If you don’t see “alternative ideas” from the Democrats, you aren’t listening.
32
Well gee Ghost, the last Repug governor we had here (Spellman) bankrupted the state, and the state hasn’t been bankrupt since then. Maybe Washington voters elect Democrats because we do a better job!
@ 58
No I’m not talking about interstate commerce. I’m referring to the amount of money paid in by red states vs. blue states and the amount of federally funded programs the red states received. Over that 10 year period it amounted to 1 trillion more federal tax dollars flowing into red states than they paid in.
Of course I don’t mean Clinton had balanced budgets in 93 or 95, but he did eventually get them under control. And he was far and away better with OUR money than the current administration or congress.
“Or the pork-barrel politics that provide only $220 million for the AWV, while Alaska gets $941 million for bridges to nowhere. It’s called partisan politics. Deal with it.” Comment by enough_of_this_bullshit
The bridge replaces a ferry service. Let’s suppose the bridge will be more reliable year round, and open the area to development (interests). Still, who’s driving on the AWV? Democrats only? Maybe a few or even a majority of republicans? Where’s this partisan politics getting the party faithful then? My position is, since no realistic plan on paper exists regarding a replacement for the AWV, any subsidy is a blank check, and, the People’s Waterfront Coalition are correct about not replacing I-99 with a tunnel or elevated highway. The saying, “Deal with it”, is like, ya know, like totally meaningless, dude. So, like, Deal with it, dude.
Putty For Brains @ 43
Speaking of income redistribution, the Repubs are taking from the poor and giving to the rich.
HOW TO CREATE A LAZY COUNTRY IN WHICH NO ONE WORKS
Simple — just enact Dubya’s incentive plan: Exempt capital gains and investment income from taxation; make wage earners pay all the taxes.
58
“Regarding the $$$ flow from the blue to the red, well it could be that they were paying for all the food the red ships to the blue.”
He’s talking about where FEDERAL TAX DOLLARS come from and who gets them, jackass! But you’e right — it has something to do with food. Namely, government welfare checks for farmers, some of whom get more from taxpayer-supported subsidies than they do from selling their crops.
“No I’m not talking about interstate commerce. I’m referring to the amount of money paid in by red states vs. blue states and the amount of federally funded programs the red states received. Over that 10 year period it amounted to 1 trillion more federal tax dollars flowing into red states than they paid in.”
Similar to eastern Washington living off taxes paid by Seattleites.
Donna @35
That was quite a quiz. I ended up at 0.88 to the right and 0.15 up.
Funny, that put me pretty close to Gerhard Schroder, a prospect I find somewhat distasteful…
Meant Donna @39
GBS @ 66
Note that “Mark the Redneck” is different from me, “Mark.”
Reagan got over 50% of the vote both times he was elected. Clinton got 48% in 96 and in 92 he got 42%. Most people did want him in the first place.
Roger @ 63: “Repugs don’t concede an inch, so why should we?”
Maybe the Far Right zealots don’t, but those of us who are true to classic Republican ideals have no problem calling it like it is. But if you can’t be critical of even the kooks on your side, you are cut from the same cloth as those you condemn.
Roger @ 67: “If you don’t see ‘alternative ideas’ from the Democrats, you aren’t listening
As I said before… I recall seeing an interview with Teddy Kennedy in which he was asked what he’d do about Iraq. He said his solution would be to come up with a plan.
That is NOT an “alternative idea” and is typical of the responses Dems give to those kinds of questions.
GBS @ 55: No, I meant I spoke too soon about “decent & rational” discussion. Oh well, the usual comments do make for entertaining reading.
78
Correction:
Most people did NOT want him in the first place.
GLT, Let’s show it to them…Oh so true, but just like the picture of the Lib on the cover of this weeks Stranger, with your head stuck in the sand, they can’t even see the implosion of the “progressive” Democrat party. I for one, love it! Keep on ranting, screaming, namecalling and furthering looney conspiracy theory. Your numbers are dwindleling everyday!
The other day an official with a British teachers’ union proposed that the concept of “failing” exams should be abolished. Instead of being given a “failing” grade, she said, the pupil would instead be given a “deferred success.”
Oh, sure, you can scoff. But evidently the system’s already being test-piloted in Howard Dean’s Democratic Party. That’s why the Dems’ Congressional Campaign Committee hailed their electoral failure in last week’s Ohio special election as a triumphant “deferred success.” As their press release put it:
“In nearly the biggest political upset in recent history, Democrat Paul Hackett came within just a few thousand votes of defeating Republican Jean Schmidt in Ohio’s Second Congressional District.”
Yes, indeed. It was “nearly the biggest political upset in recent history,” which is another way of saying it was actually the smallest political non-upset in recent history. Hackett was like a fast-forward rerun of the Kerry campaign. He was a veteran of the Iraq war, but he was anti-war, but he made solemn dignified patriotic commercials featuring respectful footage of President Bush and artfully neglecting to mention the candidate was a Democrat, but in livelier campaign venues he dismissed Bush as a “sonofabitch” and a “chicken hawk” who was “un-American” for questioning his patriotism.
And as usual this nearly winning strategy lost yet again — this time to a weak Republican candidate with a lot of problematic baggage. Insofar as I understand it, the official Democratic narrative is that Bush is a moron who’s nevertheless managed to steal two elections. Big deal. Up against this crowd, that’s looking like petty larceny. After the Ohio vote, Dem pollster Stan Greenberg declared that “one of the biggest doubts about Democrats is that they don’t stand for anything.” That might have passed muster two years ago. Alas, the party’s real problem is that increasingly there’s no doubt whatsoever about it.
Fortunately, the Dems have found a new line of attack to counter the evil election-stealing moron. A few days ago, the Democratic National Committee put out a press release attacking Bush for being physically fit. It seems his physical fitness comes at the expense of the nation’s lardbutt youth. Or as the DNC put it:
“While President Bush has made physical fitness a personal priority, his cuts to education funding have forced schools to roll back physical education classes and his administration’s efforts to undermine Title IX sports programs have threatened thousands of women’s college sports programs.”
Wow. I noticed my gal had put on a few pounds but I had no idea it was Bush’s fault. That sonofabitch chicken hawk. Just for the record, “his cuts to education funding” are cuts only in the sense that Hackett’s performance in the Ohio election was a tremendous victory: that’s to say, Bush’s “cuts to education funding” are in fact an increase of roughly 50 percent in federal education funding.
Some of us wish he had cut education funding. By any rational measure, a good third of public school expenditures are completely wasted. But instead it’s skyrocketed. And the idea that Bush is heartlessly pursuing an elite leisure activity denied to millions of American schoolchildren takes a bit of swallowing given that his preferred fitness activity is running. “Running” requires two things: you and ground. Short of buying every schoolkid some John Kerry thousand-dollar electric-yellow buttock-hugging lycra singlet, it’s hard to see what there is about “running” that requires increasing federal funding.
Perhaps America could have a Running Czar or a National Commission on Running that would report back on the need for a Cabinet-level Runner-General. Perhaps Title IX needs to be expanded to provide a federal sneaker subsidy: a woman’s right to shoes.
But I don’t think so. Sitting behind yet another Vermont granolamobile bearing the bumper sticker “Bush Scares Me,” I found myself thinking that perhaps the easiest way to reduce childhood obesity in American families might just to be to shout out, “Look! There’s big scary Bush! Run! Run for your lives! No, wait, there’s John Bolton, too! Better cut through the park before he puts his hands on his hips in an aggressive manner!” Indeed, when yesterday’s coming man John Edwards dusts off his “Two Americas” stump speech — the one with the heartwarming Dickensian vignette about the shivering girl whose parents can’t afford to buy her a winter coat ($9.99 brand new from Wal-Mart) — he might want to add a section about how an easy way for shivering coatless girls to keep warm is to run around the block a couple of times.
Speaking of shivering coatless girls in Bush’s America, spare a thought for the underprivileged urchins of the Bronx. The Gloria Wise Boys & Girls Club, a nonprofit social-services organization in New York, receives millions of dollars in government funds to give disadvantaged youth in poor neighborhoods a leg up the ladder of life. But mysteriously much of the money wound up being diverted to the coffers of Air America, the liberal talk-radio network whose ratings are yet another example of “deferred success.” The needs of disadvantaged Al Franken and his pals apparently outweigh those of Bronx welfare recipients. Perhaps Janeane Garofalo is the coatless girl John Edwards was talking about all those months. Air America looks like the broadcast version of the U.N. Oil-for-Food program, whereby money earmarked to save starving moppets somehow winds up in the bank accounts of bloated self-described do-gooders with political connections.
The DNC’s Bush-is-the-reason-your-kid-is-fat press release is a convenient precis of the party’s problem: While he runs rings around them, the Dems lounge about getting flabbier by the week and telling themselves it’s all his fault they can barely move except to complain about Bush’s Supreme Court nominee’s kid being overly cute. What’s the betting for 2006? The Dems will have a few more “nearly the biggest political upsets,” while the Republicans will have the actual political upsets — a couple more Senate seats? Including Robert C. Byrd’s venerable perch in West Virginia?
Republicans may see the increasingly arthritic, corpulent, wheezing, flatulent Democratic Party as a boon for them, but I don’t. Two-party systems need two parties, not just for the health of the loser but for that of the winner, too. Intellectually, philosophically, legislatively, it’s hard to maintain the discipline to keep yourself in shape when the other guy just lies around the house all day.
Goldy,
I shudder to think this idea came from Donna, but perhaps the post @ 39 could be an interesting experiment. Any chance you want to start a thread for self-reporting scores from:
http://www.politicalcompass.org ?
Now, I can imagine that the Far Lefties and Far Righties are either going to lie or not post their results, but maybe the rest of us will find that we’re not as far off as we’d like to think.
Richard @76,
Well apparently, Cynical thinks he’s already outed me, and apparently had no qualms about it. But to answer your question, I suppose one could make the argument that if I outed a closeted gay politician then my own sexual preference might be an issue… but I’m not really a public figure in the same sense as an elected official is (I’m just some blogger) and I don’t have any power or influence over legislation. I should also point out that I haven’t outed anybody, but if I did, it wouldn’t just be based on rumor and innuendo.
Cynical @81,
I’m flattered by your continued curiosity. Apparently you do care if I’m gay, else you wouldn’t allege it all the time.
Jon @87,
The ACVR report is a fraud. It is an organization created and staffed by Republican operatives. It’s a total lie.
Mark @ 83
Donna is perfectly capbable of insightful commentary, but emotion often gets in the way. Same thing for Roger.
I’ll be the guinea pig, here’s my scores:
Economic Left/Right: 2.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.28
Sorry 85, was me, I was having problems posting earlier and forgot to set my info back.
Goldy says “The ACVR report is a fraud. It is an organization created and staffed by Republican operatives. It’s a total lie”.
Yeah, never you mind the man behind the curtain! who in this case is the number of supporting law enforcement documents, court findings and decisions, the Democratic National Comittee lawyer and investigative findings and the documented lack of a shred of eveidence with regard to any of loony lefts cries about Ohio…Jeez Goldy, even I didn’t think you could be so ignorant.
Reply to 79
“those of us who are true to classic Republican ideals have no problem calling it like it is”
I don’t have much problem with real Republicans. Just a few minor differences of opinion. I was referring to Trotsykites posing as “Republicans.”
79 (continued)
Since Bush didn’t have a plan for occupying Iraq, coming up with one is the logical first step. And you’re faulting Teddy for that???
Goldy @ 83
“The ACVR report is a fraud. It is an organization created and staffed by Republican operatives. It’s a total lie. ”
Says who? Brad Blog?
Did you bother reading the report Goldy? It’s very well sourced. If you want to dispute the claims, please do so. If you didn’t read the report, how can you dismiss it as a “total lie”. If you did read it and still think it’s a “total lie”, when are you going to refute the 100+ documented sources they used?
90
Coulter had many “sources” and “footnotes” for her meticulously reasoned screeds as well.
Documents compiled by Republican hacks usually go straight to the circular file. This is a keeper for laughs.
Once again the principled John Cole.
Sorry folks. I am calling bullshit on this group and on this report. The group was newly formed this year, it appears to be made up of nothing but Republicans, and for what it is worth, non-partisan groups concerned with voting rights don’t issue reports that amount to little more than “Democrats are worse. Neener Neener Neener!”
I have no problem with the RNC paying for people to examine incidences of voter fraud and intimidation by Democrats and reporting them. But no one gets a free pass to have what amounts to little more than a partisan front group pretend to be a non-partisan ‘voter rights group.’ It isn’t acceptable when Democrats do it, and it isn’t acceptable when Republicans do it.
For my money I would believe the ACVR before I would believe what ABC,NBC,CBS,PBS,CNN and MSNBC spews out.
Mark @83
Hmmm…I think Goldy has an agenda (um, gee…is rain wet?). While he occasionally stumbles onto topics I agree with, I don’t think common ground is part of said agenda.
Marks: WTFiretruck? Rain is wet? Come on! Next you’ll tell me Hilary Clinton wants to be president?
Puddybud,
Hilary wants to be president…
Oh, sorry. I am a bit slow on the uptake…
Roger @ 89: “Since Bush didn’t have a plan for occupying Iraq, coming up with one is the logical first step. And you’re faulting Teddy for that?”
1. You don’t know that Bush (or, more accurately, his generals & civilian advisors) didn’t have a plan. We just know that whatever plan there was didn’t work the way we would have wanted it to.
2. C’mon… admit that Teddy’s “non-answer answer” was just political gameplaying. Any real answer to the question has to begin with “it isn’t going to be simple and people are still going to die.” The problem is that such an answer would end up making Bush’s mistakes look more reasonable. Without a simple, straightforward solution, the Dems ONLY political option is to not answer the question and to continue to drone about the “lack of a plan.”
BTW, what was YOUR score on the test from Donna’s post?
Roger @ 88: “I was referring to Trotsykites posing as ‘Republicans.'”
How do you figure Trotsky, Comrade?
Gotta love Goldy’s filter…
Apparently, anything to do with Red Russia is held. Just wondering why the words “tr0tsky” and/or “c0mrade” upset Goldy so much.
Wow! If the words even venture NEAR Red Ru-ss-ia, the post gets held. Goldy, Goldy, Goldy, what are you afraid of??
OK… Don’t tell me you don’t even like the color “red” in your posts.
I give up. This is no way to have a “conversation” — with everything vaguely Far Left being held.
I for one hopes that Hillary does not run for President. I would hate to have to hold my nose and vote for her.
If McCain can avoid further slander from the Bush crime family, I could vote for him!
Oh, I forgot he sold his soul to the devil that defiled his family.
???? God, if you exist, give us real candidates worthy of voting for!!
I am 8 left, 5 Libertarian (or cartesian {-8,-5} )
Goldy@84–
Your gayness is not my concern. At least you try to act like a man (not very successfully) and don’t act like some “fancy boy” (not yet at least). God help us if GOLDY was that masked man with the skimpy leather thong on backwards in last years Fremont District Gay Pride Parade. Tell us that wasn’t you Goldycocks!
Goldy @ 106
I was having problems yesterday too. I even forced an update of my IP address to no avail. Thought you’d banned me, but then my post magically showed up later. Sorry for all the reposts, but thanks for the filter. The comments section would be unreadable with a bunch of spam.
“It’s a bigger and better and more important story than losing a couple of soldiers every day.”
— A true American
Goldy @ 84: “The ACVR report is a fraud. It is an organization created and staffed by Republican operatives. It’s a total lie.”
Different thread, but hey, that’s ok.
So are you saying that the ‘dirty tricks’ committed by Democrats documented in the report didn’t happen? Not to be snide, are you saying the whole report is a lie just because of the source? Do you apply the same level of skepticism with reports from the other side?
God, doesn’t this story just perfectly verify everything we know and beleive about democrats?
S.C. GOP Wants Beer Money Back
Monday, August 08, 2005
Associated Press
GREENVILLE, S.C. — South Carolina Republicans say the Democrats need to stop dragging their feet and return the beer money they are owed. Democrats say the check’s in the mail.
experiment was a success! Notice how when we predicted (amongst other things) that we’d hear alot of “LEFTIST PINHEAD!”, we didn’t.
Trolls are so easily led, its fun :)
Goldy @ 106: “Fuck you. I’ve said it repeatedly…”
Goldy, relax. I’ve never seen any post of yours about the content of the filters. I have, however, seen posts that indicate that you can ban people, so one could reasonably presume that you have control over other back end functions (yeah, Mr. C, go to town with that line).
@112
Pretty ignorant Mark.
Most of these blogging setups have preset functions that you can do without any backend access at all.
The ability to ban is basic to any of them, blogs being what they are.
Spam filtering is on/off. Its simpler, and quicker, and the blogger (goldy in this case) doesn’t have to worry about researching and entering what to block.
This is hysterical!!!
Goldy–
All kidding aside…I do appreciate what you have done with this forum. Occasionally angry meltdowns do occur. But hey, it’s your Blog…it’s always been your Blog. If you want to change the rules…change the rules! No hard feelings here cuz it’s a BLOG for God’s Sake!!!!
Some folks take this stuff more serious than life. Kind of scary, isn’t it!
windie @ 113
I’m ignorant because I don’t have the psychic powers to determine what setup Goldy is running and what authority he has or uses?
You’re the one that is ignorant when it comes to spam filters. Maybe the out-of-the-box apps or the spam filtering services are on/off, but I know of other bloggers who alter the “sensitivity” of the filter (depending on the spam detection method) and who can add to or subtract from the trigger word list.
Since this is a dying thread, I am tempted to post two messages with a few test words and see if one or the other (or both) get through.
Right wing test phrase:
George Bush is not a Nazi or a fascist.
Left wing test phrase:
Donna is a mouthpiece for the Socialist Workers Party.
Gotta love it!
The Left Wing test phrase was held for ONE word, while the Right Wing test went right through. They allowed “N*zi” and “f**cist,” but held the one for “Soc***ist.” Or maybe it just didn’t like “Donna.”
windie @ 113
Maybe you should do some research before posting. I just looked up the site for WordPress (Goldy’s blog s/w) and found that there is ALL KINDS of control over spam, both in internal settings, word lists and third-party plug-ins.
Ok you caught me. I was talking from general experience on how this kind of software is often set up.
So are you actually accusing Goldy of using his spam filter as a partisan tool?
I wanna hear you say it
windie @ 120
Donna, lucy, rujax and a few others are the real “partisan tools” — interpret that as you wish.
I’m just saying that it is curious that certain words that are commonly used to slam the Right appear and words that slam the Left get filtered. I think that ALL words related to political, economic or social theory SHOULD be allowed. Sometimes a S***alist is just a S***alist — and is proud of it.
What I’d REALLY like to see is a system that prevents idiots or newbies from posting as someone else. Not necessarily a login system, but I’ve seen ones where you need to provide a password IF you want to use a “registered” posting name.
so you’re wimping out?
“I’m just saying its curious”
Nice insinuation there. Not surprising that you’d be reduced to innuendo though.
As to your random attack on other posters… why is that relevant?
windie @ 122
I’m not “wimping out.” There could be a number of reasons why some words are on there and some are not. You’re asking me to find a CAUSAL relationship when it could merely be coincidental. For example, maybe Goldy got some third-party anti-spam software from some Lefty friend and the words were pre-populated. That wouldn’t be an overt act on his part.
It wasn’t a random attack. It is a part of a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy to attack loudmouthed, profane, talking-point-spouting Leftist kooks. :)